Hi Bob. My thoughts were in an earlier post in the thread, but briefly they were,

1. The reactor designs of the time were inherently unstable, and I did not trust the industry to be able to operate reactors of those designs. Accidents at Three Mile Island and Fukushima would have been impossible with other safer designs. Nuclear material is so hazardous that a failsafe design is needed.

2. Spent nuclear fuel is extremely toxic, and I did not trust industry to manage that material. I don't feel that is as large a problem as the public thinks though, because the volume of fuel is so small. This issue was used mainly as a political issue. #1 is the larger issue.

3. I was concerned that a nuclear economy would effectively proliferate the use of uranium, which can be used to "breed" plutonium, which can be used to make an atomic bomb. I felt that if we developed a nuclear economy, we would lose control of the materials globally, because of the larger scale of use.