It's quite disingenuous to project Chernobyl and Fukushima to modern reactors. When you hear about them, always remember that they were designed in 60s and repr

It's quite disingenuous to project Chernobyl and Fukushima to modern reactors. When you hear about them, always remember that they were designed in 60s and represent the second generation of nuclear reactors. The nuclear technology came a LONG way since then and modern reactors are counted as generation 3+. After Fukushima safety requirements for reactor designs have been revisited and what do you know? Modern VVER reactors satisfies them without any changes! I suspect other modern designs have performed similarly in this regard. Also when you hear about issues with construction time/cost or about nuclear waste storage, examples are usually US-specific. There is also Olkiluoto plant, but its issues are more about building a new reactor design using an Agile-like methodology. Nuclear waste problem can be more or less solved with "burner" reactors and fuel recycling, the field in which Russia and France have promising advancements. Should the old reactors be retired? Yes! Should we abandon the nuclear energy for fashionable renewables? Absolutely, no! At the very least until the storage problem will be properly solved.