Glib sideswipes at nuclear power are unhelpful and misleading. There's a good read at ourworldindata.com entitled What are the safest and cleanest sources of energy? that looks at, among other things, the deaths caused by the various sources of power generation per unit of power they produce (they use the terawatt-hour, roughly the annual power usage of 150,000 people in Europe, in order to make fair comparisons of deaths caused). It turns out that nuclear is hundreds of times safer than coal, oil and gas and safer even than hydro and wind. There's no such thing as a free lunch, of course, and every means of energy production has its own issues with sourcing raw materials, accidents and waste disposal. Air pollution from fossil fuels is hard to see and isn't on the telly much, but it kills hundreds of thousands of people every year and is causing global heating to boot. In comparison, very few people die or are poisoned by nuclear accidents. Not saying we couldn't do better, of course...

Fifty years ago I was among the unthinking hordes who were of nuclear-power-no-thanks sentiment. I now see that if the planet had gone ahead with nuclear with enthusiasm and without opposition, we would not be in the parlous state in which we find ourselves today. The piece is worth reading if you're up for it.