4 ms·

I think realistically this is the only way in the turbulent times we live in. Even in the small and interconnected Europe, you have to be completely self sustai

I think realistically this is the only way in the turbulent times we live in. Even in the small and interconnected Europe, you have to be completely self sustainable when the need arises. We've seen more than enough broken pipes, power lines and the like in the last year alone to underline this need.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> you have to be completely self sustainable when the need arises The last few days have also laid bare that there is no sovereignty without nuclear weapons. A civil nuclear fleet is a stepping stone to nuclear weapons stewardship. (Even absent nuclear weapons, see the special treatment of Zaporizhzhia [1] over Ukraine’s other power infrastructure.) [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporizhzhia_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporizhzhia_Nuclear_Power_P...
- ZeroGravitas 2y ago
  Russia wants to control its neighbour Ukraine and also is a supplier of nuclear tech to other countries. It's not guaranteed that every geopolitical rival would have those considerations when deciding whether to care about, or plan to actively attempt, triggering a nuclear meltdown in your nation.
est31 2y ago
Italy neither has the engineers to build a nuclear power plant, they would have to ask another nation, like Russia, Canada or France, to build it for them. And where does the nuclear fuel come from? Russia.
- cinntaile 2y ago
  The fuel comes primarily from Kazachstan, Canada and Australia. Edit: Parent meant enriched uranium, not ore so this comment is not relevant.
- agumonkey 2y ago
  Aren't there other ore sources ? I think nuclear powered countries diversified inputs.
- llm_nerd 2y ago
  >And where does the nuclear fuel come from? Canada, Khazakhstan, Namibi, and so on. Russia is pretty far down the list. Australia has the largest known reserves of uranium they just haven pushed to extensively extract it.
  - throw0101a 2y ago
    > Canada, Khazakhstan, Namibi, and so on. Russia is pretty far down the list. Not wrong, but Russia controls about half of the world's enrichment capacity. If you want to avoid possible lock-in, then you may want to look at reactors that do not need enriched uranium (like CANDU: it does have an extra up-front cost for 'heavy water' though).
    - rhubinak 2y ago
      There's no need for Russia to get involved. As per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium > The following countries are known to operate enrichment facilities: Argentina, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Japan, the Netherlands, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
      - throw0101a 2y ago
        Great: but how much spare capacity do they have? A lot of these are primarily serving domestic needs. Heck, >25% of the US's uranium comes from Russia: * https://www.visualcapitalist.com/where-the-u-s-gets-its-enriched-uranium/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/where-the-u-s-gets-its-enri... Being able to use "plain" uranium greatly expands your supplier options.
        rhubinak 2y ago
        Because it's cheap. Russia needs money to wage war so it sells stuff. Again, nobody is wholly dependent on Russia.
        2y ago
- slavik81 2y ago
  Why not get the nuclear fuel from Canada? There's plenty of uranium in Saskatchewan.
- GaggiX 2y ago
  Italy has highly skilled nuclear engineers. >And where does the nuclear fuel come from? Russia. Nonsense.
  - rcxdude 2y ago
    What are those engineers doing currently, then? It takes time to actually build a technology base for somethin like nuclear, and it generally requires that you are building and running nuclear power plants. And even after years of the war in Ukraine, Russia is still the second largest source of uranium for the EU, making up a quarter of imports
    - GaggiX 2y ago
      >What are those engineers doing currently, then? Italian companies that work on reactor design, decommissioning and technology commissioned by foreign countries, for example. >Russia is still the second largest source of uranium for the EU, making up a quarter of imports The vast majority of contracts are multiannual, the EU will rely much less on Russian uranium export once they expire. Italy has no reason to sign them with Russia.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- lelag 2y ago
  > And where does the nuclear fuel come from? Russia. Not true at all. Russia is producing 5% of the world Uranium, and they probably use quite a lot of that domestically given they produce 8% of all nuclear power in the world with their own plant. Kazakhstan + Uzbekistan is 50% of the word production. Canada is second and will be happy to start selling to the EU. Namibia and Australia both produce twice as much as Russia. Not to say that supply of natural Uranium is not a concern because you do depends of a small list of countries but we don't need to buy any from Russia. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_uranium_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_uranium_p... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country
  - est31 2y ago
    Russia's large market share is rather in uranium enrichment than uranium mining. That's what I meant when I wrote "nuclear fuel".
  - legulere 2y ago
    That’s raw uranium ore. Uranium undergoes several refinement steps. In each Russia has an enormous market share.
    - account42 2y ago
      So? Refinement doesn't have a dependency on a particular location. This is like saying nuclear energy in Germany is dependent on France and other countries. Currently it is but only because we choose to not do it locally - it doesn't have to be this way.
    - rhubinak 2y ago
      Not true by skimming the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium > The following countries are known to operate enrichment facilities: Argentina, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Japan, the Netherlands, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- Fragoel2 2y ago
  That is simply incorrect, Italian companies are already building nuclear reactors/power plants abroad. Enel has built/is managing nuclear plants in Spain and Slovakia: https://www.enel.com/media/explore/search-press-releases/press/2023/03/enel-and-newcleo-sign-partnership-to-cooperate-on-generation-iv-nuclear-technology https://www.enel.com/media/explore/search-press-releases/pre... Eni is involved in building the first fusion plant: https://www.ansa.it/english/news/science_tecnology/2024/04/09/eni-says-to-build-1st-nuclear-fusion-plant-in-early-30s_ed21cb3f-3155-4be4-bb35-8721f139b276.html https://www.ansa.it/english/news/science_tecnology/2024/04/0...
  - est31 2y ago
    I would classify ITER as basic research instead of a commercial nuclear power plant. I didn't know that Enel operates nuclear power plants, that's interesting, but they seem to come from an acquisition of Endesa and have been constructed way before that acquisition, and from designs of foreign places. So they aren't modern generation reactors that one would want to build from scratch. As for the Slovakian nuclear power plant, it's a russian design as well. I don't doubt that Enel could operate nuclear reactors of foreign design, where Canada, Russia and France have strong capabilities, but if the design comes from a different country, do you really achieve the independence goal?
    - wkat4242 2y ago
      > I would classify ITER as basic research instead of a commercial nuclear power plant. Absolutely correct. It will never serve as a power plant. It's a giant experiment, that's what the E stands for. We should be so lucky that one day it will generate a few minutes of power :)
- Caius-Cosades 2y ago
  And that's because western nations are run by idiots that can't do long term planning to save their lives.
croes 2y ago
You know how long and expensive it is to build and operate a nuclear powerplant? And do you really want another target for foreign sabotage?
ViewTrick1002 2y ago
You do know that Europe still haven't been able to decouple from the Russian nuclear supply chain? The only way to be independent is to invest in renewables and storage.
- disgruntledphd2 2y ago
  Why not both?
  - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
    When renewables deliver 5-10 ax much decarbonization and independence per dollar/euro spent compared to nuclear power why waste money?
    - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
      Because nuclear doesn't emit carbon, and can be used for base load, particularly when it's not windy or sunny. Honestly, we need to stop burning carbon and nuclear can help with this.
      - adrianN 2y ago
        If you build enough nuclear capacity to run the country when the renewables don't produce anything you might as well run the country the whole time on nuclear. Building a nuclear plant and then using it at 10% capacity is an egregious waste of money. Literally any storage technology is cheaper.
        disgruntledphd2 2y ago
        Sure, but my understanding is that the scale of storage available is the problem. And like, I'd prefer to live in a world where we have far too much energy than far too little. Note also that you can use nuclear/renewables to make hydrogen to potentially store more energy.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> you have to be completely self sustainable when the need arises The last few days have also laid bare that there is no sovereignty without nuclear weapons. A civil nuclear fleet is a stepping stone to nuclear weapons stewardship. (Even absent nuclear weapons, see the special treatment of Zaporizhzhia [1] over Ukraine’s other power infrastructure.) [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporizhzhia_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaporizhzhia_Nuclear_Power_P...

ZeroGravitas 2y ago
Russia wants to control its neighbour Ukraine and also is a supplier of nuclear tech to other countries. It's not guaranteed that every geopolitical rival would have those considerations when deciding whether to care about, or plan to actively attempt, triggering a nuclear meltdown in your nation.

est31 2y ago

Italy neither has the engineers to build a nuclear power plant, they would have to ask another nation, like Russia, Canada or France, to build it for them. And where does the nuclear fuel come from? Russia.

cinntaile 2y ago
The fuel comes primarily from Kazachstan, Canada and Australia. Edit: Parent meant enriched uranium, not ore so this comment is not relevant.
agumonkey 2y ago
Aren't there other ore sources ? I think nuclear powered countries diversified inputs.
llm_nerd 2y ago
>And where does the nuclear fuel come from? Canada, Khazakhstan, Namibi, and so on. Russia is pretty far down the list. Australia has the largest known reserves of uranium they just haven pushed to extensively extract it.
- throw0101a 2y ago
  > Canada, Khazakhstan, Namibi, and so on. Russia is pretty far down the list. Not wrong, but Russia controls about half of the world's enrichment capacity. If you want to avoid possible lock-in, then you may want to look at reactors that do not need enriched uranium (like CANDU: it does have an extra up-front cost for 'heavy water' though).
  - rhubinak 2y ago
    There's no need for Russia to get involved. As per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium > The following countries are known to operate enrichment facilities: Argentina, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Japan, the Netherlands, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
    - throw0101a 2y ago
      Great: but how much spare capacity do they have? A lot of these are primarily serving domestic needs. Heck, >25% of the US's uranium comes from Russia: * https://www.visualcapitalist.com/where-the-u-s-gets-its-enriched-uranium/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/where-the-u-s-gets-its-enri... Being able to use "plain" uranium greatly expands your supplier options.
      - rhubinak 2y ago
        Because it's cheap. Russia needs money to wage war so it sells stuff. Again, nobody is wholly dependent on Russia.
        2y ago
slavik81 2y ago
Why not get the nuclear fuel from Canada? There's plenty of uranium in Saskatchewan.
GaggiX 2y ago
Italy has highly skilled nuclear engineers. >And where does the nuclear fuel come from? Russia. Nonsense.
- rcxdude 2y ago
  What are those engineers doing currently, then? It takes time to actually build a technology base for somethin like nuclear, and it generally requires that you are building and running nuclear power plants. And even after years of the war in Ukraine, Russia is still the second largest source of uranium for the EU, making up a quarter of imports
  - GaggiX 2y ago
    >What are those engineers doing currently, then? Italian companies that work on reactor design, decommissioning and technology commissioned by foreign countries, for example. >Russia is still the second largest source of uranium for the EU, making up a quarter of imports The vast majority of contracts are multiannual, the EU will rely much less on Russian uranium export once they expire. Italy has no reason to sign them with Russia.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
lelag 2y ago
> And where does the nuclear fuel come from? Russia. Not true at all. Russia is producing 5% of the world Uranium, and they probably use quite a lot of that domestically given they produce 8% of all nuclear power in the world with their own plant. Kazakhstan + Uzbekistan is 50% of the word production. Canada is second and will be happy to start selling to the EU. Namibia and Australia both produce twice as much as Russia. Not to say that supply of natural Uranium is not a concern because you do depends of a small list of countries but we don't need to buy any from Russia. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_uranium_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_uranium_p... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country
- est31 2y ago
  Russia's large market share is rather in uranium enrichment than uranium mining. That's what I meant when I wrote "nuclear fuel".
- legulere 2y ago
  That’s raw uranium ore. Uranium undergoes several refinement steps. In each Russia has an enormous market share.
  - account42 2y ago
    So? Refinement doesn't have a dependency on a particular location. This is like saying nuclear energy in Germany is dependent on France and other countries. Currently it is but only because we choose to not do it locally - it doesn't have to be this way.
  - rhubinak 2y ago
    Not true by skimming the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium > The following countries are known to operate enrichment facilities: Argentina, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Japan, the Netherlands, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Fragoel2 2y ago
That is simply incorrect, Italian companies are already building nuclear reactors/power plants abroad. Enel has built/is managing nuclear plants in Spain and Slovakia: https://www.enel.com/media/explore/search-press-releases/press/2023/03/enel-and-newcleo-sign-partnership-to-cooperate-on-generation-iv-nuclear-technology https://www.enel.com/media/explore/search-press-releases/pre... Eni is involved in building the first fusion plant: https://www.ansa.it/english/news/science_tecnology/2024/04/09/eni-says-to-build-1st-nuclear-fusion-plant-in-early-30s_ed21cb3f-3155-4be4-bb35-8721f139b276.html https://www.ansa.it/english/news/science_tecnology/2024/04/0...
- est31 2y ago
  I would classify ITER as basic research instead of a commercial nuclear power plant. I didn't know that Enel operates nuclear power plants, that's interesting, but they seem to come from an acquisition of Endesa and have been constructed way before that acquisition, and from designs of foreign places. So they aren't modern generation reactors that one would want to build from scratch. As for the Slovakian nuclear power plant, it's a russian design as well. I don't doubt that Enel could operate nuclear reactors of foreign design, where Canada, Russia and France have strong capabilities, but if the design comes from a different country, do you really achieve the independence goal?
  - wkat4242 2y ago
    > I would classify ITER as basic research instead of a commercial nuclear power plant. Absolutely correct. It will never serve as a power plant. It's a giant experiment, that's what the E stands for. We should be so lucky that one day it will generate a few minutes of power :)
Caius-Cosades 2y ago
And that's because western nations are run by idiots that can't do long term planning to save their lives.

croes 2y ago

You know how long and expensive it is to build and operate a nuclear powerplant? And do you really want another target for foreign sabotage?

ViewTrick1002 2y ago

You do know that Europe still haven't been able to decouple from the Russian nuclear supply chain? The only way to be independent is to invest in renewables and storage.

disgruntledphd2 2y ago
Why not both?
- ViewTrick1002 2y ago
  When renewables deliver 5-10 ax much decarbonization and independence per dollar/euro spent compared to nuclear power why waste money?
  - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
    Because nuclear doesn't emit carbon, and can be used for base load, particularly when it's not windy or sunny. Honestly, we need to stop burning carbon and nuclear can help with this.
    - adrianN 2y ago
      If you build enough nuclear capacity to run the country when the renewables don't produce anything you might as well run the country the whole time on nuclear. Building a nuclear plant and then using it at 10% capacity is an egregious waste of money. Literally any storage technology is cheaper.
      - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
        Sure, but my understanding is that the scale of storage available is the problem. And like, I'd prefer to live in a world where we have far too much energy than far too little. Note also that you can use nuclear/renewables to make hydrogen to potentially store more energy.