But that is an argument against socio-political ramifications of nuclear energy in a society where safety is a matter of insurance profiteering rather than risk sharing overseen by government.
I do not claim any special knowledge of the cost/benefit of energy production, but it seems to me that much of the current arguments, both pro and con, appeal to irrational fears rather than to rational calculations. What I would like to see is the total social cost and total social benefit of various modes of electricity production that include the following:
1. The cost of electricity generation 2. The cost of transmission 3. The full cost of waste disposal (pollution, spent fuel, etc.) 4. The full social effect (cost/ benefit) of underproduction/overproduction, i.e. what would happen if electricity was consistently produced at a lower/higher level than the current usage
5. Externalities of various types of power generating and transmission plants (job creation, health, impact on quality of life, environment etc.)
Wojtek