I can't say I'm at all excited by this.
While its certainly true that nuclear is cleaner than coal at the operating stage, the mining is every bit as bad, and disposal has no approved resolution.
I really can't fathom endorsing something that is an incomplete thought; if you don't know how to manage the entire life-cycle of what you create (and charge accordingly), to me that's irresponsible.
I would prefer we focused on lowering the consumption levels of the rich and upper-middle-class, and promoting energy efficiency.
We have yet to approve something as straight-forward as going to all LED streetlights, never mind some of the bigger savings that could be achieved, at far lower cost than expanded nuclear generation.
As apart from that I would strongly prefer to see much more dispersed, smaller-scale generation from a strategic perspective. Putting all eggs in one very large 'Bruce' basket seems incredibly unwise.
The fetish for having 'the largest in the world' I accord the same questioning look I give people who fetishize the tallest building, or the busiest/widest highway, why? What seems like an odd monument to ego rather than a sound use of dollars
merits no approbation, but rather lament and the need for a re-think.