I'm not going to repeat all the arguments against this article as countless other HN commenters have already done a fine job of this. But it's worth making the point that this article is revealing in its use of lies, misrepresentations, flimsy arguments and circular reasoning. It all looks rather desperate.

There's so much of it going on that you have to wonder whether the author is aware of this. I.e. is this an intentionally misleading article written to green wash highly lucrative government spending on new nuclear plants? Without this spending no nuclear plants get built. Just a theory but this article looks a lot like it is written with this kind of agenda in mind.