The low-wind periods last December had a peak of 1.2 GW solar.
Combined wind and solar right now are producing only very slightly more than a tech that has had zero real investment in thirty years. I wouldn't brag about that.
Unlike wind, solar and pumped storage.
Nevertheless, the >30-year old nukes still delivered what every single technology you have listed categorically failed to deliver. I have provided ample, repeated evidence of that. They failed and fossils came to the rescue. Repeatedly.
Why should they get even half the subsidy nukes get (which is what they do get), when their output is simply useless.
I've posted numbers. Please, you want to show me storage can be economically done, today, do so. Or admit you can't because it can't. We no longer have time for utopianism.
150 MW currently.
This is simply, provably false. They have delivered cheap and green electricity and weaned us off fossil fuels gradually.
Theyre growing very very fast because theyre economic and a good investment. Nuclear is not because it is not.
Throw $4 billion of subsidies at solar, wind and pumped storage and youll get more power when you need it than if you did the same for a nuclear power station.
I'm sorry we're just living in fantasy land now.
We're not weaned off fossils. Not even close. That's just a lie.