1) Electricity could replace most carbon usage, the amount generated now from carbon is almost besides the point.
"So it's including vehicles. You could be 100% nuclear power generation and that part wouldn't change."
? We're going to electric cars. Cars currently run on fossil fuels because it was cheap and convenient, that will change.
2) We have at least mid-term storage and there are plenty of options on the table for long-term we just have to make up our minds.
3) The 'failure modes' are not that bad - nobody died in Fukishima - and - we can limit them. Neither Fukishima nor Chernobyl plants should have ever been running.
At this point, the only thing stopping us is ourselves.
To the extend we are organized and competent we can do it just as well.
Nitpick: in the Fukushima incident, one worker died of radiation poisoning and 273 (elderly) people died of evacuation-related stress.
Still negligible compared to the deaths from coal burning. And as you say, the Fukushima reactors are much worse than current designs like Hualong One.
"So it's including vehicles. You could be 100% nuclear power generation and that part wouldn't change."
? We're going to electric cars. Cars currently run on fossil fuels because it was cheap and convenient, that will change.
2) We have at least mid-term storage and there are plenty of options on the table for long-term we just have to make up our minds.
3) The 'failure modes' are not that bad - nobody died in Fukishima - and - we can limit them. Neither Fukishima nor Chernobyl plants should have ever been running.
At this point, the only thing stopping us is ourselves.
To the extend we are organized and competent we can do it just as well.