You do have a better way of pointing out your viewpoint than RL or DL have.

I'll accept your figures on the difference between the energy levels between the sun and the nuclear fission in the reactors. However, I feel that you still do not understand the basic principle that I am trying to convey.

You said:
"Blow open every reactor on Earth and let the heat seeth out into the atmosphere*, and it's still like sticking a lit match next to a forest fire as far as overall heat flux goes. This seems to make no impression at all on you."

Actually Tom, it does make an impression on me. I fully understand the very large difference that these figures (and the others presented previously) represent.

And I am sure that you understand that a lit match can start a forest fire.

Can you explain why a spent fuel rod from a nuclear power plant is more radioactive than it was when installed in the reactor?

A large discrepancy in energy levels between the sun and nuclear power can be deceptive as far as the danger to the Earth is concerned.

As I understand it, the Earth's energy input and output has been in balance for hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years, and the energy has come mainly from the sun during that time.

It seems to me that we are taking material from the ground and increasing its energy output level and then distributing that extra energy into the atmosphere and no one cares, because the sun puts out more energy than that.

If there is an increase in the atmospheric energy content, without an appropriate loss of that energy, then the atmosphere will eventually become hotter.

All I am saying is that, SOMEONE SOMEWHERE should consider that possibility and investigate it thoroughly.

If my assumption is wrong then please tell me the exact point where the error occurs.

Thank you
Johannes

PS. The further assumption to this above energy increase assumption is that the extra energy IS being expelled from the planet, and at least partly in the form of escaping particles.