Agreed. I'm not opposed to identifying situations where companies are getting away with something for free that they should be paying for, and then correcting

Agreed. I'm not opposed to identifying situations where companies are getting away with something for free that they should be paying for, and then correcting that. For example, dumping chemicals into a river, or emitting toxic fumes into the air. Somehow this turned into: "only solar, wind, and thermal are good, so everything other than those are bad. We need to shut down nuclear." It would have been better if it was: "wow, these decades old designs did really well. We've learned a lot over the years, let's build newer, better, cleaner, safer nuclear plants and then shut down the old ones."