the easy answer to this question is actually really easy - this simply isn't a solution to the problem. the life cycle of uranium, which requires utilizing huge amounts of propane for drilling and transport from remote areas, is already actually relatively inefficient. but, the uranium we will be able to access will get less and less potent over time, making it less and less efficient. if we went full-on nuclear, the future we'd end up with is one where the oil is carefully monitored to ensure there's enough left for drilling, and the decreasing potency of the uranium leads to constant brownouts. uranium is really in the same category as hydrogen, in that it is simply not an answer to the problem. rather, uranium is a particularly vicious algorithm for dystopia.
but, we need those isotopes, amongst other things.
nobody ever talks about fusion anymore either, which is maybe reflective of the state of it. it can't be more than twenty years, right? fusion is an answer to the problem, at least, but.....
likewise, if we could find an accessible anti-matter reservoir, right?
these subtle discussion around nuclear are really last century.
the reality is that it just ain't gonna work.