Quite the opposite, there's clear evidence that fossil fuel companies heavily supported anti-nuclear action groups. Because nuclear energy is just as much of a threat to their business as renewables are.
> Quite the opposite, there's clear evidence that fossil fuel companies heavily supported anti-nuclear action groups.
Fossil companies fund both camps. They are especially interested in closing-down existing nuclear plants, as it immediately creates a big market for them, but it's also useful to them to delay deploying new solar/wind capacity (and thus, funding the wait-for-new-nuclear or even wait-for-fusion campaigns)
If you keep it forever in R&D you can have it as a carrot and never as a competitor. Tons and tons of cash that could go into battery or panel factories. And because they have the media in their pocket they can easily turn the knob on favor or disfavor of nuclear power.
Solar is the solution now because America dithered and fumbled nuclear energy in the 60s - 80s. Now nuclear cannot be built because every estimate has been 1/10th the actual cost for plants built in this millennium. Glow rocks are dead - use fusion power from the sky.
They probably flipped 5-15 years ago. Before then nuclear was the biggest threat to fossil energy. Now solar is, and pro-nuclear is the best anti-solar.
