re: How about
"Since energy can not be destroyed, and in this kind of reaction the energy does not convert back into mass, then it must give a permanent increase of (kinetic) energy to the surroundings."
Ok, I'll accept that- if you also accept that in terms tonnage of mass converted the Sun does more in a second than human have yet to do and probably will do in the next 100 years:
OK, I can live with that, - if you can accept that the sun’s energy input to Earth and the radiation output from Earth has been in balance for millions of years.
"Sufficient accumulation of kinetic energy in the atmospheric molecules will cause disruptions in the climate of the planet."
Kinetic Energy does not accumulate in atmospheric molecules or atmosphere. Or I suppose, I could say that Kinetic Energy per it's definition doesn't accumulate anywhere
Heat is kinetic energy, or motion of molecules.
The kinetic theory of heat also provides a simple explanation of the true nature of temperature. Temperature is a measure of the amount of energy per molecule, whereas heat is the total amount of energy possessed by all the molecules in an object.
http://www.vias.org/physics/bk2_03_02.html
In other words; the alpha, beta, and gamma radiation from nuclear reactions can increase the temperature of surrounding molecules, by imparting kinetic energy to the molecules.
These energetic molecules then cause the material to become hot.
The higher the kinetic energy [or temperature] of the molecules are, the hotter the material becomes.
Though I suppose what you really mean to say is that heat [potential energy] is trapped in atmosphere which again seems wrong if you are suggesting that this heat remains for any amount of time [such as a days or months rather than time periods on order of seconds or nanoseconds].
NO, heat is kinetic energy. [See above explanation]
The length of time that a molecule retains its kinetic energy depends on several factors, the kinetic energy of the surrounding molecules is one and the amount of radiation that the molecule absorbs from the environment is another.
As for this energy causing "disruptions in the climate of the planet" this too vague for me to understand or even guess as what you are referring to.
The planet and its atmosphere is a type of a heat engine, see:
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/ldeo/v1011x-1/jcm/Topic3/Topic3.html
If we add more kinetic energy to the atmospheric molecules, the atmosphere can do more work in the form of more destructive storms.