Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance • Hacker News Board

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#261

Post by csouzaf » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:55 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #99

Maybe not well known, but during the 20th century a number of nations started a nuclear weapons program, but then were convinced to halt the work by security guarantees by the U.S. You better believe that every single one of those nations is now revisiting that decision. For those wondering if Italy can afford to build nuclear: their economy is larger than Russia’s. As is Brazil’s, another nation that put nuclear wea…

Brazil simply does not have any leverage in the matter. The country almost conducted the first test in Serra do Cachimbo, but the hole where the nuke was to be detoneted was closed by the former president. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serra_do_Cachimbo

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#262

Post by echoangle » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:55 PM UTC

JumpinJack_Cash wrote: post #188

Mashimo wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem with nuclear in Italy is just one: Remember when Italy paid the mafia to get rid of nuclear waste, they put it on old boats and sunk them :D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_waste_dumping_by_the_%27...

Water is the best insulant for radiation. Apparently even mafias bosses know that famous cartoon where it says that you could swim in the exhaust nuclear bars cooling pool

You would hope that the containment is sealed for this though, releasing the material into the water still isn't ideal.

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#263

Post by willvarfar » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:55 PM UTC

IsTom wrote: post #125

wkat4242 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, it's not the biggest earthquake in the past we have to worry about, it's the biggest one in the future. And climate change can have very sudden and unpredictable results too as we've seen all over the world in recent years.

Europe just isn't a particularly seismically active and then only it's mostly southern Europe.

The article is about nuclear plants in Italy.

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#264

Post by ta20240528 » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:55 PM UTC

flanked-evergl wrote: post #173

rob74 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BTW, Ukraine already had nuclear weapons, but agreed to give them up for security guarantees by the US, the UK, France and Russia (!) in 1994: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

The Budapest Memorandum had no security guarantees. > Another key point was that U.S. State Department lawyers made a distinction between "security guarantee" and "security assurance", referring to the security guarantees that were desired by Ukraine in exchange for non-proliferation. "Security guarantee" would have implied the use of military force in assisting its non-nuclear parties attacked by an aggressor (such…

Oh yes, so many subtleties.

From now on anything short of "Can I press the red button myself?" will not cut the mustard.

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#265

Post by ttoinou » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:56 PM UTC

FrancisMoodie wrote: post #136

ttoinou wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No their economy is not larger than Russia, this is a common trope among people whose only way to reach reality is to irrationally use statistics computed by bureaucrats

Huh, so you're claiming that GDP data and such is not correct? Any source on that? Because I see multiple sources reporting that in 2023 the GDP of Russia was $2,009,959M and that of Italy was $2,300,941M, although Italy has a higher debt %. Which would confirm the original posters claim considering Italy is a much, much smaller country than Russia. What I find a common trope is people claiming facts are incorrect wi…

You can make statistics about whatever you want and assign any meaning you want to the numbers you get. It doesnt mean it’s true. The assumptions in the economic theories do not hold true in real life, hence all computations are useless

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#266

Post by 1I3zafs9 » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:57 PM UTC

km144 wrote: post #161

The current US Administration does not understand the basic mechanics of American hegemony. I think Trump truly believes that we are getting ripped off and stand to gain nothing from our current position with the EU and other allies. But if you take away the incentives and guarantees they'll just turn their back on you and seek their own protection—it has to be symbiotic.

I fully agree that the US benefits from its hegemony and that Trump's statements that the US is getting ripped off are completely false.

But what game is currently being played by the Trump administration? He told the EU to be self-sufficient in defense spending, insults them and Ukraine to awaken their pride. He (temporarily) cuts off public ties with Zelensky. The press conference with the row at the end actually ended with Trump winking at the audience and Zelensky putting his thumb up. That part is cut out of many videos.

EU leaders scramble to put up the type of peace plans that they know will be refused. What if all is prearranged and Trump just wants to dump Biden's conflict on the EU, at least temporarily until everyone has rearmed?

Trump has said a lot, including lifting sanctions on Russia. But he extended the sanctions. He did halt arms shipments to Ukraine either to pressure Ukraine or the EU.

The EU should negotiate with Russia without the US, get a viable peace plan and drop sanctions. Then we'll see if Trump's behavior is more than theater.

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#267

Post by lillecarl » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:57 PM UTC

regularjack wrote: post #165

pjmlp wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Portuguese, and regarding how things work there, regardless of whatever achievements get acomplished, the ways how to do business and handle bureaucracy walls aren't very far from stereotypes, even if it was improved during the last decades. I assume same applies in Italy, given that we share some of those stereotypes.

I'm portuguese and I completely disagree with this. Stereotypes are just stereotypes, generalizing 10M people into a dumbed down pseudo reality doesn't make sense.

It makes less sense the further from the stereotypical thing you go.

It's nuclear, not burning clothes or giving your uncle the building contract.

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#268

Post by kranke155 » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:58 PM UTC

acatton wrote: post #167

stop50 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had luck, depending how hot this summer gets some nuclear facilities have to shut down again because the water gets to warm or they don't have enough water in the cooling water source.

The low river issue 2 or 3 summers ago was overblown. When there is not enough water, the production can be slowed down to use less water. Regarding what happened during that heatwave, there are, rightfully so, regulations on how hot the water can be to be dumped into regular rivers. These regulations ensure the protection of the marine life and ecosystem of these rivers. During the that summer, the rivers' natural t…

You're saying the media lied to me? For a political point?

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#269

Post by mrweasel » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:58 PM UTC

hengheng wrote: post #54

surgical_fire wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter. As far as I am concerned, self sufficiency comes before price concerns. Nuclear is very safe and reliable. By all means, EU countries should keep investing in Solar, Wind, Geotermal, etc. but that should be done alongside Nuclear.

As always with nuclear there are a few taboo topics. One of them being fuel supply. For European reactors that seems to be either Mali/Niger, or Russia. Both not excellent if the goal is geopolitical independence. Solar, wind and batteries have no fuel concerns, and they are inherently decentralized.

Uranium could be sourced from both Greenland and Ukraine, but realistically Australia, Brazil and South Africa might be better options.

Denmark also have 3700 tons of uranium ore just laying around, not sure how much actual uranium you can extract from that, very little I suspect.

Re: Italy moves to reverse anti-nuclear stance

#270

Post by sras-me » Tue, Mar 04, 2025, 2:58 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #256

sras-me wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am curious about the plan of Europe about on countering a nuclear first strike on Ukraine by Russia, because the latter has run out of options because the war dragged on and on by the support from Europe, draining Russia of everything they have..

> draining Russia of everything they have They can always just stop? It's not as if Ukranian tanks are at the gates of Moscow, it's more like the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Or the previous USSR withdrawal from Afghanistan. It is unclear whether the UK or France would threaten a retaliatory strike in case of nuclear weapons use not against their own territory. It doesn't seem likely, but if there's one thing Puti…

>They can always just stop?

They can, but that is what I am wondering about. Will a desperate Putin think he can get away with a nuclear first strike on Ukraine? If he thinks he can, why stop?