The issues is partly political. We could overcome that. Partly technological: risk of fallout, and more ugly - long term storage. But really, the issue nobody

The issues is partly political. We could overcome that. Partly technological: risk of fallout, and more ugly - long term storage. But really, the issue nobody thinks about is proliferation. If the West started pumping out 5 cent/mmh electricity and booming, you can be darn sure every tin pot fool everywhere in the world would be as well. After all, why shouldn't they? But Canada will manage it's boring, hardened facilities extremely well. The entire economy of Canada is not based on anything really intelligent - just 'boring, consistent responsibility and stability' - which is exactly what you want for such things. But how long will stability remain around Nigeria's 20 new reactors? Hey - they convinced us that 'everything was fine' and that it was 'Colonialist and Evil to require external, rigorous inspection'. But now there's a regime change, a civil war breaking out. A rebel group has nabbed a reactor. A second reactor the staff are fleeing because Boko Haram is in the area. The US president wants to send in Marines to lock down the facilities immediately, but wary it will just erupt in more violence immediately. Obviously that's hugely speculative, but if/when nuclear power breaks up with 100's of reactors popping up everywhere - something like this will happen - somewhere. I think we can conquor public opinion and figure out 'long term' issues with enough focus and innovation. But this requires 'highly responsible civilisation' almost universally so that something doesn't blow up somewhere in the long tail. Since most of the world actually isn't ready for that responsibility, what do we do? Controls? How? Can we tell them 'no'? We could block Somalia from getting nuke power ... but probably not most other places.