This is a continuation of the question asked here: How long would it take for nuclear energy to become adopted in a world on the brink of collapse?
So, with my current timeline, nuclear energy (and ZenCorp, the corporation behind it) has a headstart of 8-9 years before other alternatives come along. According to one of the answers, this should be enough time to see some changes in things like carts and buses.
But... then a new challenger approaches: another corporation begins pushing for other energy sources, such as solar, hydroelectric and tidal power, an alternative to ZenCorp's "nuclear solution".
Things to take into consideration:
- The corporations are actively trying to undermine each other, like in the "nuclear solution" example above, meant to spread fear and unwillingness to adopt the competition's solutions.
- There's a constant state of flux across the world. Places that were relatively peaceful/safe a few weeks/months ago may not be so anymore. The flipside is also true: places that were being torn apart by war may reach a tense truce or one faction may ultimately rise victorious. Which leads us to...
- They are willing and able to set up shop in places were riots and crime are widespread (their security forces are essentially private armies), but wouldn't (knowingly and willingly) go into an active warzone.
- Despite their main clients being governments, the corporations have no qualms about working with those that overthrow them, so long as the feeling is mutual.
- Despite their militarized security forces, they don't engage in open armed conflict with each other. They're not above underhanded methods, such as sabotage or industrial espionage, though. If the agents sent on these missions are caught, well... they're far away from the public eye, so they'll mysteriously go missing or show up the day after as tragic victims of crime.
This leads to a situation in which one or another corporation holds the most power in a given area, even if the other eventually tries to expand there. This would be decided by the first one to strike a deal or whose propaganda was best internalized by the government/population.
So, considering the information above, how would this not-so-friendly competition (and the unstable state of the world) affect the adoption of their products and services, particularly the implementation of alternative energy sources?