> Second, all that electricity, even if you generate it with nuclear reactors, have to be delivered via copper wires.
This is indeed a massive red flag. You need conductors, but the material they are made of is pretty much irrelevant.
These days you'd have to search quite a bit to find not-ancient copper conductors in the larger electric grid. Aluminium might have a slightly higher resistance, but when you can just use a thicker wire it's almost always the more attractive choice.
If you don't even know that the grid mostly uses aluminium, you probably shouldn't be making big claims about what is and isn't possible with copper wiring.
Another red flag vis-a-vie energy source is ignoring hydro electric. High energy consumers and areas with a constant surplus of hydro are a good match. One of the new mega dams on Central Asia was restarted and funded primarily by an aluminium conglomerate - cheap and stable pricing at industrial scales.
This is why one of the two major Aluminum smelters is located in Washington. The economics of using hydropower to run the smelter are really good.
You can sometimes see green copper transmission lines, but they're all rather old and becoming far less common