"The solar glut also means higher electricity bills for Californians, since they are effectively paying to generate the power but not using it.

California’s electric rates are roughly twice the nation’s average, with only Hawaii having higher rates. Rates at Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric increased by 51% over the last three years.

“Ratepayers aren’t getting the energy they’ve paid for,” said Ron Miller, an energy industry consultant in Denver. He calculates that the retail value of the solar energy thrown away in a year would be more than $1 billion."

California residents pay higher rates to allow utility companies to build alternative energy source systems, but the excess generated capacity isn't able to be used in-state -- so that excess capacity is sold at rates lower than the cost of generation, sometimes at a negative cost to energy brokers.

the excess power to neighboring states, thus subsidizing their customers' lower rates.

Seems they need to increase their energy storage capacity by quite a lot instead of ripping off rate payers.

Electricity flows to the nearest demand. So when your solar panels generate excess current not used by your own home, it flows to your neighbors house. However the power company only pays/credits you the wholesale rate, while the neighbors electric meters turns and the power company bills them the retail rate. They make a huge profit from that fact.

Cost of electricity with nuclear:

Capital cost of nuclear power plant plus Maintenance costs.

Fuel and safe disposal costs are not a large part of the equation.

Cost of electricity with fossil fuels:

Capital cost of fossil fuel power plant plus Maintenance costs plus fuel costs.

Fossil fuel waste is simply dumped everywhere without account and will eventually destroy this world as we know it.

Cost of electricity with fossil fuels, wind, and solar:

Costs of fossil fuel power plants (including ALL environmental and Capital costs) plus Capital costs of wind and solar plants, including distribution, plus Maintenance costs of wind and solar minus the fossil fuel equivalent cost of wind and solar power produced when there is a demand for it.

Because the capacity factors of wind and solar are so poor, about 16% in the case of home solar, 25% in the case of large scale desert solar, and around 30% for wind, fossil fuel primary power will always be required. Adding batteries to these hybrid systems will only increase the cost of electricity further.

Wind and solar power cannot displace fossil fuels entirely, which is what we need to do.

Nuclear power is the only energy resource capable of displacing fossil fuels entirely, and it can do so for less cost and much smaller environmental impacts than hybrid solar / wind / battery / fossil fuel systems.

If we build nuclear power plants then we don't need wind or solar power, which brings great distress to solar and wind advocates who inevitably become tacit supporters of the filthy natural gas industry and environmentally destructive battery and hydroelectric storage schemes.

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/radwaste.html
And very dirty as well

Surely you must be joking.

The difference is that nuclear waste can be contained. Fossil fuel waste cannot, it's simply dumped everywhere. Some of that fossil fuel waste is radioactive, carcinogenic, etc., etc.. Natural gas accidents can destroy entire neighborhoods, flames spewing toxins everywhere. Worst of all, fossil fuel waste causes global warming.

Nuclear waste won't destroy the world as we know it. Fossil fuel waste will, and is doing so as I write this.

We've been very well trained to ignore the dangers of fossil fuels, most of all the very real threat of global warming.

Wind and solar promotion is climate change denial "light" (as in light beer) and will only prolong our dependency on fossil fuels, doing nothing in the long run to reduce the total amount of greenhouse gasses humans dump into earth's atmosphere.