thing is there's a split in the road coming up for big energy investment/subsidies, one leads to alternative/renewables, the other goes nuke

Not true. There are no serious private investments in nukes, and public ones are decreasing rapidly. The old model of shifting costs and risks to the public, but privatising the profits no longer works for new plants.

The only interesting debate is what to do with old plants. They are written off, that makes them profitable. They clash with renewables though. So, do we want technological stagnation, and exponentially growing risk (from ancient nukes) or do we want innovation, investment in renewables, and a different structure of the producers (large entities or a network of small ones) and the corresponding grid?