I take a center position on this: every year new nuclear looks worse economically, but that's not a good reason to shut down already operating plants.

The safety issues .. I think the combination of low probability (unknown) and potentially huge cost (Chernobyl affected almost the entirety of Europe!) make it exceptionally prone to toxic discourse. You just can't assign reliable numbers to it. There's a risk of ending up with a Space Shuttle situation, where because a disaster would be so bad everyone in the chain downplays the risk until an O-ring explodes.

Maybe we can try SMRs once they're actually in production, but somewhere else can try them first on their own expense.