Italy Set to Relaunch Nuclear Program in Efforts to Decarbonize Energy Mix

In late January, the Italian government started the policy process for restarting its nuclear energy program, a move that could also support the emerging EU industry for small modular reactors.

—

Italy may be on its way to reintegrate nuclear power into its energy mix. On January 23, Minister of the Environment and Energy Security Gilberto Pichetto Fratin submitted the draft of a new bill to Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, beginning the necessary policy process. The proposal will now be discussed in the upcoming Council of Ministers and subsequently presented to Parliament.

In a purely bureaucratic sense, this first step will outline the fundamental principles and objectives governing this sector, including establishing an agency to oversee Italy’s civil nuclear industry and ensure high safety standards.

However, the draft bill also raises questions regarding the scheduling process. For instance, the draft outlines a roadmap with a deadline of 24 months to pass the decrees after the law is approved, with an optional 90-day extension. This suggests the start date will likely be pushed past the next elections, in 2027. Another point of contention concerns the type of nuclear hardware that will shape Italy’s future energy landscape. Even before the bill’s publication, the government had signalled an interest in Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), citing their faster construction timeframe and possible future scalability.

SMRs are smaller reactors with less power capacity — about one-third of a traditional one. But what they lack in megawatts, they gain in flexibility; they are easier to manufacture and set up, with lower upfront costs and shorter construction time, and can be primarily built in factories and shipped to their destination. This makes them a valid alternative for countries with limited power grid infrastructure or, as in Italy’s case, looking to gradually incorporate nuclear energy into their mix.

Although this seemed to be the path the government intended to take, the new document presented in January shows that the legislation will not be limited to SMRs or fourth-generation reactors — as it explicitly mentions using the “best available technology.”

According to physicist and science communicator Luca Romano, pursuing large-scale reactors is a smart move, though that does not mean SMRs should be sidelined. “They’re still going to be extremely useful, because there are plenty of regions in Europe where smaller reactors make way more sense than big ones,” he told Earth.Org.

In Romano’s view, SMRs are better suited for low-consumption regions, where large reactors would be inefficient or impractical. “Take Sardinia or a small country like Estonia,” he explained. “If you install a 1 GWh reactor in places like that, it’s going to be in overproduction three-quarters of the time. But smaller reactors, say between 50 MW and 300 MW, would match their energy needs much better. You can also rotate maintenance and keep the power supply stable.”

The appeal of SMRs also extends to budgetary considerations, not just technological ones. “One of the biggest challenges with atomic energy is the high interest rates,” he pointed out. “Today, they make up more than half the cost of building a reactor. […] Since SMRs are faster to build, they can ease that burden because the interest doesn’t stack up for as long.”

Still, Romano cautioned against relying solely on technological workarounds. “Engineers shouldn’t be tasked with fixing what’s essentially a financial problem,” he added. “That’s for policymakers to handle.”

Going forward, the Italian government must also address the well-known public scepticism surrounding this energy source — a significant obstacle, albeit less pronounced than in the past. Over the years, nuclear energy opponents in the political sphere have cited various concerns, including perceived technological risks, the high infrastructure development costs and the lack of a domestic supply chain.

You might also like: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Nuclear Energy

However, Italy already exports reactor components, and its nuclear industry and companies are involved in international projects such as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), which focuses on nuclear fusion development. Notably, Italy is ITER’s second-largest European supplier after France. This is not surprising: Italy has a solid tradition in the atomic sector dating back to the 1960s, with companies such as Ansaldo Nucleare and ATB Riva Calzoni leading the way.

Several of these companies specialise in producing essential, high-quality components for nuclear power plants, such as pressure vessels for large reactors, steam generators, heat exchangers, core cooling pumps, and tanks. They offer multidisciplinary engineering services, including design, analysis, construction supervision, and project management. Companies like SIET and RINA even provide testing and certification services for nuclear components and systems, ensuring safety and quality standards compliance.

Thus, in the end, the future of nuclear energy in Italy will depend less on its industrial capacity and more on the ability of policymakers and experts to engage with the public and dispel lingering misconceptions about the technology. 

The necessity of nuclear energy becomes even more apparent when comparing its two other European peers. Germany, for example, has spent the last decade focusing heavily on renewables. Yet, it continues to struggle with high carbon intensity. Since solar and wind are intermittent power sources, the country relies heavily on coal, which remains a significant part of its energy mix. Germany’s coal consumption in 2023 accounted for roughly one-third of the EU’s total, measured in terawatt-hours. To put this into perspective, if we combined the yearly coal consumption of France and Italy and multiplied it by four, we would still fall short of Germany’s usage — highlighting just how far from “green” Germany’s power grid is these days.

Meanwhile, with around 70% of its electricity needs met by nuclear power, France maintains one of Europe’s lowest-carbon electricity grids. Italy itself is also less suited for mass adoption of renewables due to its predominantly mountainous geography. Not to mention that a substantial portion of Italy’s economy and industries — over 50% of its €2 trillion-GDP (US$2.08 trillion) — is concentrated in the Po Valley, in the country’s north. This region is less sunny than the country’s southern parts and is surrounded by mountain ranges, making wind energy impractical. Most energy here comes from hydropower, already a low-carbon source, and natural gas, which could be replaced by nuclear plants, making energy cheaper and less polluting while also contributing to the stability of the EU power grid. 

Here is where nuclear energy becomes particularly appealing for a country like Italy, which is still trying to lower its emissions and energy prices at the same time. And since several Italian companies are already active in the SMR sector, the country may even have a head start in this specific field. Moreover, the EU is currently pushing for the development of SMRs as part of its overall energy strategy, which could open doors to funding and collaborative opportunities within the bloc. On top of that, a homegrown European SMR sector could prove highly profitable, with significant export potential beyond the EU, in a global market estimated to be between US$400-600 billion.

Nevertheless, the EU — and Italy as one of its member states — will still have to find ways to differentiate and stand out in this increasingly crowded field. Several countries, including the US, China, and Russia, are already investing heavily in developing their SMR industry to gain a competitive edge. 

Additionally, Europe is also constrained by an extensively fragmented regulatory framework. “In the US, you’ve got the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the federal level,” Romano pointed out. “But in Europe, every country has its own rules. A reactor approved in France can’t just be built in Sweden — it has to go through Sweden’s regulatory authority first. It’ll always be difficult unless we set up a unified EU-wide system.”

Ultimately, only time will tell whether this strategy will turn out to be one of the cornerstones of Italy and Europe’s energy future or a missed opportunity in the race for energy innovation.

Featured image: Wikimedia Commons.