Money is fungible, but the individual supply curves of different things you buy with the money aren't flat.

> and is not cancelled after years of delays and cost overruns

This is a super-disingenuous argument, especially since I'm guessing you're part of a faction behind the scene inducing many of these delays, cancellations, and cost overruns through objection to nuclear's safety and utility.

> Since each dollar spent on renewables produces several times the watt-hours produced by a dollar's worth of the nuke, diverting that dollar to the nuke has brought climate catastrophe that much nearer.

Alternatively, every year assuming that renewables will eventually be able to provide enough industrial and base load through storage, if in error, commits us more and more to climate catastrophe. You handwave away objections. Storing enough is going to be really really hard and may not happen in time.

Our extant example of a very-low-carbon grid has a big mix of nuclear in it. We may not want to commit to building the exact same thing, but I don't think we should totally ignore the example that has produced this outcome.