The nuclear plants in Finland are built for a real need (cheaper electricity) without any viable alternatives if we want to limit reliance to other countries (ask the east block countries how fun it is to rely on Russian gas for your electricity/heating during the winter). In some countries you would probably use coal or gas but as Finland doesn't have any of those (literally 0 natural gas, oil or coal reserves) we have had to rely on nuclear (for which we have fuels to burn in the bedrock). We have already built dams pretty much everywhere we can so hydro cannot be expanded in any meaningful way. Solar and wind just don't work as baseline power for heavy industry in Finland (at least not yet. The battery technology just isn't there). Solar is useless during the winter and wind has too much variance.
Also due to the delays in construction of the new reactor (thanks Areva and Siemens) we have been very close to actually running out of power (with the connections to Sweden and Russia maxed out) and have had to resort to reserve gas power plants with MWh prices in the hundreds of euros as most plans for the grid have included the new reactor being done in time.
In Finland the subsidies for wind power is just flat selling price into the grid. You can take subsidy on building too but then you cannot get the one for selling electricity (which is much better with the current prices)