Cleaning up "harmful emissions from burning lignite" is complete bullshit. How would that even work? For one thing those emissions or whatever is not radioactive, which is a big plus. For another, those emissions are continously reduced and once they are sufficiently reduced, the planet as a whole will actually clean it up by itself. This will take a long time, of course. Not as long as leaving nuclear waste and radioactive dirt alone and hoping it won't get blown around and harm anyone.

The Fukushima incident was a result of regulations being too weak or ignored and the government not keeping good enough tabs on the operator. I really don't think the Chinese government does a better job. They suck at regulating and enforcing plenty of things they care about.

Pro-nuclear propaganda tries to focus on "only" one direct fatality, and conveniently ignores all the cost associated with not running up that number.

There is no need to "overbuild" wind or solar. There has never been any illusion those sources will produce at 100% capacity all the time. There will eventually be energy storage to level out the peaks, but most countries still have years to build up to the point where this is necessary.

And nuclear power proponents are using plenty of lies. Like the one where the only alternative to nuclear power is coal power.

What you claim to be "reality" and "science" is just a convenient selection of either. It is entirely rational to claim that the risk of nuclear power is not calculable, and to not have enough appetite to carry that risk.

The purpose of building up renewable energy sources right now is NOT to sustain peak loads entirely from renewables. But such simplifications are convenient, right?

Yet you repeat the lie that coal power is the only alternative to nuclear. That convenient lie is the core assumption between most or all your arguments.