It is a multifaceted problem. Often it comes down to: 1) There is no established community / trade to build and maintain nuclear energy on a industrial stage.

It is a multifaceted problem. Often it comes down to: 1) There is no established community / trade to build and maintain nuclear energy on a industrial stage. I live in the neighboring country (Norway), and the nuclear energy community here is pretty much 100% academic. There's are nuclear engineering, tech, etc. programs, so in the start we'd have to import almost all the workers - all while starting our own programs. 2) It's a very long-term commitment, takes what, 10-15 years from shovel in ground to energy production? Compare that to wind energy and similar. The countries that really need energy, are needing it now. 3) Many countries have long-term plans for energy, which were formed decades ago. This is the case of my country - they analyzed nuclear energy back in the 70s, and deemed it not suitable. They are still, almost 5 decades later, parroting the same strategy. "We will focus on renewable hydro, wind, and solar energy, and concentrate funding to those sources" 4) There's a non-trivial amount of political opposition - even though new tech is much, much more safe than the older plants. Nuclear is still big and scary, and some parties will vehemently oppose it - no mater what facts or findings you present to them. And it is very much a NIMBY thing...even those that want it, become a bit hesitant when it comes time to plan for places to put the plants, if it turns out to be too close to home.