Reducing CO2 emissions are a key concern for our generation, and hobbling nuclear power because we're afraid of nuclear weapons proliferation is a great way to keep burning fossil fuels and keep CO2 emissions high.
1.) The very slim chance of a very devastating incident
2.) The difficulties of storing burnt out fuel modules (this could include protecting them from dangerous too, as used modules could be used to create a dirty bomb)
3.) The economic problems with highly centralized power grids.
I am definitely not an expert though, and also I am not necessarily against nuclear, I just don't think that weapons of mass destruction are the main concern around nuclear power plants (although they are a part of it).
As with oil, coal or gas - externalities were not factored in and payed for by society. Just not with the price per kWh. While the gains were privatized.
So no. While somewhat cleaner nuclear power actually isn't a viable solution. Neither ecological nor economically from a society's standpoint.
Economically viable nuclear power plants for the future will require liquid metal, liquid salt, or gas cooling. Likely these will also involve some innovation in fuel processing. Research on advanced nuclear energy was stopped almost completely in 1977 in response to racist nuclear proliferation fears.
Subsidies are provided to coal / natural gas in the same proportion of generation capacity within the US.
"Renewables" are subsidized at 10x other sources.
Nuclear can be extremely cost effective. France is currently generating 70% of their power using nuclear and is significantly cheaper than US nuclear power seeing wholesale prices around 5 cents per kWh. US just has stupid expensive plants with 100% unique parts and old designs. This is why French consumers are paying 1/3 as much as Germans. In addition France is burning their waste in breeders.
You can blame most of the costs and problems of Nuclear in the US with an obsession over protecting private interests. Especially Oil, Coal, and Natural Gas companies. Meanwhile, nationalized energy companies in France are making us all look like idiots.
The problem with nuclear is that smart people sit around thinking up all the 1% ways that the plant could meltdown and making iterative changes to designs to mitigate them. Managers generally approve them since its better not to be the person making the call on something that caused a meltdown as long as the increase in the cost is marginal. The sum total of a lot of marginal increases in the cost though is a negative learning curve.
Solar and wind don't have this because nobody worries about a solar plant blowing up and contaminating the surrounding countryside and cost a trillion dollars to clean up, so it keeps getting cheaper.
There have been also some improvements on the research side but China was the largest effect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycrystalline_silicon#/media...
If you think this is unrealistic, it's currently happening in the US.
Maybe it will take a little longer but I’m optimistic it will not fail.
My big issues with nuclear fission are the powerful nuclear-capable government required to manage the reactors, the risk of catastrophic meltdown and the national security target reactors become. Fusion just needs duterium from seawater and can’t melt down.
The claim upthread was "American and Europe deprioritized carbon energy". Germany has also grown green energy dramatically faster than they've reduced nuclear. It's a pity they didn't get a couple more years on it; I suspect that plays into Putin's timeline a bit.
You're saying at 40% of current energy needs they've entirely maxed out Germany's solar and wind potential? That there's no more acreage left for new panels and turbines?
So sure, renewables are great, and it's good that Germany is doing so much to reduce carbon emissions. Because that's the point of renewables: reducing carbon emissions. And if that's the point, why on earth would you shut down nuclear power plants and switch to burning lignite???
If all countries with nuclear weapons agree to convert all warheads into nuclear fuel, we could power humanity, reduce CO2, and eliminate the threat of nuclear armageddon.