Actually pete, building a bomb is simple. Albeit, none simpler than a fusion bomb the size of a grapefruit, and able to be transported in a hand carried in a shielded embassy bag, as opposed to an old fashioned fission bomb, even there one only needs enriched uranium and no reactors per se.

What I'm saying is, that particular horse has already bolted minus the feared reactor or nuclear technology.

All we might do if we build a reactor or ten is add to a massive nuclear stockpile already large enough to destroy the world ten times over.

Actually the only way to absolutely prevent this material finding its way into bombs is to use and reuse it in FBR's!

And there we could reach some sort of sane agreement that turns hundreds of planet killing bombs into peaceful power, with no way back into bombs once the cycle is completed, which by the way could reduce the half life to just 300 years

Surely we humans have enough nouse to store the stuff for that long?

I won't tell you how to build a fusion bomb as that would spoil your warm and comfortable warm inner glow as you wake up and smell the Co2 in the morning. But can confirm, no reactor or nuclear training wheels are necessary.

Yes nuclear power is dangerous, but less so, than coal fired power which has to date cost more lives, and given the massive expansion holds vastly more threat to the entire world than new helium cooled pebble reactors or cheaper than coal thorium

Given access to the necessary materials, building bombs is just not that hard. Even so, the modest size fusion bomb, could if detonated in a precise spot, turn our little world into a new if small and short lived star. And no bunker deep enough to survive that!

Neither of these outcomes is reliant on a reactor or nuclear training wheels.

However, we do rely on those who have this knowledge remaining patient with obdurate obtuse folks with a hidden anti development anti population agenda.
Alan B.

Considering that in April India cleared the legal and insurance hurdles, and announced that it is proceeding with about 60 reactors by 2035, and roughly the same in China, I would take Jim Green's predictions with a little salt.

What we have here is a classic supply bubble similar to what is happening with iron ore whose price collapsed to $40/t from about $170/t, yet no one is silly enough to say that steel production is doomed.

Below is something challenging the the "Linear No Threshold" model ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model ) of the effects of radiation.

http://radiationeffects.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/The-Chernobyl-Conundrum-der-Spiegel-5.2016.pdf

Meanwhile, the fear-mongers stand firm against the only safe and economically feasible solution to AGW.

I don't know what to think about it. There are so many ways...