> the problem with heat pump is require quite well isolated building to make it efficient. Also after talking with a friend he had to change all radiators in his parents home since it didn't work well with previous old one he had.

no, it doesn't require good isolation. Good isolation is beneficial, like for type of heating.

Radiators don't have an effect on isolation. However, modern radiators usually have a way higher surface area, which allows heating rooms with lower water temperature.

Heat pumps are more efficient if the difference between source and target temperature is closer.

1. Nuclear district heating.

2. Just electric heating, if electricity is cheap enough. Very simple and cheap.

But yeah, heat pumps make that more efficient. At significant higher investment costs. Gotta do the math of whether it is more efficient overall to invest in an efficient energy producer (nuclear), efficient consumers (heat pumps) or both.

Using resistive heating with nuclear electricity would be very foolish, unless you have a money wasting fetish.

Nuclear district heating would be very difficult to retrofit.

> Using resistive heating with nuclear electricity would be very foolish, unless you have a money wasting fetish.

Hmm. "... if electricity is cheap enough."

> Nuclear district heating would be very difficult to retrofit.

Who said anything about retrofitting? Just build district heating nuclear plants.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/sollid_denmark-to-investigate...

Again, building one nuclear plant is expensive. But building tens or hundreds of thousands of heat pumps is certainly also and likely even more expensive.