I don't think any of the GP's arguments hold up.
> there are the issues of storage and disposal of enrichment byproducts
Omega Tau did an in depth analysis of all the storage issues, including the byproducts and how they are managed.
https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/omegataupodcast/omegatau-3...
These are solved problems.
> what to do with old fuel rods
...same as above. The quantity here is far far smaller than most people imagine and it's a very manageable amount - even if scaled 100x. We're talking about 1 barrel per reactor per year.
> there's long-term maintenance of a plant
Modern Gen III plants are build such that any failure in the control systems, causes the reactor to turn off via a, usually, gravity system - so no power needed to turn off the reaction. They are essentially constantly being told to stay on.
Accidents as we've seen in the past are not possible with Gen III reactors. ...the failure modes are just much, much worse for nuclear
More relevant though is that the success condition for LNG/Coal/Oil/etc plants is Global Climate Change. THAT is the critical issue.
Also, the notion that nuclear storage facilities are somehow massive liabilities when the nations of the world currently already have literally tens of thousands of nuclear bombs/missiles, seems odd. There is a far far greater likelihood of Climate Change triggered nuclear war than nuclear waste misuse.
The real problem with nuclear is public ignorance. What I find a remarkable contradiction is how anti-nuclear advocates claim we need to convince the public that Climate Change is real, but then throw up their hands as hopeless when there's a suggestion that nuclear misinformation should be combated.