If you can mount a good argument for investing in nuclear when...

If you can mount a good argument for investing in nuclear when even if the public could be manhandled onside (which is highly doubtful) it would still take until 2050 before we could switch one on, and decades more before it paid for itself, then I'd appreciate you laying it out. I'm not averse to nuclear but the timetable of trying to get an anti-nuclear, nuclear-free nation the size of Australia onto nuclear seems very prohibitive. In 30 years I would imagine other technologies would have trimmed down a whole bunch as well, making a nuclear option even less attractive.