Nuclear does seem like it can be a cleaner technology than fossil fuels. And a greater investment in nuclear might have helped avert the climate crisis. There a

Nuclear does seem like it can be a cleaner technology than fossil fuels. And a greater investment in nuclear might have helped avert the climate crisis. There are other concerns about nuclear, yeah, and a lot of them are legitimate, but they're all at least theoretically solvable, and I certainly don't believe we can afford to make the perfect the enemy of the good. That said, I just don't believe it can be part of a realistic solution to the climate crisis. Not anymore, at least. These things are very difficult to design, engineer, and build, and the costs of a screw-up can be so high that taking things slowly and methodically is imperative, much more so than with most other alternative energy options. Combine that with decades of divestment in nuclear, and it just doesn't seem realistic to think that this is a solution that can be brought to bear quickly enough to count as a serious option for diverting a climate crisis. The time for using nuclear to stave off climate change was a quarter century ago.