Love it how fast Japan vanishes from the list after the Fukushima incident in 2011

#1 That's an odd comment. If you believe in Global Warming and believe something needs to be done ASAP, we should be doing nuclear hard! Currently it's the only viable solution that is scalable AND cheap enough to replace fossil fuels.

I understand Bill Gates is working with partners on Gen IV where it's impossible to have a meltdown and there's a version that eats nuclear waste as fuel. I'm not aware of any political leanings Bill has. He just seems to want to solve problems.

A better comparison might be what percentage of power used is nuclear.
According to the wikis:
Of the top countries, only 4 top 50% (three are in the 50 percentile) with France in the number 1 spot with 70%.

The US is 15th at 19% and China is 27th at 4%.

There's only 450-ish worldwide and only 54 under construction with the US having a measly 2 under construction and China, the top builder, currently only at 11. India is in 2nd with 7 being built.

We're not really serious about Global Warming are we.

Arguably, Richard Mulhouse Nixon's biggest crime wasn't Watergate.
It was the shutting down of the molten salt Thorium power plant in Oak Ridge Tennessee in 1971 thus sending the planet down the path of filthy, dangerous and scarce Uranium as the fuel for Nuclear power.
Thorium plants have cheap clean fuel and are safe, but were no good for making Plutonium fuel for nuclear bombs).
So why not go with Thorium?
Thorium in very plentiful on Earth and is easy to extract.
One tonne of Thorium delivers the same amount of energy as 250 tonnes of Uranium.
There is estimated to be enough Thorium on the planet to last 10,000 years.
Thorium LFTRs (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) run at normal atmospheric pressure instead of 150 to 160 times atmospheric pressure currently needed for Uranium water cooled reactors.
Thorium is much less radioactive than Uranium.
Downside to Thorium:

1. It produces no fissile material for old style nuclear bombs.

2. The current nuclear incumbents have built the market on Uranium and will fight Thorium tooth and nail to preserve their market and profits

3. There is not yet a Thorium power station in full production to demonstrate its viability.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVSmf_qmkbg

The top 20 countries that generate the nuclear energy you share help me expand my knowledge, thanks for sharing.<a href="https://vex3.online">vex 3</a>

The world stopped building nuclear stations 3 decades ago (switched to cheap gas).
We lack the skills now to build them now.
The accidents at Fukushima, 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl and Windscale now means that with new projects, the level of safety has to be raised significantly.
Also there is a tendency now to make much bigger plants to leverage economies of scale.
These 3 factors:
The lack of skills and experience.
The increased safety standards
The temptation to build giant plants
means that the real time costs of building a Uranium plant today is 3 times what it was 30 years ago.
What is the state of nuclear power plant construction around the world now?
Let's take the USA.
Remember Obama's 2010 state of the union where he got a standing ovation from both sides of the house when he said he was going to resume nuclear power production.
9 years later how are we doing?
After 3 decades without building nuclear plants, civilian nuclear skills are somewhat lacking.
The military hoovered up much of the nuclear talent over that period.

The US has 2 new Nuclear power plant builds underway, one in Georgia and one South Carolina.
Both however, are riddled with scandal, vast cost overruns and incompetence.

The Vogtle power plant in Georgia is way behind schedule, over budget and wracked by lawsuits.
Along with cost issues, there seems a serious problem with long delays acquiring skilled workers from abroad.
It may never be completed.
https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/news/2019/10/30/lawsuit-challenging-decision-to-finish-plant.html


The South Carolina Gas and Electric and Santee Cooper plant is a total fiasco and will likely be abandoned after $9 billion has been squandered on it.
https://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/gov-south-carolina-nuclear-reactors.html

Misguided politics are shutting existing nuclear plants.
(This next link gets corrupted when uploaded. you need to select text starting with https)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2019/01/16/u-s-co2-emissions-rise-as-nuclear-power-plants-close/#140b23097034

And the legacy of poor quality waste management still hangs over the country.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/05/the-60-year-downfall-of-nuclear-power-in-the-us-has-left-a-huge-mess/560945/

The main US nuclear player (Westinghouse Nuclear) has gone bust.

The installation of a former oil and mining industry lobbyist as secretary of the interior will not help nuclear in the US.