Most of us would not be willing put a price on the lives or health of, say, our children. Any price.

I'm not so ok with it, but not just for safety reasons. New designs may be safer but they are still part of a globally destructive system of dirty mining, byproducts that go to weapons, and still non-zero risk of inflicting lifelong and community-wide damage in catastrophic situations.

Also it bugs me that nuclear is perpetuating the interests of large players who would prefer to control all the energy. I'd like to see energy democratized more, meaning instead of having contracts or bills from a power company, you make your own energy at home. That's an ideal, and we will probably end up with a mix, but I'd rather see money put into trying to tip that mix toward the decentralized side of things, which means toward locally installable technology like solar.

I'm sympathetic to all of that, and agree fully with most of it. But my point is that nuclear power plants, in order to be insurable on the open market, with no government involvement, would necessarily be safe enough to address your safety concerns. Regarding decentralization, we'll need some substantial breakthroughs in fabbing. Either that, or some substantial reduction in technology level.