> It fizzled due to FUD.

You're saying there were no actual, serious problems with nuclear plants?

> Existing plants work and are defensible.

That's survivorship bias to a degree: Te plants that work and are defensible are the plants you see. It's also a bias of sunk costs: The surviving plants could have been way over-budget and late, but it's still worth operating them.

Ah that’s breeders, it’s a different game. They’re technically more challenging (the French spent billions on their plants which didn't quite deliver) and have a significant nuclear weapons proliferation risk.

Somewhere I read (sorry for the lack of sources) that with single-pass fuel use, known reserves would only last a couple decades, a century at best.