Safe nuclear power does not exist

The American researchers' discovery has sparked hype about clean nuclear power, which could solve all the world's energy problems. Bullshit. The timescales are too long.

di |
NUCLEAR FUSION

SAFE NUCLEAR DOES NOT EXIST

Il nuclear There's no such thing as safety. Every time some government tries to reopen the nuclear issue, forgetting the referendums with which Italians buried this energy, the fake news about "safe nuclear power" resurfaces. In reality, the new fourth-generation nuclear power plants, thanks to a fission process, produce no energy. CO02 emissionsBut that doesn't mean they're safe, as there's no scientific certainty about the waste produced by these plants, which aren't yet operational, even in countries that rely on this energy source.

The contagious enthusiasm with which the news of nuclear fusion achieved by American researchers was greeted, even in Italy and without much further investigation, demonstrates once again how much demagogy and ignorance, both shrouded in clouds of bad faith, circulate around this topic.

NUCLEAR FUSION 

So far, researchers have succeeded in fusing two hydrogen nuclei to create a helium nucleus, producing more energy than was used in the process. The news is great, with very encouraging prospects for the future, and with opportunities still to be deciphered. But from here to say that, thanks to this discovery, we will have clean nuclear power and it will certainly solve the structural problems of energy supplies and lead the world away from its dependence on coal and Petroleum, the step is not short at all. And indeed, by creating confusion you only risk creating false hopes and to fuel fake news.

ALSO READ: Return to nuclear power: but where does Cingolani live?

NUCLEAR FUSION ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES

Certainly this newly discovered technology, and therefore still in an embryonic phase of research and development, allows the production of little radioactive waste, does not emit greenhouse gases and eliminates the risk of accidents, which most frightens public opinion when it comes to nuclear power. But the benefits of this supposed miracle, which we can now consider safe and usable for the energy paradigm shift, end there. And if anything, other questions begin to arise that currently have no certain and reassuring answers.

NUCLEAR FUSION AND THE CLIMATE CRISIS

The first problem concerns timing. It will take decades, and the authors of the discovery themselves say so, before the new fusion nuclear can translate into large-scale, safe, and reliable energy production. Decades. And yet the world faces much tighter deadlines. To limit global temperature rise to 1,5 degrees, the minimum goal to avoid being overwhelmed by the climate crisis, by 2030, total greenhouse gas emissions carbon dioxide they should be halved by 2019 and net emissions should reach zero by 2050. Even a child understands that these timescales are incompatible with the possible progress of nuclear fusion and its cascading impact on energy production on a global scale.

FUNDING FOR NUCLEAR FUSION

A second critical aspect that should silence the cheap vocalists of nuclear salvation is the issue of costs. Enormous. We certainly cannot imagine that progress on nuclear fusion safer and emission-free are all borne by the United States. And if we want to stay in the game, we have to dig into our pockets. Something that the European Commission has already done in a questionable and non-transparent manner: 5,6 billion euros of the total expenditure for the climate protection They were allocated to nuclear fusion research. And so they were diverted from other areas, such as incentives for renewable energy. Is all this worthwhile for us Europeans? Or do we simply risk wasting money, and lots of it?

NUCLEAR FUSION AND REFERENDUM

Finally, for us Italians there is a very delicate but equally clear question. nuclear It was rejected twice, and with a very large majority, by two referendum Popular. Italians don't want nuclear power. Period. And there will never be a government so self-destructive as to defy public opinion and truly reopen, beyond a few vague announcements or hopes, the nuclear issue. Such a decision would spell its end, and that means nuclear power in Italy is a shelved issue. For now, forever.

HOW MUCH DOES A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT COST?

Before discussing the technology, the low-cost proponents of a return to nuclear power should consider the costs. There's no single calculation to determine the cost of building a new plant, but there are some parameters. France has never abandoned nuclear power, and among the latest plants, still unfinished, is the Flamanville plant. Begun in 2007, it will cost no less than 12-13 billion euros and will power a population equivalent to the residents of the city of ParisQuestion: Can anyone really believe that Italy has the resources for such an investment?

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS TO BE DISMANTLED

Meanwhile, we continue to waste money on the decommissioning of nuclear power plants, planned after the 1987 referendum, which is proceeding at a snail's pace. The process was supposed to be completed by 2019, at a cost of €3,5 billion, but only a third of the plants have been dismantled. The Sogin juggernaut, the public company charged with leading the process, is still in the process of being decommissioned. dismantling, is still standing, with salaries and contracts to distribute. And the power plants are still where they were when they were operating.

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up-to-date. Click here!

GREEN ENERGY:

Want to see a selection of our news?