Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Factor in all the externalities that these other forms of energy bring in and nuclear is probably one of the cheapest. There's a lot of handwaving in that personal assertion. The fact is that nuclear is by far more expensive than any alternative source of energy, baseless assertions on how with some imagination you can inflate cost of alternatives does nothing to change that.
Its not imagination, you can quantify these things. There have been thousands of studies showing the economic damage of something like a polluting coal plant and its not like we pass these costs on to the polluter ever, so of course the price of a coal plant looks low when you ignore the hospital bills and the loss of biodiversity. I'm not going to do your book report for you though.
Please get back when you find any rational and serious quantification of these externalities, specially one which accounts for a few millennia worth of babysitting residues to validate a business that goes for a couple of decades.
Until then, please cease with the hand-waving.