One ought not to endorse a fundamentally bad thing because it entails a number of positive consequences; but if a bad thing does have benign consequences that's fine. It's to be hoped that the global warming scam will make us reconsider nuclear power in a levelheaded way. First and foremost, we should allow and encourage research and entrepreneurial innovation in the field, and ultimately this will require the restitution of open markets for energy.
After all the ballyhoo about nuclear apocalypse in Japan and the world over, reality and reason are asserting themselves ever more firmly. Though, no one among the (green) scaremongers is saying: "we're sorry to have seriously misled you."
[N]early three years after Fukushima, the impact of the meltdown seems smaller than ever, even in the country that was ground zero for the accident. Today Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe released a new Basic Energy Plan that states Japan will push to restart the dozens of reactors closed after the disaster, and potentially even build new ones in the future. And beyond outliers like Germany—where denuclearization is still proceeding—nuclear power is still expanding in much of the world [...]
But the long-term health impacts of the meltdown and subsequent radiation release seem limited. In a study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, a team of Japanese researchers found that the mean annual radiation dose from the Fukushima event after 2011 was comparable to the background radiation that the average Japanese citizen might experience over the course of a year, and any increases in cancer rates from the meltdown may be so small at to be undetectable.
Read more at the (mainstream) source, which ridiculously ascribes unproblematic radiation levels to wise measures taken by government in the aftermath of the Fukushima accident.
For better background information consult my posts: