The technology is really simple. As we occasionally described it: "Hot rock -> make steam -> make boat go." The complexity really comes in the metalurgical is

The technology is really simple. As we occasionally described it: "Hot rock -> make steam -> make boat go." The complexity really comes in the metalurgical issues, in my opinion. 40 years is a substantial period of time. And yes, you CAN find Google results for reactor accidents, but you can also find results about how NASA faked the moon landings. The government has strict definitions about what constitutes a nuclear accident and required to report them. But there are currently nearly 100 active nuclear reactors, and have been for 40+ years. 4000 reactor-years of experience in arguably the harshest conditions possible DOES mean something. I understand your point that things could change. But if we need to reduce emissions NOW, with technology available at scale NOW, nuclear is a very good option.