Greater reliance on nuclear
This is an important subject given the radical shift in relations with Russia, the case of France, whose reliance on nuclear energy is stronger than ever and sends a strong message to Europe and the rest of the world, as well as the general shift in public opinion regarding nuclear energy.
I do not think they discussed the cost. Which has driven a spike through the heart of conventional nuclear power. In Georgia we will soon have the most expensive electricity in history with our two new nukes. There is no way a sane power company exec would build another nuke. If the Westinghouse people cannot construct a nuke on time without gigantic cost overruns, I doubt anyone else can. Westinghouse will never try again because this project bankrupted them.
There is simply no way nukes can compete with solar and wind when they cost $28 to $37/MWh and nuclear power costs some ungodly amount north of $300, or $400/MWh -- or who knows how much by the time they finally turn it on. On top of that, one serious accident at Fukushima bankrupted the largest power company on earth, and exiled 90,000 people from their houses, farms and towns. That is an insane level of financial risk. There is no risk at all from solar or wind installations, and either of them could produce far more energy than the human race consumes.
Conventional nuclear power is obsolete. It is one of these promising technologies that never panned out, and that progress has left behind. Like bubble memory, monorails, or English Channel hovercraft. Some other method of fission power might work out, such as pebble bed or thorium.