There is such a thing as a safe nuclear plant, LFTR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L..., a type of reactor that is walk-away safe. No active safety systems, nothing to power to keep the plant safe, you can walk away from it and it will never melt-down. It doesn't even use the same family of fissile material.

Germany is not the top PV anything anymore: http://www.slate.com/blogs/fut...

as for storing PV-generated power, good luck with that: http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

The real problem and that 90% of the people pushing alternatives like PV and such is that they don't understand that scale at which humanity consumes energy. The land needs to build enough PV are staggering, a 1MW facility requires about 7.9 acres of land, not much until you consider that most nukes produce 1200MW on about 100 acres, you would need 9480 acres to get the same capability. The amount of land needed to displace fossil fuel consumption is staggering. Solar PV is fine for your rooftop to help offset grid costs to your household, but it can not scale to satisfy the needs of the world, at least not at the ~9% efficiency they currently have, maybe at 75% or more but not now.

With cheap abundant clean electrical energy you can generate liquid fuels from the carbon in the atmosphere, the best way to get that kind of load is nuclear and the best nuke we currently have is LFTR. The key is displacing fossil fuel use with something that can maintain and grow with our current consumption. PV is not going to cut it.