@ribosome. I would. Wind and solar were being selected when they were among the most expensive options, per megawatt, out there. Economies of scale and enormous government subsidies have made them affordable, if not convenient for lack of equally-large power storage systems. Nuclear, meanwhile, would be cheap if it was rolled out on a large scale with standardized reactors, but it isn't selected because of irrational fears and obstructionism.
So, yes, people have deliberately selected expensive (and undependable) means of power production while bypassing less expensive options.
Not that they always bypass the cheap options. After you get done banning nuclear power because it's scary, banning wind power because it kills birds, banning solar power because it endangers the habitat of a local tortoise, banning tidal power because it messes up estuary ecosystems, and banning hydropower because it messes up river ecosystems, cheap, reliable coal is still there for us.
Green Germany loves its dirty brown, low-grade coal. China loves its coal. Britain loves its coal. The US loves coal. Australia loves its coal. Some nations can also use natural gas for really cheap power, but coal is the big one that never gets passed up.