Alternative "clean" energy

As long as we know, there is no clean energy source at all to create such electricity we need. Only kinetic power connected to a dynamo can be the less polluting source.

(Photo: Radio Free Europe)

It is very logic that nuclear power is also paradoxically - at this moment - the cleanest form to create electricity for our modern needs. It is certainly not the cheapest way to build one reactor, but it is the most reliable and cheapest (!) energy source we can imagine.
If nuclear power is connected with radio-activity, then we are very narrow-minded in our thinking: radio-activity is a tiny little invisible "garbage"product that is unspokenly dangerous for all life-forms on earth but with good maintenance very controllable and in time recyclable as a new energy source.
Our need for (more) electricity in a modern household doesn't give alternative energy a better chance to succeed, because wind, solar and water energy is depending on what nature really is: instable. The costs to build such 'environment-friendly' reactors AND it's garbage is so much higher than a classic nuclear power implant. Suppose it is not that case, then our electricity-bill on alternative energy is enormously high... We now are already complaining about Electrabel (Belgian supplier of energy, from the Suez-Group).
We also can count on natural gas for our energy. As we know, natural gas can be cultivated in the big sea, but it is also a derivative of petrol, a diluted source of energy on Earth. And politically-economically-socially speculated by mankind...
On nuclear energy, we can trust on (mainly the increasing benefits for the energy-multinationals)