Like George Monbiot or James Hansen and James Lovelock, I don't think we're going to be able to free ourselves of our fossil fuel addiction without embracing every non-carbon energy source currently available to us. What that means in the short term is clear - accepting nuclear power. What that means in the medium and long term remains to be seen. We're only beginning to explore alternative energy options, many of them still in their infancy, and it is entirely conceivable we may be able to mothball our nuclear energy resources in two or three decades. I just don't know. Neither do you.
The nuclear option has clearly left a deep rift in the environmental movement, especially in the wake of Fukushima. Yet plenty of very knowledgeable voices in the science community - the same community we implore others to accept on global warming - stand behind nuclear power.
If, like me, you're less than scientifically competent on nuclear power technology - and still have an open mind - here's an article I think you'll find helpful:
Take a read and see if it helps answer some of your questions and doubts.