‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Italian parliament votes for return to nuclear energy

908 points · 818 comments · geox

  1. reddalo · · focus · HN ↗
    I'm Italian and I'm super happy with this.

    The referendum that made nuclear energy illegal in Italy was held right after the accident of Chernobyl; people voted with their gut, not with their mind.

    Curiously enough, some Italian town signs still have a small sub-sign reading &quot;denuclearized municipality&quot; (example: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;live.staticflickr.com&#x2F;1421&#x2F;712461235_e46a2c7db5_z.jpg" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;live.staticflickr.com&#x2F;1421&#x2F;712461235_e46a2c7db5_z.jp... )

    1. icantevenhold · · focus · HN ↗
      As someone who thinks nuclear is both less efficient and much more expensive than renewable energies - would you mind sharing a bit why this makes you happy?

      Since all plants in Italy are closed since the 90s won’t it take decades and billions of tax euros to get them back operational again?

      1. sndcr · · focus · HN ↗
        It’s not either or, you need both. We haven’t solved energy storage so renewables can’t be the only source of energy. If you look at Value-Adjusted Levelized Cost of Electricity (VALCOE) it changes the calculation quite a bit. We have negative energy prices a few times per year in Europe as it is.
        1. ViewTrick1002 · · focus · HN ↗
          We’ve solved both. The research has moved on from VALCOE to whole system modeling. Including transmission, storage, backup, firming and modeling it hour by hour.

          Studies are converging on renewable energy systems being cheaper in climates ranging from Australia to the Nordics:

          Some recent ones:

          Finland, 2025: nuclear scenarios 71–84% higher system cost; unrestricted least-cost optimization builds zero new nuclear. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sciencedirect.com&#x2F;science&#x2F;article&#x2F;pii&#x2F;S0360544225042720" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sciencedirect.com&#x2F;science&#x2F;article&#x2F;pii&#x2F;S036054422...

          Denmark, 2026: system-level LCOE including storage, flexibility and system integration; renewables substantially cheaper than nuclear. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sciencedirect.com&#x2F;science&#x2F;article&#x2F;pii&#x2F;S0360544226009837" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sciencedirect.com&#x2F;science&#x2F;article&#x2F;pii&#x2F;S036054422...

          Australia, CSIRO + AEMO GenCost 2025–26: whole-system modelling including transmission, storage and firming; renewables + storage remain the lowest-cost net-zero pathway. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.csiro.au&#x2F;en&#x2F;research&#x2F;technology-space&#x2F;energy&#x2F;Electricity-transition&#x2F;GenCost" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.csiro.au&#x2F;en&#x2F;research&#x2F;technology-space&#x2F;energy&#x2F;Ele...

          1. Flip-per · · focus · HN ↗
            I&#x27;m interested in why people think this is wrong, in case this is the reason for the downvotes.
            1. realusername · · focus · HN ↗
              I didn&#x27;t downvote but it&#x27;s nonsense, nobody can sustain a winter with batteries and other storage.

              I only checked the first paper and it doesn&#x27;t seem talk about what would happen if a 3 weeks bad wind event would happen in winter, and a rough look at the figures makes me think it just wouldn&#x27;t work. I didn&#x27;t check the other papers.

              And the proof is in the pudding anyways, if it&#x27;s that cheap and feasible to do, well let&#x27;s see who&#x27;s doing it.

              1. ViewTrick1002 · · focus · HN ↗
                They just model the weather hour by hour. But you’re made up scenario is of course impossible to cover.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.