[janef0421]

Why would Russia promote anti-nuclear disinformation? The Russian state-owned entity Rosatom is a major exporter of nuclear technology, so doing that would be against Russia's interests.

[mannerheim]

Rosneft and Gazprom each make way more money than Rosatom.

[janef0421]

At present, yes, but those revenues are threatened by climate change, while Rosatom's revenues are likely to expand for the same reason.

[mannerheim]

Those revenues have specifically gone up as a result of climate change measures. NS2 had a projected cost of 9.5 billion euros, and that's not even including any gas; you don't spend that kind of money without the expectation of making it back and more.

[janef0421]

Gone up in the short term, but likely to fall in the long-term.

[mannerheim]

The latter is speculative.

[janef0421]

Speculation is inherent to geopolitical strategy.

[bioemerl]

Russia has massive incentive to keep Europe dependent on their fossil fuels.

[janef0421]

Yes, but doing that by undermining nuclear is a poor strategic move. It would leave Russia with no fallback strategy in the case that Europe did cease fossil fuels imports, and would undermine export of nuclear technology to other regions.