> The greatest advances in drawers don't help if you still have ticking time bombs
The greatest advances in drawers don't help if you stop building new nuclear plants. The choice today is not about whether to build more outdated plants; it's about whether to build new modern plants.
I'm not sure whether this much nuance is possible in politics. There isn't just a choice between building new plants or not building them, but there is also one between the outdated plants online vs bringing them offline, and if there is a new push to nuclear, I's very possible that the plants will get an "upgrade" and declared safe to use while in reality they just got a new coat of paint or something equivalently effective.
Just look at coal: The coal lobby is also constantly talking about how many jobs they are bringing and so on while in reality they bring only very few jobs and those that exist are being reduced due to automation.
What you're saying is very hard to accept, which is not to say it's wrong. We have access to an absurd amount of power, and it's safe if we do it right, but we're not currently mature enough to reliably do it right, so we should refrain.
Or more specifically, and even harder to accept: We know perfectly well how to do it right, but the danger of someone selling out public safety is high enough that we should refrain from advocating for an entire field of progress, at least presently.
The greatest advances in drawers don't help if you stop building new nuclear plants. The choice today is not about whether to build more outdated plants; it's about whether to build new modern plants.