I am baffled by world leaders repeatedly suspending, cancelling, or shutting down nuclear reactors. Even after Fukushima Daiichi, nuclear energy remains in Japan and worldwide the (1) safest by far [deaths/kWh], (2) lowest emissions on average, (3) most reliable source of energy generation.
Every plant shut down / suspended / whatever you want to call it effectively increases the number of people who die in accidents each year because the production is offset by increased coal/solar/gas/hydro generation, and usually it's coal, which is the worst by far - which also means more air pollution, more deaths due to air pollution (already a gargantuan problem in Asia), and more greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere (for which it is also the worst by far, even 4x worse than natural gas).
Every politician or leader who moves to build more coal plants instead of nuclear or at least renewables (which are much much safer and cleaner than coal) or natural gas (which is also safer and cleaner) should be criticized by their people.
If you can build ANYTHING that isn't coal, you're saving lives and reducing the climate change problem. Coal is the worst.
Also, if you're under the impression coal is "cheaper" - forget about unit cost, and look at the real world data. German electricity is about 2x the price of French electricity - a coal / renewables mix vs. a nuclear majority. Ontario electricity ranges from 5-10x cheaper than German electricity as well - also a nuclear majority grid.
This isn't even including the significant externalized costs that the air pollution and GHG emissions from coal plants place on society, or the costs of the thousands of people who die due to coal power accidents.