Nuclear power: what have we learned?
Words are wasted in this period. An earthquake of magnitude 8.9; a tsunami that swept the island of Japan killing hundreds and a nuclear power plant that threatens to explode with unimaginable consequences. I don't want to add any more words but just invite you to watch these videos
I propose an interview with the head of the ENEA TRIGA RC-1 nuclear reactor Emilio Santoro, who explains the dynamics of the Fukushima accident in Japan.
If you do not want a nuclear power plant or a radioactive waste deposit to be built in the courtyard of your house, in June 2011 we voted to build nuclear power plants in Italy.
Below is the video of the Super Quark broadcast: "Chernobyl April 26 1986 April 2010" which explains how a nuclear power plant works and above all what happened in Chernobyl.
And to conclude, I propose an interview with the executive director of Greenpeace, Giuseppe Onufrio entitled: "Why not nuclear power".
For what concern referendum 2011 the results on the nuclear and onwater they marked the clear victory of the yes. It was not only a success that involved reaching a quorum, but also one eco-responsible choice in favor of reduced environmental impact. The Italians have chosen not to use thepower produced through the use of nuclear, even if you can't count on a complete one energy autonomy from other countries. They also decided to opt for water considered as a public good.
The predictions on the 2011 referendum had already illustrated the trend towards reaching a quorum. The results have now confirmed everything, marking an important stage in the history of the referendums, in which it was not always easy to reach the participation of 50% + 1 of those entitled to vote. Now that the results have been disclosed, it seems incredible the hypothesis of not giving our compatriots the opportunity to express themselves on issues of particular collective interest, such as that of nuclear power in Italy.
The Supreme Court decided that the nuclear referendum would be held: a decision rewarded by concrete feedback in terms of participation by the electorate. Was it therefore right who, like the WWF, said that there should be a vote on the subject of a referendum on nuclear power? And the referendum on water has it involved public opinion so much?
The numbers relating to the results of the 2011 referendum leave no room for doubt (the data are updated at 9 pm on Monday 13 June): turnout equal to 56.7% for all three questions for the first question about water yes are 95.7% and no 4.3% for the second question on water it is 96.2% for yes and 3.8% for no for question on nuclear power there is a percentage of 94.6% (yes) and 5.4% (no).
On 12 and 13 June the Italian voters will be called to the polls to express themselves on the four abrogative referendum 2011. The third of these questions is probably the most heartfelt and the one that has been discussed the most in recent weeks. It is about the complex referendum on nuclear power, which essentially asks for the partial repeal of the decree law of 25 June 2008 (later converted into law with subsequent amendments) which concerns precisely "Urgent provisions for economic development, simplification, competitiveness, stabilization of public finance and tax equalization ".
In particular, the abolition of rules concerning the construction of new nuclear power plants, a theme that is deeply felt by a large part of public opinion, especially after the terrible tsunami in Japan and the serious crisis at the Fukushima power plant. In this sense, the governmental hypothesis of the "one-year moratorium on nuclear power", a pause for reflection, however, does not convince the supporters of the referendum who brand it as "a trap, a diversion to save themselves from the referendum and not put the administrative elections at risk. But the Italians will not be fooled. No to the moratorium-fraud ".
The earthquake that hit Japan, this enormous misfortune complete with a combined nuclear crisis, has rekindled the debate on the atom in Italy as well. Among many fears and carelessness, one of the few who turned on their brains before starting to write was the excellent Amedeo Balbi, astrophysicist and researcher in Tor Vergata who
The earthquake that hit Japan, this enormous misfortune complete with a combined nuclear crisis, has rekindled the debate on the atom in Italy as well. Among many fears and carelessness, one of the few who turned on their brains before starting to write was the excellent Amedeo Balbi, astrophysicist and researcher in Tor Vergata who wrote about it in detail on his blog.
Today, on the other hand, two of the major Italian newspapers put comparisons, debates and more humorous statements on the home page, which seem to close the door to the power plants in our country. If the Corriere compares Celentano and Boncinelli on the nuclear referendum to be held shortly, Repubblica goes to the practical point, and explains to us that no PdL governor wants the power plants on its territory.
Against something far more important than public health, their political health: the votes. If there is anything that takes away votes, it is being in favor of a nuclear power plant. In Italy it is like this, there is little to do. But on 12 and 13 June we will have to go and vote for the referendum on the new plants - and not only: get an idea on the wikipedia of the 2011 abrogative referendums ...
It is not yet clear how things will go in Fukushima, Japan, what is not a new Chernobyl, but has already become one journalistically and consequently for common sense. Nuclear power continues to scare, it continues to be something that in Italy evokes largely irrational fears.
It is enough to see - and it is not just a question of editorial “composure” - how the home pages of the major foreign and Italian newspapers open. The Guardian, which is certainly not a boring and boring source, has this home page as of this writing
Main title: "Fukushima nuclear power plant evacuated". Simple, straightforward, it says it all. no emotions, mere data. The facts.
Here is the home page of the largest Italian paper newspaper.
A whole other thing, ample space for the emotional side of the tragedy (the "fifty heroes" the "sacrifice"), animated gif at the top to slide the looped images of the tragedy.
The home page of Le Monde is also very clean
Of course, these will be just coincidences, sobriety versus passion, but it seems to me that they indicate a very clear trend: in our country talking about nuclear power using only the brain is impossible. It takes the heart: and when you put your heart into it, sometimes you make a mistake, you exaggerate, you overdo it. Or you take it in full.
This is why I ask you: what are your voting intentions for the abrogative referendum on nuclear power in June? Do you want the power plants or not?
Ps: question not so idle and obvious, because I will try to ask you in a couple of weeks or in a month, when the emotional storm will have subsided.
If you want updates on Nuclear referendum 2011: Fukushima and emotion that wins over reason enter your email in the box below:
The only ones who are really in favor of building nuclear power plants are the Northern League. Without alibis like: "I agree but not here". "The debate - the vice-president of the Lombardy Region Andrea Gibelli makes it clear - is not whether… Continue reading →
This thesis is part of the work done for the degree course in Economics and Management of International Organizations at the LUISS University of Rome, for the Energy Economics exam carried out by Professor Bollino, president of the GSE, written by the undersigned Pier ... Continue reading →
The major political repercussions of the referendum will come from the repeal of the law on legitimate impediment, proposed by Italia dei Valori.
"Do you want Article 1, paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 as well as Article 1 of Law No. 51 of 7 April 2010 containing" provisions on the impediment to appear at the hearing to be repealed? " ".
In April 2010 the Sole 24 Ore proposed a reading guide to explain, step by step, all the innovations contained in the new rules on legitimate impediment. You can find it at this link.
It was the judges of the Court of Milan who raised an objection of unconstitutionality during the trial on the David Mills case. In January 2011, the Constitutional Court then expressed itself for the maintenance of the law, with an interpretative ruling which abrogated some parts considered by the Court to be incompatible with art. 3 and 138 of the Constitution.
Italy of Values describes the legitimate impediment as one of the ad personam laws passed since 1994 by the center-right. Here are some of the reasons presented by the IDV for vote YES and abolish the legitimate impediment:
1. Because the law is the same for everyone, even for Silvio Berlusconi. When it stops being, it is a sign that there is no more democracy.
2. Because if those who govern a country are accused of a crime, they have the right and the duty to defend themselves. But in the process not from the process.
3. Because if there is a scoundrel in the government, the citizens must know immediately. Not after he leaves the government, when the damage has already been done.
4. Because taking up public office is a responsibility that requires transparent behavior. Not a privilege that gives impunity to the powerful.
Did you have any plans or programs for the 12 and the June 13? The validity of the abrogative referendum, one of the few tools in the hands of citizens to directly express their democratic will, depends on the achievement of the quorum, 50% + 1 of those entitled to vote. If you want to express yourself, cancel the commitments if you want to leave things as they are, go ahead and organize. However, the themes are very important and pausing a little more to think about what to do with conscience and not with the imposition of the ideas of others, this time it is worth it.