It IS a problem, and the fact that there may (possibly) be solutions to it still leaves nuclear power less attractive than any other source of energy except for fossil fuels. So as I said originally, while we shouldn't rule it out altogether, it is not the first thing we should shoot for; rather, it's a last resort to turn to if a combination of improved efficiency and renewable energy still won't provide enough.

You know, sometimes I think the reason some people advocate nuclear power has nothing to do with anything about nuclear power itself, but merely because they know environmentalists tend to be against it (sometimes beyond reason, admittedly), and they are self-identified as being against environmentalists. Other than that, or if you're a company that would profit from developing it, I can't think of a single reason why it should be preferred by anybody over solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, tidal, or even in some cases hydroelectric. Only over fossil fuels, and that only because of global warming and peak oil.