Slightly off-topic, but this is how I feel when people discuss the risks of nuclear power. You can talk all you want about the disasterous consequences of a reactor meltdown, but what about the disastrous consequences of sticking with fossil fuels?

I agree that switching to wind and solar would be better, but it's not obvious whether we can switch without transforming the world economy in ways people seem unwilling to do. Nuclear reactors can generate much more energy, and I really think it’s time to get behind them.

We need underwater, seaborne, or subsurface nuclear power plants.

Radiation release is contained to within the largest stratum available on the Earth: ocean and rock. Anything avoiding our thin atmosphere is a win.

We need NPT dropped, that’s all it takes I think(given everyone can still be nice after which is a big if)

the "non-proliferation treaty" ?

Yes, nuclear isn’t hard, they’re so strictly regulated because there aren’t other dual use technology that are more controllable, destructive and easily repurposed by sufficiently advanced nations.

My personal opinion is that if we discover a more devastating weapon of some sort, such as kinetic bombardment using bunches of O'Neill space colonies as projectiles, nuclear becomes comparatively benign and that kinds of event can lead to more de-regulation.