Other non-renewable energy sources are also subsidized when you factor in second order effects, like for example the breathing health issues caused by coal particulate emissions, or the global warming caused from CO2 from extracting and burning gas.
Nuclear is truly the most environmentally friendly.
> Nuclear is truly zero emissions on the environment.
It is low emissions, but it isn’t zero and other sources are lower (wind turbine - see below). I assume it’s the mining, processing, storage and vast quantities of concrete in the plants.
Maybe except China? They've built 37 reactors in the last 10 years (with a total capacity of 20 GW) and have 30 more under construction with a total capacity of 31 GW [1]. It is possible this is all subsidized construction, like lots of things in China. How could you tell? Still, there's also a fairly good chance they found a way to make them economical, just like they build roads and bridges and buildings and railways at a much lower cost point than the West.
Nuclear is truly the most environmentally friendly.