That’s an interesting, theoretical point. The containment structures around a nuclear plants are designed to withstand forces more powerful than even advanced a

That’s an interesting, theoretical point. The containment structures around a nuclear plants are designed to withstand forces more powerful than even advanced artillery, so there’s really no chance a stray rocket breaks the structure. A concerted effort is a possibility, but it’s not a tactic we’ve ever see used so far and I think the strategic value of doing so is limited. If an adversary had a fully subterranean power grid, maybe an attack on a nuclear plant could make sense, but that’s hypothetical because most energy infrastructure around the world is not protected in anyway. But another takeaway from the current conflict is how incredible nuclear is at shoring up energy security. A nuclear plant can easily keep 18 months of fuel onsite as required storage space is trivial. A 2 or 3 year strategic reserve of uranium would likewise be a trivial project. Meanwhile other base load sources like coal need dozens of rail cars worth of coal every single day. Gas needs a pipeline or again daily shipments of LNG. So now Russia has cut off the gas and energy costs in Europe are exploding and they are having to build out tons of new LNG infrastructure. Russia can basically turn the heat off in Europe because they under invested in nuclear power.