Plus you forgot the 1978 Seabrook Protests. Most of the hate was due to where it was built, not the fact it was built. It was really NIMBY on steroids plus a poor choice of location. So even conservative people in NH hated that plant due to its location.
But the press spun it as hate towards nuclear power. So that put a big black mark on the industry, maybe even more so because both Liberals and Right Wing people came out against it.
So where should we put nuclear reactors then? Should we put a new California nuclear reactor in downtown San Francisco or Los Angeles? If nuclear proponents are saying nuclear technology is safe, then it shouldn't matter where we put it. It's just an education issue, right?
The problem is, that nobody really trusts nuclear, or more specifically nobody really trusts corporations with nuclear power. I will point out there's a high correlation between a given nuclear accident and a coverup of that nuclear accident.
Areas where there is more then a one 1 lane road for evacuations. If you have ever been there, there are only 2 ways out, go north or go south for about 10 miles in either direction on a one lane road.
In the summer the population of that area grows to hundreds of thousands. That area is by far the worse area for a plant. There are no evacuations signs there because there is only 1 way in and out.
But the press spun it as hate towards nuclear power. So that put a big black mark on the industry, maybe even more so because both Liberals and Right Wing people came out against it.