You should expand upon "fast reactors that turn nuclear waste into nuclear fuel" -- the "spent" fuel from current reactors still has 90-95% of the fissionable uranium left, but has to be "retired" because some fission products capture the slow (moderated) neutrons the the reactor relies upon to maintain the chain reaction. This "spent" fuel can be used as is in fast-neutron reactors, supplying power for 9 times longer than the original fuel.

You might also mention why nukes have been so expensive for the last few decades: the debunked Linear, No Threshold model of the health impacts of radiation and the resultant official As Low As Reasonably Achievable policy for radiation releases from reactors (which amounts to "zero tolerance") so that reactors have to be made less radioactive than typical background radiation, no matter the cost. People (especially the NRC) need to be honest about the often beneficial effects of low levels of radiation, and confront the hysterical Auntie Nukes who got their understanding of radiation hazards from Marvel Comics. See e.g. https://jick.net/skept/RadHaz/RadHaz_talk.pdf