There is still a strong and vocal group of people who absolutely oppose the use of nuclear power as one possible viable alternative to CO2 producing power plants.
Anti-nuclear advocates must still answer the pressing question, if the nuclear options are not considered and practical and sustainable non-carbon energy alternatives are not found in time to replace existing carbon consuming facilities before global warming become irreversible (we might already be there with 400 ppm of CO2 now being recorded) then what happens to the world and human existence?
The end of life on earth and the suffering humanity will have to endure while the world terminates lifeforms due to the consequences of global warming, like a person dying of cancer, is infinitely worst than any nuclear accident as well as being global in scope. How many people have died from all past nuclear plant accidents compared to people killed in just the last 10 years globally due to unusual weather events (storms)? A few hundred compared to tens of thousands and counting. Then there is the breeder reactor option that is being totally ignored that is cleaner and a more abundant energy source than current conventional nuclear facilities.
A rational approach to this question is to pursue ALL POSSIBLE OPTIONS so that we have choices just in case some other options turn out unfeasible. To eliminate any viable option simply does not make rational sense. Keep in mind that we are talking about, the ending of human existence on earth in less than 200 years and increasing suffering until the last person takes his/her last breath. I think anti-nuclear advocates fail to understand how grave the situation is just as conservatives are ignoring the warnings from scientist because they are in denial of the consequences. Gambling man’s survival just because one does not like nuclear power is not much different from conservatives not accepting global warming because it is bad for business or their economy. I do not see much difference in such non-rational reasoning.
We are often faced with the lesser of evils. Nuclear power is a lesser evil than CO2 producing power industries because it could save human existence. The stakes are very clear and very high so I am willing to gamble possible nuclear accidents against the certainty of global warming destroying life on earth. Keep in mind I consider nuclear power AS AN OPTION. I am NOT saying that it is the solution but can provide clean energy if a safer and more practical technology is not found in time. There is enough potential nuclear power to sustain us for thousands of years especially if breeder reactor technology is develop (see Nuclear Power Alternative – Less waste disposal problems). But like all technologies being explored it needs time to develop and scientist are saying with increasing alarm that we are quickly running out of time. So there is not time to waste.