I got curious when you mentioned transportation being a fraction of global carbon emissions, according to Our World in Data, both industry and building account each for more emissions than transport, and Livestock & Manure account for more than non-road transport combined.

That is indeed precisely what I meant - changing transportation alone would only be a fraction of the total CO2 emissions. It's not negligibly small (IIRC 5-10%?), but it's not the sort of thing that "fixes the environment" alone. The Livestock aspect is why I mention agriculture being one industry that must change, because current farming practices are the single biggest driver of CO2 (and other GHG emissions like methane). I love my beef, but if I have to give it up for the sake of literally saving the planet, small price to pay.

I did have a suspicion EV weren't nearly as clean as commercials made it out to be. Thanks for explaining the environmental costs behind them, I have a suspicion nuclear would be a cleaner source of energy compared to fossil fuels, while it does produce waste this waste can be contained and kept away, compared to the gases produced by fossil fuel which are inevitably released into the atmosphere.

100% yes. Nuclear is, objectively, the cleanest, safest, and most long-term viable energy source we have. The waste being talked about is actually miniscule - on the order of tons per year globally, rather than mega- or giga-tons of CO2. Said waste can be reprocessed to extract more viable fuel leaving mere pounds of actual, dangerous waste. And that waste can be locked in containers and buried in concrete easily. The problem is people have imagined boogeymen in their heads about this entire process, thinking that "nuclear waste" means leaking barrels of green sludge a la the Simpsons and Greenpeace propaganda, rather than what it really is (hard, ceramic materials encased in lead and concrete); or that we should really be worrying about hypothetical "10,000 year in the future" people "digging it up" and being too dumb to know it's radioactive waste, like this is an actual reasonable concern (1, they won't if you put it in a hole, and 2, most of the really dangerous fission products have half-lives on the order of decades, not millennia). The entire push against nuclear that started in the '70's was borne entirely out of irrational fear and ignorance and continues to be promulgated to this day. And that's just one aspect of the nuclear ignorance - there's plenty of other aspects too. Thankfully numerous governments are once again ignoring the loud voices and getting back on track with an actual solution to the climate crisis. And ironically it seems to be conservative governments doing it.