Nuclear and solar have competing problems. Nuclear is a baseload generator. It can’t ramp up or down fast enough to meet the daily demand curve; it needs a steady, stable load, 24/7. The steadier and stabler the load, the better. If the load drops off overnight, nuclear has to dial back its continuous output to match that trough. And again: It can’t ramp up and down fast enough to match demand, so it just has to stay at the lower “trough” level, with the remainder made up by various types of “peaker” plants.

To make nuclear as efficient at possible, we need to drive consumption to that trough. We have to increase overnight demand as high as possible, to minimize our reliance on inefficient peaker plants.

Now, look at solar. Solar stops generating overnight. Solar can’t possibly meet overnight demand without storage, and grid-scale storage solutions are fundamentally limited. To make solar as effective and efficient as possible, we have to move as much demand to daylight hours as possible, where it can be met directly by solar generation, without storage.

The two technologies require opposing demand incentives. Making one more efficient necessarily makes the other less. Whichever choice we make here, the other one is relegated to a limited, auxiliary role in generation, and can never reach its full potential.