Fine Italian exports?
When I lived in Italy on an olive farm (that phrase must be said in a wistful voice), it was well known that Italy kept the truly best olive oil for domestic use, and exported the rest. That included oil that was imported from other countries, repackaged as Italian, but which no self-respecting Tuscan would use for anything other than mopping a floor.
Well that's not the only thing Italy exports that they won't have at home.
Not a single commercial nuclear reactor is operating in Italy. But guess what? Italian energy company ENEL is peddling nuclear power outside of Italy like bad olive oil.
Our colleagues were protesting in five Central European capitals today, accusing the Italian government of exporting nuclear risk to Slovakia, where ENEL is currently working to complete two reactors at the Soviet-designed Mochovce nuclear power plant.
Like the Czech Republic's Temelin nuclear plant, Mochovce was first drawn up by Czechoslovakia's communist government in the 1970s. It was a really bad year for nuclear reactors.
Jan Rovensky of Greenpeace told radio Czechia "It's a Soviet construction from the 70s, and this old project doesn't even have the containment that protects the reactor in case of accident. So we hope that even people who support nuclear energy should be against this project because it's really dangerous."
So how about it, nuclear energy supporters? If the argument goes that modern nukes are safe and that's why you support them, the logical conclusion is that older nukes are dangerous and ought to be opposed. What say we sit this one out and let you campaign against Mochovce, while we continue our efforts to let people know that nuclear energy is not an answer to climate change, and that we can achieve a 50% reduction in emissions by 2050 without it.
Follow Greenpeace »
Comments
Haha, you should see the looks my housemates give me when I dare cook with butter instead of olive oil...
Thing is, most Italians know they're exporting olive oil... but they don't know they're exporting nuclear (which they personally rejected by referendum back in 1987, I think)... We're trying to let people know about it - it worked for UniCredit (a bank that was going to finance a nuclear power plant, and then backed down after their clients learned what was going on - good for them!), so it could work with ENEL. Who knows...
Posted by: Juliette | April 18, 2007 4:19 PM
Some more photoes from Budapest, Bratislava and Warsawa as well here:
http://www.greenpeace.hu/index.php?m=galeria&galeria=16&page=1&kamp=166&PHPSESSID=e06dc560ca9d16a4134529234605702c
Posted by: Bob | May 20, 2007 11:08 PM
I would like to correct Jan Rovensky on a couple of points, firstly these reactors use a pressurized water design called VVER, this is distinct from the older RBMK, which was a poor design by reactor standards, even when it was built. The design has even been updated to incorporate all the newer safety features found in any modern plant.
Secondly she is completely wrong about the containment building, the containment building could contain several times the force generated by a catastrophic coolant failure event. I believe she may have again confused the reactor from an RBMK, the type used at chernobyl.
It is very simplistic to say that because there have been accidents with nuclear power in the past that makes all nuclear plants dangerous. That is like saying that because a few people were killed by a poorly designed wind turbine they are all dangerous.
I am glad that I could point out these misconceptions about nuclear power, hopefully in the future your spokespeople will check their facts more thoroughly.
Posted by: D Harvey | June 5, 2007 7:00 PM