It has killed very few people, expense isn't a reason for hate, and everything else has pretty much been a win (land usage minimal, minimal byproducts, etc).
Meanwhile, that money could have purchased solar + wind that would provide something like a third or even half of Europe’s electricity needs! That’s not even factoring in ongoing cost reductions over those same decades.
Fission has the same problem: it’s expensive power in the distant future versus cheap power available now.
Chernobyl 4000 km2/1600 sq mile, Fukushima 800 km2/300 sq mile.
The Fukushima exclusion zone is currently 143 sq miles, and half of the original Fukushima exclusion zone (a radius around a plant situated on the coast) wasn't on land. Based on the difference in capacity factor between nuclear and solar, a solar farm with the generation capacity of the Fukushima nuclear power plant would require approximately the same amount of land as the height of the Fukushima exclusion zone (including the parts over the sea), and about twice as much as the current exclusion zone.
Needless to say there are several hundred other nuclear power plants that have operated for decades and have no exclusion zone, even before you consider newer designs that reduce or eliminate the possibility of that failure mode.
