I agree with you Russell, a few folk got rich with nuclear but overall it isn't cost effective, the decommissioning costs are much higher than most projects budget for, and if those were truly reflected at the start of a project, it simply would not go ahead.
Besides, at the end of the day it is just more extraction, squeezing energy from materials.
Something fundamental, which massively affects everything is being suppressed, as far as I can tell.
It is the absence of money issue on solar product received.
You maybe know the Austrian Economics principal that money issue should be balanced with production, in essence it predicts devaluation of money not honoring the principal.
We have to include donated product also as a form of production. Solar energy is Joules donated from a source external to Earth's economy. Those Joules convert to physical hydrogen fuel, and even food (See "Solein"), but no money is issued on reception of those Joules. Reception of them, when that is converted to electricity, or even just to heat in a water tank, is when the product is physically added to our economy. That addition is constant and cumulative, at the rate of tens of GigaJoules per second in every developed country, and still scaling up.
Add it up for several years now, that is an awful lot of acculmulated product, which has never been reflected by issue of money.
What that unmonetised donated product actually is, is a growing, physical force, literally devaluing money.
As long as it isn't redeemed, the only way it can be, by issue of free money, (The product was donated, no labor of extraction per joule is associated with it, money issued as promises to pay, or promises to do work, can't represent product received for free), then money is physically devaluing, because it is not representing that continuously growing, very valuable, donated product.
Why is this not talked about in the mainstream? I think we know the answer there, it doesn't suit the slaver narrative, which currently "Owns" everything including all media and all centralised power production, and well, everything.
How long they can continue to ignore it, seems to be set by how much value they can stand losing from their capital, by loss of value in money due to inflation, before they see sense, and give in to the inevitable, their loss of power.
Isn't this an interesting situation, either they issue free money, which instantly functionally supersedes their capital, or they watch the value of their capital erode away over time anyway, as the donated product credit continues to mount up, devaluing everything they claim to own?
When this becomes apparent, it seems now we are all the more responsible as a species, for continuing to allow the misery of millions of our species dying from hardships which could be solved by issue of free money.
To me it is only a matter of time now until this is acknowledged, and we can finally move to a truly sustainable, much fairer, infinitely more creative economy, based on all things donated. Everyone donates from a basis of having plenty, with no need to expect returns, it will be a very different world, very soon.