Despite the large upfront cost, nuclear still provides cheap electricity. Currently, the price of the electricity generated by nuclear is more impacted by the way the upfront cost was financed than by the price of the combustible (uranium). You can see the difference between the electricity price for a UK nuclear power plant (private investors), vs. a French power plant (state investor). The private investors request 10% interest. The state investor request few percents. On a ~$10B tab it makes a difference and for a long time.

If we get serious about nuclear, we could find a way to build it a bit cheaper, and even faster (and with interests that would make it cheaper).

There might be also an argument to make, that nuclear might be too safe for its own good, and we could relax the safety measure. Not trolling here. Given the number of death due to nuclear power plants (near zero) are we too cautious at the expense of its deployment. I suspect that relaxing the safety rules is what some governments might have to decide if the fossil energy becomes just too expensive, they could stretch and extend the life span of the reactors beyond what was previously deemed safe.

And the population should be informed about the real risk of nuclear...

Nuclear has an underserved extremely bad reputation (maybe due to the bomb A/H, or how media reported on Tchernobyl/Fukushima ?). Earth had natural nuclear reactor that have been running for thousands of years (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklo_Mine), and nature littered the waste everywhere. On the other hand, we carefully confined our nuclear reactions, and store properly waste (in most countries everything exiting a nuclear facility is considered nuclear waste, even though there is no trace of radioactivity whatsoever).

We probably poison general population way more with chemicals and yet the general population does not seem too worry to have chemical factories all around. Silicon Valley dear Palo Alto is a superfund (https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fus...). Did we abandon the site ? No, we excavated and off-site disposed of approximately 10,700 cubic yards of soil, ventilated all the buildings so you do not smell the Palo Alto cookie dough (http://www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/20130404/in-search-of-...). And no one is batting an eye. The groundwater is contaminated and yet the real estate is a premium to raise a family.

We have 12,000 people dying in stairs every year in the world (https://www.medlegal360.com/fall-down-the-stairs/), and yet we have nowhere near the same safety measures for those evil stairs that keep killing every year. Is it due to the powerful lobby of the carpenter's guilds? No, we are just careful when going down the stairs.

We have very different risk tolerance with radioactivity. Probably because we cannot "see" it with our senses. We are wired to fear what we can grasp with our senses. I will still go down the stairs recklessly, unless maybe I actually witnessed someone die in a stair. Yet there are radiations everywhere, some of us are more exposed than other. And our body is engineered to deal with it, to a certain degree. For instance, according to IAEA:
"The individual dose limit for radiation workers averaged over 5 years is 100 mSv, and for members of the general public, is 1 mSv per year." (https://www.iaea.org/Publications/Factsheets/English/radlife). Yet we let flight attendants flying without any radiation monitoring, even though they are technically "radiation workers" with some even likely passing the recommended 20 mSv/yr limit.

Getting radiation and breaking our DNA is part of life. Life on earth from the beginning had to put in the specs a way to repair, as we have been and still are attacked by radiation and oxidation all the time. Our body due to oxidation alone breaks hundred of thousands of cells every day. A major part of our DNA is solely responsible to repair it. And yes, sometimes it fails (cancer). But getting radiation (dentist, flights, etc.) are considered fine, as long as you do not do it too often.

A well run nuclear reactor should not be more worrisome than a well run chemical plant.

Let's build some good (breeder) nuclear reactors !