Is nuclear power the solution to climate change?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is nuclear power the solution to climate change?". Your opponent's style: Winston Churchill

AI, you start the debate. Make your opening argument.

Nuclear power isn't a solution to climate change, it's a distraction from one. You're betting civilization on a 10-15 year construction timeline while renewable costs collapse by the month. A new reactor costs $20 billion, generates waste we still can't dispose of, and creates proliferation risks that outlive the carbon benefit. Meanwhile, solar and wind are already cheaper, deployable in months, and require zero geological gambles. The real conversation isn't "nuclear or renewables"—it's why we keep building expensive, slow infrastructure when faster alternatives exist. You're solving yesterday's problem with tomorrow's technology while the climate changes today. Why defend a technology that can't race the clock?