I recently read the article about the findings of Re>C by google again.
It can be found here:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/rene...climate-change

The reading is quite boring because the simple assumption that renewables can not compete coal is wrong because we do not yet know the costs of climate change and they are not accounted for in the price for coal (externalised).

The same now becomes obvious for nuclear energy.
In the above article there are literally hundereds of posts about how simple the problem could be solved with nuclear energy. The first question is, can these experimental reactors be build at a large scale fast enough to prevent drastic climate change ? I asume not.

The second point about the waste is also not accounted for. How this looks like can be seen here:
http://www.heise.de/tp/news/Wo-ist-d...d-2649917.html (german)
This article expresses the findings that the utility companies RWE and E.on do maybe not have set aside the reserves they were required to do by law for the decomissioning of their nuclear power plants. It looks like the german tax payer will have to step in...

This goes the same old story again: privatisation of profits, socialisation of losses.

So whenever you hear people talking about "markets" you should question them, where do the exhaust fumes of these "market activities" go.
Obviously they are somehow forgotten by all eceonomic sciences!