I think so, others disagree
Technically, anyone who lives near a nuclear power plant and, i suppose, gets permission, can use nuclear energy as a cheaper alternative to electricity
You don't need nuclear energy. There are many alternatives to get energy; nuclear energy is just one of many options.
Energy
Wind ,solar ,nuclear , hydroclectric ,tidal, biomass,sun,GO thermal
Alternative source of energy beside conventional fossil fuel, nuclear power and hydro-power are Solar energy in the form of photo-voltaic cells or solar-thermal, wind energy, wave energy, geothermal energy, biological derived fuels.
The main alternative source of energy that Caribbean countries is solar energy. Another alternative source of energy they could use is wind energy.
All material uses nuclear energy.
The nuclear energy obtained from uranium or plutonium is the most important alternative to fossil fuels. Oil and methane will be exhausted in less than 100 years. Wind, geothermal, solar, organic wastes etc. are useful but not serious alternative for 10 billions inhabitants.
Nuclear energy and renewable energy are not related. Renewable energy does not use nuclear energy.
Vague question. "Should" implies personal opinion. For the future of sustainability for the planet, it doesn't matter what type we use at all. In my opinion we will use what is available, and what is available is controlled by profit interests at this time. We "should" do what we have to do to survive.
There are many ways in which energy can be obtained, some of these sources could be: Solar Wind hydroelectric solar agricultural geothermal tidal nuclear :)
Batteries use chemical energy to create voltage to drive current flow. They do not use nuclear energy.