You have to consider that the reactors were old and at the end of their life span. It would have cost billions to renew them. That money is better spent on S&W and hydrogen

Possibly true. But you can't change the past and new nuclear is too expensive

How so? New sunlight in massive quantities shines on the earth and creates wind

I mean you have to process the gas that you extract but once you have done that, then yes it is

Best for decarbonizing hard to decarbonize sectors like steel manufacturing. In theory it could also replace fossil fuels in the energy mix

No, you must be thinking about nuclear. Natural hydrogen has been found at high concentrations and is highly scalable

Solution: hydrogen storage, ideally from natural hydrogen

Why tho? By 2030 the grid will he entirely renewable. It's already 60% there with exponential growth of renewables in the future. Why would you spend billions on a base load energy source in a renewable energy world?

Nuclear is not renewable.

Just one question, WHY?

🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

It's also just not true. Russian oil was never cheaper than oil from other countries.
www.ft.com/content/837e...