@kevinrns
The economic issues around nuclear are complex, and it doesn't have to be the way things currently are, but I'm not arguing those points here.
The safety issue is another thing. Nuclear energy is not actually "so dangerous". Do you want to know how many people have been killed due to the operation of western-style civilian nuclear power plants in Western Europe and North America (as well as a bunch of other places) in the last 65 years?
The answer is "none". The only nuclear #accidents that have killed people have been one or more of:
1) Nuclear weapons production facility, rather than civilian nuclear energy plant e.g. the Windscale fire at Sellafield in the UK in 1957.
2) Non-western #reactor designs that have never been used in the west, and would never be permitted to be built. e.g. graphite-moderated reactors like the Soviet RBMK involved in the Chernobyl disaster.
3) Plants operated without the normal #safety #culture that every western nation with nuclear energy has. The example here is the Fukushima accident in 2011; TEPCO (the owner and operator of the plant) was riddled with bureaucratic and cultural issues from top to bottom, which kept the company from anticipating the disaster, and prevented it from responding effectively when it happened. This is very similar to the causes of many air disasters before cultural changes were mandated in aircraft operation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safety_culture is a good jumping-off point.
#Nuclear #energy is #safe.