We have all read about the nuclear accident in Japan. Is nuclear energy's very nature unsafe? Some say fusion is going to be a safe energy source in the future. Probably so. But what about until then. Sure we can harness renewable energy, but it is not yet economical nor does it produce the massive amounts of energy we need in the near future (look at what Google consumes.)
Some argue that today's nuclear energy production is too expensive. That may be so. A large part of that cost is insuring against catastrophy. What if you didn't have to worry about a meltdown or other disaster? Wouldn't that cut the costs?
There is another form of nuclear power generation and it is called Pebble Bed. Not only is it safe, but it does not require a source of water so it can be located away from bodies of water in isolated locations further increasing the sense of safety.
Tennis ball sized "pebbles", made up of carbon and uranium, are put into a hopper like the ones that deliver packing peanuts. Nothing happens. If a lid is put on the hopper and high pressure helium is injected, then a nuclear reaction begins. It generates heat and the power facility harvests the heat in various ways, converting it to electricity.
China is installing these reactors now. Because they require no massive plumbing, power plants can be constructed out of smaller components (modules) and their output can be increased in the future by adding more modules. Continuous refueling is possible by letting spent pebbles out at the bottom and putting fresh ones into the top.
Dealing with the spent pebbles can be handled by vitrification such as England has been doing since 1948. WE need to develop portable (railroad) vitrification factories and take them to nuclear facilities and let them turn nuclear waste into glass logs (2 meters a side.) These are stable for millions of years and do not leach into water supplies.