The nuclear a great way to diversify our energy sources, strongly linked to imports from countries such as Libya. However, Italy does not seem capable of providing sufficient guarantees in terms of security in the storage of nuclear waste.
The recent disruption of the flow from the pipeline that links us to Libya indicates once again how fleeting and changing the tone of our energy security. From a situation of super-supply, which led to strong criticism of Eni to supply contracts with Russia, we are suddenly faced with a small energy crisis, thanks to Eni and Russia, we can solve. This patch does not completely tank, however, exclude the urgent need to diversify our portfolio of energy production, still very dependent on gas and coal. We can now admit that nuclear power could provide an excellent solution.
It's true what they say supporters of the atom: nuclear energy is an energy source available, seen that the limits to the extraction of uranium are not represented geology, but only the ability of the mining industry. The fuel price is a mere 10% of the electrical charge, and a real impact on the bill could be if its price doubled. Nuclear power has the potential to trawl the high level of industry specialization, which in Italy still survives, but it serves other countries.
Not even you may repeat an accident like Chernobyl. bubbles in the popular sense as "atomic explosion", it was actually a chemical explosion due to a criminal trial, operated by people who had no idea of \u200b\u200bnuclear power plants of any kind. The nuclear island, the center of production, was isolated from the outside world by a thin sheet of metal as the roof, instead of the domes "hardened" to be employed in the rest of the world. The real question, however, concerns the ecological footprint of nuclear solution. The spent fuel is classified as part of "third category": it requires a complex treatment of "vitrification" (ie, solidifies the material in order to isolate it to make it inert), and then must be stored for centuries before returning to be harmless to humans. Other types of waste belonging to the first and second category, requiring periods ranging from a few months to decades before losing hazard. To the world, yet there is no final storage of "third category" because it is rare to meet simultaneously a site that has all the characteristics necessary for stability. The waste produced each year by the long decay in the world would fill a box equal to one hundred feet high basketball court.
Nuclear power, however, produces less CO2 emissions. Some calculations, a kilowatt hour of electricity produced from the atom generates 21 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent, compared to 200 kilowatt-hours generated by the same gas. We are thus faced with a choice about the kind of impression we want to leave: The nuclear waste generated poison, which they blame on to future generations is a complex task of management. The atmospheric gas that produces waste, as such, do not force them to direct responsibility for treatment. At most, we can introduce artificial patterns of compensation, with all the complexities of the case.
is impossible to decide what is worse, between the harmful effects of CO2 on climate, el'incombenza to manage waste for centuries. Even carbon dioxide, once emitted into the air, it takes decades before being reabsorbed. Speaking of the specific case of Italy, let me express a concern. Slag, than carbon dioxide, have a component of "poisonous" due to radiation, which fortunately has no carbon dioxide. This imposes a responsibility of the atom, until now, our country has not proved to have. Italy failed to reach agreement to settle its waste waste in a single deposit is controlled, operated the dross of the old nuclear program, health and industry. When we talked about the salt caves of Basilicata, in Scanzano Jonico, we reached the brink of civil war. Then we do not have an enviable record for the traditional waste management. For hazardous waste, then we have been protagonists of despicable episodes on illegal landfills, to the controversial issue of the wreck of Cetraro.
not say where the radioactive waste risk of ending up in the hands of gangs, but only that the management so complex waste must rely on a framework of national responsibility so far not demonstrated by Italy. Realized gains from nuclear energy production, potential adverse effects of a faulty waste treatment may be expressed even decades away, with costs that have repercussions on citizens who, ironically, not related to electricity production would directly benefit. That's exactly what's going on in Germany: a country that, among many defects, but has a sense of national responsibility and ethics among the most advanced on the continent. Mine is not a dry no to nuclear power: I remain convinced that it can be a real solution for the differentiation of the energy mix, waiting for the moment we have the most reliable and advanced renewable energy. I doubt that our country's system is able to host and develop a responsible nuclear industry. After all, nuclear power must be earned. Do not just buy it.
* Professor of Economics and Politics at the University of Potsdam and Senior Fellow of bigs potsdam.org-
0 comments:
Post a Comment