For all you 'Crazy' anti-nukers, this one is for you. We have company.

[kristopher]

15. Nope.

You can't turn off coal without also turning off nuclear - the economic fundamentals of both are the same. Centralized largescale "baseload" generation is a product of those economic fundamentals. It isn't an unalterable law of nature that all energy delivery systems must duplicate. In fact, a distributed grid provides greater resilience, durability, and reliability. When it is made up of renewables, it eliminates fuel insecurity.

There are far more lessons from Fukushima than what you've noted, and the problem Jazcko is talking about with regulatory capture is at the top of the list. Nuclear ISN'T safe because human are not perfect and we do not design perfect systems.

If you think I'm advocating we shut all nuclear plants down now because they frighten me, you're mistaken. I want a massive buildout of renewables in as short a time frame as possible. I recognize that both coal and nuclear are going to be put out of business fairly early on as renewable penetration increases; and I'm fine with that. I don't mind losing low carbon capacity of nuclear if, as Germany is doing, it is a part of the process of changing to a distributed energy system because that is the only way we are going to get rid of carbon.

Additional reading:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775312014759
Cost-minimized combinations of wind power, solar power and electrochemical storage, powering the grid up to 99.9% of the time

http://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i13/Nuclear-Retirement-Anxiety.html
Nuclear Retirement Anxiety | April 1, 2013 Issue - Vol. 91 Issue 13 | Chemical & Engineering News

http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2013_03_26_2013_Asias_Accelerating_Energy_Revolution
Asia’s Accelerating Energy Revolution