system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV Modern nuclear power is by far the superior choice of energy production and we should fund nuclear technology on a larger scale

With genIV tech nuclear becomes the superior choice. The are many reactors but these are some common specs:

* Increased fissile efficiency from .5% to 99%. This also means less waste.

* Increased range of fuels due to alternative fuel cycles, thorium becomes an alternative

* Increased temperature allows lower pressure. Pressure is incredibly scary in context of safety engineering and reliability. Lower pressures allows reduced safety margins.

* Liquid fuels makes meltdowns imposible since the fuel is already a liquid. Drain tanks and passive safety systems becomes available.

* Less complex safety systems and passive cooling systems. Molten lead becomes available as a coolent and neutron absorber. Lead cannot vaporize and can be passively cycled without the presence of pumps.

* Less storage time due to less ionising waste. From 100 000:s of years down to about 100 years.

* Possibilities of recycling old waste and making it the only possible way of actually getting rid of it.

* Introverted cycles instead of extrovert cycles. Cycles that are dependent on energy to run instead of ones that need power to halt the process from runoff. Effectively making some reactors walk away safe and literally impossible to runoff.

* Modular technology becomes possible due to reduced volume thanks to the absence of enormous containment vessels due to lower pressures. Mass producing reactors becomes possible rather than building on site.

* Nuclear proliferation becomes nearly impossible using breeder cycles. (edit: main reason why we don't use breeders today, Weinberg was not funded to build breeders because they did not produce bombs)

Not all reactors comes with all the specs but most of them are generally low waste and walk away safe. There are some challanges but nothing impossible.

Edit: I should state that I meant bulk energy production. Solar obviously has some pros but cannot compare to nuclear in terms of stability and concentration. Solar should be persued  but only act as a compliment to bulk energy production.
gpt
There is no doubt that we should be moving away from fossil fuel sources like Coal.  Nuclear tech has gotten much better, but so have renewables.

Centralized production like a Nuclear Plant has benifits like being able to feed an entire grid and ability to react to changing demand.  It also has major problems, specifically single point of failure.  Melt downs are not an issues, but that doesn't mean shut downs won't happen.  If a melt down starts, the fail safe kicks in and the entire plant goes dark.  This leaves millions without power.  This single point of failure is also a tempting target for terrorism for this reason.

Solar pannels on every roof solves this problem.  There is no way to "turn off" power production.  There isn't a single point of failure to be attacked or malfunction.  There are problems with the ability to react to changing demands and the ability to produce enough power for industrial uses.

Nuclear Tech is a very viable choice.  It's not "by far superior".  It has different strengths and weaknesses than other tech like Solar.