Again, I quoted Wikipedia, just as you did.

"Though all of Japan's nuclear reactors successfully withstood shaking from the Tohoku earthquake..."

And yes, the shutdown of nuclear reactors was primarily political:

Japan Backs Off Of Nuclear Power After Public Outcry

https://www.npr.org/2011/05/11/136209502/japan-backs-off-of-...

"Kan's decisions to back away from nuclear power came after an unusual number of public demonstrations. "

And of course, all this is an irrelevant sideshow.

The point is that you claimed nuclear power is on its way out.

Except that turns out not to be the case, we have had 22 countries committing to tripling nuclear power. Tripling is not "on the way out".

And it turns out that Japan is one of those countries. Something you first denied. Then you claimed they were only reactivating their old reactors. Even if that claim were correct: so what? It's an increase compared to now.

But your claim is not correct: they are actually planning to build new plants.

And of course Japan is just one country of the 22 (+China+India+...). So again, how is nuclear on the way out?

You know what is on its way out? The German Energiewende. A lot of countries were going to follow this model, but most have now reconsidered, and the few that remain are hedging, for example Belgium just extended the life of their reactors. In Switzerland, recent initiatives to turn their reactors off earlier than currently planned were rejected by the electorate, and of course they have >50% reliably hydro power.

In fact, the German public also rejects the Energiewende, around 60% say that getting out of nuclear was a mistake. I have a hard time thinking of anything in recent times that got that kind of a majority.

Mehrheit ist gegen Atomausstieg

https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/deutschlandtrend/deutschlan...

And as to the sideshow:

You found another plant that was affected by the Tsunami (not the earthquake directly), as it was a sister plant of the one that melted down and sited about the same, so inundated by the same unprecedented Tsunami.

Now you claim the Tsunami wasn't unprecedented. The Japanese disagree with you, but what do they know? About anything really. You know better than them about their plans for nuclear power, you know better than them about their Tsunamis, you know better than them what the risk/reward of nuclear power is...despite them actually having had to deal with the 2nd worst nuclear accident in history.

Coming back to the Tsunami:

"It was the most powerful earthquake ever recorded in Japan,..."

"Most powerful ever recorded" sounds pretty unprecedented to me.

"The earthquake triggered powerful tsunami waves that may have reached heights of up to 40.5 meters (133 ft) "

"Among the factors in the high death toll was the unexpectedly large water surge. The sea walls in several cities had been built to protect against tsunamis of much lower heights. Also, many people caught in the tsunami thought they were on high enough ground to be safe"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tōhoku_earthquake_and_tsu...

So a lot of non-nuclear infrastructure in Japan built specifically to withstand or even protect from Tsunamis was...washed away by this Tsunami. To point a finger exclusively at the nuclear infrastructure that was also washed away is either ignorant or dishonest.

'nuff said.