So what you're saying is instead of spending 1.2B to stop a firm from building wind, the government should leave the firm be so they can keep building wind and invest the 1.2B into building a nuclear power plant which will come online when the German firm has built roughly 1,000x the same capacity in wind turbines.

Nuclear isn't as cheap as you present it. It needs heavy subsidies for insurance and waste disposal.

Most nuclear power proposals are just LARPing as "cheap" as they pretend subsidies don't exist.

In addition you have to shut nuclear power plants down in summers due to lack of sufficient cooling. That means you need to plan alternative replacement power generation.

> 1.2B gives you a 1-1.5GW nuclear power station

Er... That seems optimistic. Even in China, which is the current world leader and has significant advantages of scale, nuclear capacity costs $2-3bn per GW. The most recent US construction (Vogtle 3 and 4) took 14 years and cost $36bn for two reactors of 1.1GW each.