Hm, I would automatically distrust any "fact sheet" issued on this topic by the nuclear industry, just as I would any "facts" adduced by the tobacco industry intended to minimise the impact on consumers of independent health research into the damage caused by smoking.
That said, human life depends on energy and getting it and converting it to usable forms has always been a source of environmental pollution. When the earth's population was small, it didn't matter. As population grew, it mattered more, but the west was able to hold things together for a couple of hundred years by developing a system in which the have nots were denied full access to energy. Those days are over. The line can't be held any longer. But everyone can't have access to energy on the scale we've been able to enjoy it in the west. So, billions must die or our demands for energy must be reduced (greatly) and access to energy arranged more equitably. How? Dunno. But it is not rational to think that any increase in demand for energy must be met by whatever means available.
MG