See also Canadian data (https://www.cns-snc.ca/learn-nuclear/basics-of-nuclear/how-m...). We're blessed to have abundant access to hydroelectric energy which is even cheaper to produce here, but otherwise we should be outraged by the decommissioning of nuclear plants - and, indeed, there have been recent campaigns to revive old plants and step up production.
> but otherwise we should be outraged by the decommissioning of nuclear plants
No, we shouldn't. Pull up charts for energy generation by type for the US, Canada, and Europe. Notice that solar and wind (especially wind) has skyrocketed and far eclipsed the capacity loss of nuclear. In the US, 7 times as much wind power is going in as nuclear plants being taken offline. In the UK, 30% of power generation (and growing) is from wind.
Now, who do you think knows better here? The power companies who have been shutting down nuclear and coal plants because they're more expensive than wind and solar? Or...uh...you?
If your answer is "me", then clearly you should get a job in energy production, or become an investor, and make a bazillion dollars knowing more than everyone else in the industry, in nearly every country.
US, EU, UK...all seeing massive capacity growth in wind, far eclipsing nuclear decommissioning. Several countries have hit days in the last few years where they didn't need to have any fossil fuel plants online.
> indeed, there have been recent campaigns to revive old plants and step up production.
That is because the nuclear industry is lobbying desperately to stay alive.
If you need to lobby the government to force power companies to use you while also handing you a big fat check written by taxpayers, that is proof you're not market competitive.
