Dwayne, I think you're being a bit of a noodnik here. If you're against nuclear power under capitalism, then you're against it, since capitalism ain't going anywhere anytime soon. So the conversation boils down to
Dwayne: I'm for nuclear power [in an alternative universe].
Organic friend: What? Did you just say you were for nuclear power?
Dwayne: Do you think it should be wrong in all alternative universes? Tut tut. How closed minded.
Organic Friend: Sputter!
This seems to be an equivocation subtly crafted solely for the purpose of needling your friends.
Secondly, I'm not sure this "in a capitalist universe" stuff flies.
Leave to one side that management in the Soviet Union was pretty awful too.
......
Oh you're right!
I *am* needling my "organic" friends. We tend to needle each other. They point out the problems with my technophilia and I detail the assumptions behind their 'harmony with Nature' shtick.
It evens out in the end.
As far as supporting nuke power under capitalism and the problems thereof...
Of course you're right to say that if you oppose it under current conditions you might as well just say you oppose it out right and for the visible future. I suspect however, that as our global situation becomes a bit more, er, hectic and as questions of energy production, supply and demand jump to the forefront of our collective attention, nuclear, warts and all, will seem very attractive to a lot more people. This isn't a unique observation. Many others have pointed it out.
My argument -- which is really with my social set of activists and anyone who shares their views -- is that instead of raising eco-moralist objections, we should come up-to-speed on current reactor research and waste management thought.
We should, in short, prepare ourselves to counter Exelon's lazy-ass plans (to name a very specific example) with our own, insisting on better, simpler, cheaper designs and mature oversight of the fuel/waste cycle. (Ideally, radioactive waste management would be an international affair.)
My neighbors aren't interested in No. They are however, interested in 'this is better than that.'
Also, you're right to point out the problems with Soviet-era handling of these issues. They're no model. We need new models for a future energy production mesh. I'm looking to hook up with people whose understanding of nuclear energy is as up-to-date as their appreciation of climate change is keen. For whatever reason, there seem to be more of these kinds of folk in Europe than the US (as James Heartfield mentioned).
.d.