Nuclear power, subsidies and climate change

In "Calvert Cliffs 3 makes no sense" (March 10), Ellen Vancko is adamant that Maryland state government should not in any way underwrite or subsidize a third reactor at the Calvert Cliffs nuclear facility.

Yet while she eschews support for nuclear energy, she implies that it, unlike other forms of renewable energy, will have an effect on "climate change."

Based on that, Ms. Vancko would be more than willing to subsidize the proven inefficiency and lack of cost-effectiveness of solar and wind power — to the detriment of a proven, efficient and world-wide major energy source: nuclear power.

Where have we gone wrong?

W.C. Harsanyi, Pasadena