Today, we taxpayers are subsidizing greenhouse-gas emissions.

Today, tax takers are subsidized by royalties and consumption taxes on greenhouse-gas-emitting fuels. Their hope, when they subsidize renewable energies, is that these will produce token amounts of energy and so take token amounts of money from their pockets, while preventing you-know-what from taking much more. So far it's working pretty well.

Boron: A Better Energy Carrier than Hydrogen?

The nuclear subsidy number is pulled out of thin air with no references. Show us an itemized list of the subsidy costs of commercial nuclear power to the tax payer.

The nuclear subsidy number is pulled out of thin air with no references. Show us an itemized list of the subsidy costs of commercial nuclear power to the tax payer.

This should be fun :P

Office of Nuclear Energy ($1.4 billion)
National Nuclear Security Administration ($9.1 billion)
Office of Environmental Management ($5.5 billion)
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management ($494.7 million)
Office of Legacy Management ($186 million)
Total that up, thats around $16.7 billion dollars.
Call it an even $16B if you shrug off the other waste management projects.
http://www.energy.gov/news/5920.htm

By comparison, we're looking at:
$156 million : Solar
  $52 million : Wind
  $30 million : GeoThermal
    $3 million : Hydropower
$242 million : TOTAL
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/2/5/162252/0067

___

Gimme a while and I could give an even more detailed itemized list by going through these.
http://www.cfo.doe.gov/budget/09budget/Start.htm

Call it an even $16B

Actually if you took the time to read your link you would see that most of those programs are defense related.

National Nuclear Security Administration ($9.1 billion)

The FY 2009 National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) budget requests $9.1 billion, an increase of $287 million above the FY 2008 enacted level, to promote national security by maintaining the nation's nuclear weapons stockpile and promoting nuclear nonproliferation and threat reduction to address the realities of the 21st century.  The NNSA budget requests $6.6 billion, a $320.6 million increase over the FY 2008 appropriation, for its weapons program to meet the immediate national security requirements of the stockpile, and continue progress toward transforming the nuclear weapons complex to a much smaller size by 2030.

Office of Environmental Management ($5.5 billion)

The FY 2009 Environmental Management (EM) budget requests $5.5 billion to clean up Cold War era legacy waste at sites across the country.

So the budget request for commercial nuclear power is about $2 billion.

Nuclear power produces about 20% of our electricity, so lets eliminate that huge $2 billion of pork and make nuclear power stand or fall on its own merits.

While were at it lets give back the $5 billion in taxes  collected by local state and federal government agencies on the sale of nuclear power.

And nuclear power is one of our cheapest sources of electricity, O&M cost 2 cents / kWh.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat8p2.html ...

So lets add two cents / kWh of nuclear power sold, to be used for nuclear power R&D and to back loan guarantees in support of new nuclear plants construction.

That would be $15.8 billion / year.

P.S.  Don't try this approach with so called "renewables", the cash flow would be pitiful.

Authors of The Grand Solar Plan

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan

think that by 2020 solar might cost as little as 10 - 15 cents per kWh in today's money.

http://science-community.sciam.com/topic/Solar-Grand-Plan ...

If we guaranteed nuclear power that rate a new 1.5 GW nuclear plant could pay for itself in 5 years and pay for another new plant every five years.