I know the discussion has evolved into something else and it's far too late to try and enter, but what the hell...
saying the nuclear system is flawed because fukushima suffered earthquake damage is like saying that the financial system is flawed because barclay's got hit by a meteorite: rubbish.
The french have made something called a 'fast breeder reactor'. I don't pretend to understand how it works, but apparently it means that a dose of uranium that would last a few years in a conventional reactor could last for several centuries. Something to do with recycling the fuel.
Yes, nuclear is a stepping stone, but it's better to have a stepping stone that DOESN'T release carbon than to keep plowing through coal reserves until renewables become ecologically and logistically viable (which they are most certainly not). Nuclear reactors could keep the country running for many hundreds of years yet, and without them, the only alternative is to produce more coal-fire stations to supply the burgeoning power requirements. That is clearly not acceptable, at least if you believe in global waming.