There’s a very different attitude that’s immediately obvious when you’ve had the opportunity to go iside both nuclear and coal fired power plants. That’s the attitude toward maintenance. The nuclear power industry went through a shake out not only after TMI but also in the 90s. During that period the management of utilities that operated a nuclear power plant either committed and performed based on NRC dictates or they literally got out of the business by selling the nuclear units they owned to utilities that had the right stuff.
Maintenance in a nuclear power plant is proactive like aircraft maintenance. It doesn’t have to be broken to be replaced or disassembled for inspection and rebuilt.
A coal fired plant goe beyond the “If it’s not broken, don’t fix it,: mantra. Unless it’s absolutely essential lots of maintenance or repairs in a coal fired power plant is deferred to save money.
After 40 years a nuclear power plant is still in eat off the floor condition and they complete run cycles from refueling to refueling without issues.
In a nutshell if a nuclear power plant was an automobile, it would still be in virtually showroom condition after 40 years. The typical 40 year old coal fired plant would look like a ragged out beater that still runs ok.
A couple of differences. If a coal plant blows up it doesn’t put a bunch cesium in the atmosphere and on the ground.
Secondly, there have been significant advances in design of nuclear plants in the last 50 years. Any 40 yr old plant was certainly designed years before construction.