Sir David King has an article in today’s Guardian where he defends his decision to back nuclear. Somewhat oddly given the article’s headline, he only briefly discusses nuclear and mainly focuses on the problem of climate change, stabilization levels, and emissions trading. Interestingly though, he says:
I emphatically do not believe in direct government subsidies for nuclear energy. (emphasis added)
So does that mean he no longer supports an electricity levy to support nuclear? Does the government paying insurance and waste costs count as a “direct” subsidy?
