As you can see even at time when wind provides more than half of Germany's total energy production, the red nuclear bar remains nearly unchanged.
https://www.energy-charts.info/charts/power/chart.htm?l=en&c...
If you check France's energy production at the same time nuclear energy production isn't affected.
https://www.rte-france.com/en/eco2mix/power-generation-energ...
It does affect oil, gas and coal, but hardly affects nuclear.
https://seekingalpha.com/news/3780688-france-shuts-down-nucl...
Not exactly. Operators can bid a price for generation and markets dictate the cheapest generators are bought up first. Renewables tend to have zero marginal cost and are therefore often cheapest. Nuclear also has low marginal cost, but not zero.
Renewables being favored is not a rule but effect of how the market works.
What's so sad is wind and solar being so concentrated in Germany. If it were more spread out over Europe, it would have lower correlation; and help with production peaks.
There's egotistic, and there's egotistic + harmful.
The EU energy market mandates that wind and solar production must be bought before everything else. What happens at the moment is France's nuclear reduces production when Germany's wind is over-producing; there is no energy storage at all.
So right now, on top of wind uselessly adding to max production capacity, it thrashes zero-CO2 nuclear-allocated capital's effectiveness. That's a form of capital theft.
And on top of that, Germany's huge coal baseline continues producing just as before:
https://app.electricitymap.org/zone/DE
Really, the EU rules should be changed so as to account for driveability in energy production.