Cookiewalled video is on the channel Sabine Hossenfelder (German theoretical phycisist), titled "Is Nuclear Power Green?" The conclusion chapter transcription:

> What speaks in favor of nuclear is that it's climate-friendly, has a small landuse and creates power on demand. What speaks against it is that it's expensive and ultimately not renewable.
The disadvantages could be alleviated with new technologies, but it's unclear whether that will work and even if it works, it almost certainly won't have a significant impact on climate change in the
next twenty years.

> It also speaks against nuclear power that people are afraid of it. Even if these fears are not rational, that doesn't mean they don't exist. If someone isn't comfortable near a nuclear power plant,
that affects the quality of life and that can't just be dismissed.

> There are two points I didn't discuss which you may have expected me to mention: one is nuclear proliferation and the risk posed by nuclear power plants during war times. This is certainly
an important factor, but it's more political than scientific and that would be an entirely different discussion. The other point I didn't mention is nuclear waste. That's because I think it's a red herring which some activist groups are using in the attempt to scare people. For what I'm concerned, burying the stuff in a safe place solves the problem just fine. It's right that there aren't any final disposal sites at the moment, but Finland is expecting to open one next year and several other countries will follow.

> And, no, provided adequate safety standards, I wouldn't have a problem with the nuclear waste deposit in my vicinity.

> So, what did I learn from this? I learned that nuclear power has become economically even unappealing than it already was 20 years ago, and it's not clear this will ever change. Personally, I would say that this development can be left to the market. I'm not in favor of regulation that makes it even more regulation for us to reduce carbon emissions. To me,
this just seems insane. In all fairness, it looks like nuclear won't help much, but then again, every little bit helps. Having said that, I think part of the reason the topic is so controversial is that, what you think is the best strategy depends on local conditions. There is no globally right decision. If your country has abundant solar and wind power, it
might not make much sense in nuclear. Though you might want to keep in mind that climate change can affect wind and precipitation patterns in the long run. If your country is at a high risk of earthquakes, then maybe nuclear power just poses too high a risk. If on the other hand, renewables are unreliable in your region of the world, and you don't have a lot of space, and basically
never see earthquakes, nuclear power might make a lot of sense.

> In the end, I'm afraid my answer to the question "is nuclear power green?" is: it's complicated.

---

I wonder if HN needs a "your content is in another castle: link-only comments aren't thoughtful or substantive" guideline, a la stackoverflow (combining the principles from here https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/225370/your-answer-... and here https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)