Seems to me like there are pushes for all kinds of alternative energies, including nuclear, When is the last time we built a reactor in this country?
Now when is the last time the government subsidized solar and wind in this country?
There is a move afoot to start up nuke plants in this country again. It may take 10 years to get the first one online, but the environmentalists, and 'No Nukes' crowd will have a much harder time, this time around, getting them squashed. There is much more of a desire to reduce our need for oil from the Middle East, and stop feeding the terrorist networks, which receive money from sympathetic members of the royal families of some of the oil producing nations. If they aren't getting all that money, they won't have so much extra to part with.
Why should the government SUBSIDIZE any of these technologies? If they are shown to be cost effective and marketable, they will attract investors on their own. Regarding the nuke plants, the government doesn't need to subsidize them, but it could sure help by reducing the chances of the plants being held up in frivilous lawsuits like they were in the late 70's and 80's.
"When is the last time we built a reactor in this country?
Now when is the last time the government subsidized solar and wind in this country?"
Nuclear reactors are subsidized too:
"The Energy Policy Act, signed by the President on August 8, 2005, has a number of articles related to nuclear power, and three specifically to the 2010 Program. First, the Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act was extended to cover private and DOE plants and activities licensed through 2025. Also, the government would cover cost overruns due to regulatory delays, up to $500 million each for the first two new nuclear reactors, and half of the overruns due to such delays (up to $250 million each) for the next four reactors. Delays in construction due to vastly increased regulations were a primary cause of the high costs of some earlier plants. Finally, 'A production tax credit of 1.8 cents per kilowatt-hour for the first 6,000 megawatt-hours from new nuclear power plants for the first eight years of their operation, subject to a $125 million annual limit. The production tax credit places nuclear energy on equal footing with other sources of emission-free power, including wind and closed-loop biomass.' (ibid, copyright, permission obtained to use in Wikipedia - see discussion)
The Act also funds a Next Generation Nuclear Plant project at INEEL to produce both electricity and hydrogen. This plant will be a DOE project and does not fall under the 2010 Program"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Power_2010_Program
The cost of building nuclear power plants is enormous. Several are on the market today because the companies that own them can't make ends meet. They sell for millions, as opposed to the billions it costs to build one. The government is offering subsidies to build more plants, because utility companies can't afford to do it on their own. While fuel costs may be lower than with traditional power plants, the ongoing operation and maintenance costs coupled with principle and interest payments on the exorbitant up front costs are too high. Nuclear power is not exactly cheap.