Nuclear also has the problem that cleanups are *astronomically* expensive, even when there weren't any "accidents" -- and when there were, it's far more expensive. We *still* haven't cleaned up after the Manhattan Project or the Russian equivalent.
It's not financially viable to screw around with something with that bad a cleanup profile. I know coal and oil are terrible in this regard too, of course.
Nuclear is not financially viable.
Wind, hydro, and solar are.
This is an argument that I really just don't get involved in any more, but, as someone who spent a significant portion of their career in R&D for technologies to help clean up nuclear waste I'll just say you're right. Anyone who tells you that nuclear has to be part of the future power generation of a "green" country hasn't spent any time in the real world of dealing with it.
