"In 1970, a leader of the petroleum industry and the head of the Atlantic Richfield Co. named Robert O. Anderson contributed $200,000 to fund Friends of the Earth, an organization that is strident in its opposition to nuclear energy, citing both safety and cost issues."

Why am I surprised at learning this?

I am actually surprised that the article doesn't provide more examples. The article argues that the fossil fuel industry is paying the antinuclear movement and the single, one example given is a onetime payment in the 70s to start a new organization by a private person. Sure, everyone requires different levels of evidence, but I heavily doubt that you will be able to convince anyone with that one. And then the rest of the text is about how renewable are (as of 2016) so much smaller than the loss in nuclear power.

Well they did the same with "climate scepticism" too, so it's from the playbook.

Another fun one: Greenpeace is a natural gas energy provider in germany (proWindGas)

Yeah of course they are, I was being a bit sarcastic (but also don't know how people here would cope with such "conspiracy theories").