If your example you've reduced generation from fossil fuels from 70% to 40% so still a win.
I assume you're still going on about nuclear. The problem with nuclear is that it doesn't make financial sense even if it can run at 100% of capacity for 100% of the time, it certainly can't cope with variable load - you can't scale nuclear to provide your peak amount, so you need to be able to top up with gas or battery, just like renewables need top up
You go to 60% solar 40% gas.
Obviously the numbers are made up but that’s the point I’m trying to make.