The elephant in the room
Is, of course, all the wasted heat that any power plant has to get rid of generating all that 'leccy.
Personally, I tend to agree with Lewis that the menace of CO2 is somewhat over done. It can't help that burning any kind of coal has, historically, dumped more many times more radioactivity onto the ground, as well as other solid pollutants both onto the ground and into air than all the nuclear + their accidents put together (by several orders of magnitude).
However, none of them are thermally efficient on any objective measurement. Then there is heat wastage during usage. If one ignores the comparatively tiny amount of useful work that 'leccy driven widgets do, as well as the woeful insulation status of most human 'leccy usage, one is drawn to the conclusion that all power stations are essentially atmospheric heaters with a wide distribution network making sure than few parts of the planet escape some local heating. Oh and BTW physics tells what all that "useful work" ends up as.
So current power generation digs something out of the ground and uses it to heat its surroundings. The heating might be local, but do enough of it for long enough, over large area of the planet and one has to ask if there is a better definition of "Global Warming". What we are doing is systematically overloading the planet's ability to dump excess heat. The other "bad" things simply add to the problem.
So are we all doomed? Well yes, obviously. However if one needs to choose"fossil" then nuclear is easily the least polluting fuel generation method. But solar based generation has one advantage in that they can never *add* to the local heating of an area. The plant even (eventually) makes a profit on the energy expended on its manufacture - unlike windmills.
I see a small ray of sunshine in the German government has belatedly twigged what periodic generation of 40% solar energy does to a distribution grid and is starting to think about subsidizing house sized energy storage systems to bring down the cost. To the point that households might largely (in the sunnier seasons in Europe) be electrically self sufficient (and therefore excess heat generationally "neutral" for a large part of a year - but they aren't thinking of that bit - yet).
If they succeed in bringing the cost of storage at the same rate as the reduction in cost of PV cells, together the continuing improvement in PV cell 'leccy conversion rates, then the agreement that UK PLC has just made with France and China will look even more expensive than it currently does. It may never get finished.
I've put my coat on, as it's cold.