I didn't say climate change won't stress Swedish society. I'm saying the claim that climate change will make Sweden not exist to utilize a power plant in 20 years is completely out of touch. Review mainstream sources about climate change projections and scenarios and find me something that says Sweden is likely to not exist in 20 years, so they shouldn't build any new long-term infrastructure. Even if things go the worst way projected as possible, it doesn't end Sweden within 20 years.

Using climate change as an argument against building any long-term infrastructure is insane, and is probably anti-nuclear motivated thinking. What are the odds I find such doom-saying in the discussion about a bridge being designed to last 50 years? Oh gee, no point building a bridge that lasts 20 years since we'll all be dead by then, right? Tell all the architects and construction firms to stop building apartment buildings to last more than 20 years, right? Yeah right. This extreme sort of doom-saying is reserved for discussions about infrastructure planning that is opposed by the doom-sayer for some other unstated reason.