> not pilotable like nuclear

You cannot switch off a nuclear plant in an instant, that process takes weeks.

Isn't targeting their nuclear plants the first thing that Russia did when they invaded Ukraine? And there are all of these refineries and pipelines being bombed around Iran. And sometimes an oil tanker or several gets stolen...

Centralized energy infra just isn't resilient enough against geopolitical problems to be worth investing in. Something about too much dependency on a thing attracts bad behavior to that thing.

By contrast, ain't nobody wasting a $50k missile on a $5k battery just so they can cut power to one building.

" but I kind of wince everytime people are trying to say it's better than nuclear"

Solar is the superior form of nuclear energy. You're using a big ass nuclear fusion reactor in the center of our solar system to generate energy, and you harvest that energy by capturing its photonic output.

As far as storing the energy for peak demand/nighttime usage, we've got literally hundreds of methods to do it, from pure mechanical to electrochemical.

I am not sure if I understand your comment lol

I could also say: Solar is the best energy source (if you put night aside of course).

I mean obviously the main drawback of nuclear fission is the waste and the potential impact of radioactivity.

Fission is unmatched in its ability to abandon projects after spending tens of billions of dollars. I don't see how any rational person can look at the history of nuclear and say "damn, this thing can drop electrons on short notice." That's just a ridiculous take.

Sadly nuclear also stays unmatched in cost. It was already way too expensive, and now it has even worse economics on modern grids full of cheap variable sources. It is terribly uncompetitive and that’s why you see roughly none getting built anymore