It is well-known that when a superconductor (SC) is cooled below the transition temperature $T_c$, the magnetic field passing through the bulk of the SC is completely expelled. In Zee's book on Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell, he explains why a superconductor abhors magnetic field in the bulk along the following lines
A hallmark of superconductivity is the Meissner effect, in which an external magnetic field $\textbf{B}$ permeating the material is expelled from it as the temperature drops below $T_c$. This indicates that a constant magnetic field inside the material is not favored energetically. The effective laws of electromagnetism in the material must somehow change at $T_c$. Normally, a constant magnetic field would cost an energy of the order$\sim\textbf{B}^2V$, where V is the volume of the material. Suppose that the energy density is changed from the standard $\textbf{B}^2$ to $\textbf{A}^2$ (where as usual $\nabla\times\textbf{A}=\textbf{B}$). For a constant magnetic field $\textbf{B}, \textbf{A}$ grows as the distance and hence the total energy would grow faster than V. After the material goes superconducting, we have to pay an unacceptably large amount of extra energy to maintain the constant magnetic field and so it is more favorable to expel the magnetic field.
Statement 1 "Suppose that the energy density is changed from the standard $\textbf{B}^2$ to $\textbf{A}^2$..."
Question 1: What does this mean? Energy density depends on $\textbf{B}^2$ and not on $\textbf{A}^2$.
Statement 2 "After the material goes superconducting, we have to pay an unacceptably large amount of extra energy..."
Question 2 Why?