Sorry I couldn’t discuss with you, but I’m back from your 1 week
”vacation”, now so I can.

Bottom line is, I’d rather see the nuclear plants than the wind turbines and solar panels. They are too dependent upon ideal weather for a reliable grid. Nuclear chugs along through all weather anomalies.
I also don’t believe 250-300 nuke plants would be nearly enough to cover the country. There would still be a need for smaller power plants, which could be easily powered by cleaner burning NG. The remaining bountiful NG we produce could have been sold off shore to other countries, like ohhhhh, maybe Germany???

but not anymore! Lol
I don’t think converting to them to nuke would do much to the “liquid” fuel supply jobs and infrastructure as very few power plants run on diesel fuel of gasoline. EVs will have a much more detrimental affect on “liquid” or petrochemical American energy jobs than nuke plants.
So, yeah, I would be good with nuclear replacing coal, but much less satisfied with solar or wind replacing coal as they are far too unreliable and there’s not enough battery storage for cloudy or low-wind days.
So go ahead and cut/paste an article to show how solar is a better choice than nuclear, but it won’t change my mind.