Considering it doesn't address the cost of building the plants I'd say it isn't very compelling at all.
Heres a good article on the costs: http://theconversation.com/what-does-nuclear-power-cost-old-...
Heres a good article on the costs: http://theconversation.com/what-does-nuclear-power-cost-old-...
This book does a pretty decent and math-based argument that the chain of reasoning for nuclear energy holds up pretty well. Have there been some new developments that suddenly made it not so?