California needs clean firm power, and so does the rest of the world [pdf]
The severe problems with nuclear are well known:<p>1) Extrememly high construction costs and cost overruns.
2) Requires more cooling water than any other power source.
3) Highly radioactive &#x27;spent fuel&#x27; must be stored indefinitely.
4) Uranium ore mining and processing consumes significant energy, of the fossil fuel form typically.
5) Catastrophic failure scenarios (Fukushima, Chernobyl).
6) Major security issues with high costs.
7) Poor compatibility with intermittent and varying energy sources (i.e. solar, wind), as does coal.<p>Note the &#x27;modular&#x27; concept is just as bad, as you still have all the security costs, waste storage costs, cooling issues, etc. just distributed in more locations.<p>All in all the nuclear experiment looks like a complete failure, and yes you can use solar&#x2F;wind&#x2F;storage at scale to generate all the electrical power required for human civilization - and yes, shutting down all the nuclear power plants in earthquake zones makes perfect sense.<p>As far as the &#x27;you&#x27;re exaggerating risks&#x27; comments, well, then, let&#x27;s see the repeal of Price Anderson accident indemnity, which would require the owners and operators of nuclear power plants to pay full costs for disasters. Investors would flee en masse if that happened, of course.