I turn 60 in a few months. I'm not afraid of anything.
I agree with Rahvin that nuclear power is the best current answer to climate change and the more immediate problem of fossil fuel pollution of air and water.
Nonetheless, I don't think concerns about nuclear waste storage can be shrugged off as mere NIMBYism.
The notion that radioactive waste will be stored perfectly for thousands of years by profit-driven entities who typically look no further than the next fiscal quarter seems a bit optimistic.
Supporting a global expansion of nuclear power in the face of unproven storage methods of waste (on the time scales required) makes me uneasy, although I do support it because the fossil fuel alternative is clearly catastrophic, and "renewable" energy processes aren't ready for prime-time.
I suppose, in the face of climate change and present pollution, I prefer to trust the ingenuity of future scientists and engineers in dealing with stored waste, if needed, rather than the "promise" of clean coal.
Still, even geologic storage solutions like Yucca Mountain require a confidence in our ability to predict geologic events for millenia to come.
The most germane source of nuclear NIMBYism, I think, is not a mistrust or ignorance of science but rather a mistrust of industry which is warranted by its track record.
I might lend credence to assurances from Stephen Hawking, or the persuasive and clearly knowledgeable Rahvin, for example, but I wouldn't trust General Electric anywhere near my backyard.
In fact, they devastated my regional backyard (NE) with illegally dumped PCBs and lied about it for decades.
P.S. I probably should have posted this reply to Rahvin, but I was reading through the thread and was charmed by your 60-year plan.
Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale?
-Shakespeare
Real things always push back.
-William James