Excellent news! The last thing we want when GlobCiv 1.0 comes apart at its technological seams is a bunch of (temporarily) operating nuclear reactors littering the biosphere. Let's get them all shut down by 2030 and we can get on with the serious business of closing down the toxic waste dump of human civilization.

were falling as rapidly, or at all.

...is dismantling the system of centralized thermal electric generation. Nuclear and coal are both experiencing stress from a range of factors.
The age of existing nuclear plants,
the cost of maintaining them,
the dangers associated with letting their condition deteriorate,
and the extremely high cost of new construction...

...all conspire to make nuclear more susceptible to competition from renewables and natural gas than coal is.

However that doesn't mean that coal isn't going to have its turn.

We are already seeing a virtual halt to coal plant expansion in developed countries, and renewables are rapidly reaching grid parity around the world, a fact that is already displacing some new investment in coal.

If this could be done by dictate of some supreme leader, then we could precisely tailor the path of transition so that those who do nothing but throw raspberries from the sidelines might have a couple of less things to bitch about, but since we can't I suppose we'll just have to endure the mindless chants of those who don't have a fucking clue about what is happening around them.

Up 22 ppm over the last decade.

Bitching isn't going to change anything.

and 2013 is on a path to exceed both 2012 and 1998, the year that the anti-environmentalist Joe Romm was running the climate office.

For the year to date for 2013, the average week is showing an increase of 2.82 ppm over the same week of 2012 - again the second worst in history. The year to date for 1998 was 2.59 ppm over 1997, and the whole year ended up at 2.93 ppm over 2007.

We will easily beat 1998 and surely exceed 3.00 ppm for a single year.

The insipid crowing in the OP shows exactly how connected to environmental and human issues anti-nukes are, which is to say not at all.

The fear and ignorance squad has obviously done what fear and ignorance squads have always done throughout history: Do the utmost to destroy the future.

It's very likely that anti-nuke fear and ignorance will succeed at distributing - uselessly and for faith based reasons - cadmium and tellurium messes all over the planet, increase the record dependence of dangerous fossil fuels, increase the millions killed by them each year and otherwise completely destroy the future.

History, should humanity survive to have history, will record anti-nuke fear and ignorance as a great crime.

None of that, however, will stop anti-nukes in their contempt for the environment.

Have a nice evening.

No crowing; simple recitation of statistics. It really isn't complicated - if nuclear is such a panacea, why has it failed miserably to advance in the 50+ years it has been receiving extremely strong government support and subsidies?
Why is it that the more we learn, the more the costs go up?
It has been operating in a system of centralized thermal generation - a system where its strengths have their most value - yet it has still failed to sever itself from the government teat or make any dent at all in the expansion of coal. When is it supposed to make its move and actually deliver on the promises it has been making for decades?

The answer is it won't because it can't. It is an overpriced, unreliable dinosaur technology that can't compete. The only thing it has accomplished is to preserve the economic structure if energy generation and delivery that gives coal its power.

As written above: