Financial liability on nuclear plants for nuclear disasters is capped at ~0.5% of the cost of a cleanup like Fukushima/Chernobyl because sophisticated private insurers fully understand the risks and categorically refuse to shoulder them.

Thats why the taxpayer is forced into providing free insurance for every nuclear power plant. The private sector would only ever build solar and wind and storage if externalities like this or CO2/coal pollution were fully priced in. Since the government has a vested (military) reason for wanting a thriving civilian nuclear industrial ecosystem, however, they provide lavish subsidies - some costed, while others (like this one) are not.

There are a lot of articles in the media sourced from profit driven pro nuclear lobbies telling us that it's totally 110% safe now though - none of which acknowledge the private sector's categorical refusal to shoulder the financial risks, obviously.

So, presumably Greenpeace, who are apparently motivated purely by a desire to protect the environment, must be the ones that are misleading us.