Nuclear does indeed not require sacrifice, but it does require things like manufacture, transport and use of dangerous materials. (And not just radioactive, it'

Nuclear does indeed not require sacrifice, but it does require things like manufacture, transport and use of dangerous materials. (And not just radioactive, it's also a matter of poison, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32613470 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32613470 has numbers.) Handling dangerous materials is expensive and IMO likely to grow more so, as our societies seem to grow more risk-averse. We didn't have policies to avoid all traffic deaths a few decares ago, for example. And with many voters being opposed to nuclear, I think states will be less likely provide free insurance cover in 10-20 years than was the case 10-20 years ago. This too increases the costs to nuclear power operators. An increasing cost curve that faces a decreasing cost curve for solar and wind isn't something about which you can say "is the best". You need some solid arguments. (FWIW, I think nuclear has no hope.)