I'm willing to accept that the technical and safety aspects of nuclear are manageable. The hard part is that humans are responsible for operating the reactors.
How do we protect against regulatory capture, when there may be very large sums of money involved with safety decisions? (Note that regulatory capture can go both ways: a company running a reactor might prefer regulations to be lax for their reactor, but unattainably strict for any new reactor a competitor might build.)
My answer to this is to look at it this way. We’ve been running nuclear power for over fifty years, exposed to these very concerns you have of regulatory capture and humans at the controls, and it’s still over that time proven to be the safest form of electricity. So the experiment has been done and the conclusion is really: nuclear power is safer than other forms in spite of regulatory conditions or humans.
How do we protect against regulatory capture, when there may be very large sums of money involved with safety decisions? (Note that regulatory capture can go both ways: a company running a reactor might prefer regulations to be lax for their reactor, but unattainably strict for any new reactor a competitor might build.)