THE GREAT SEA POEMS IN PANINI FIFA 
comes to mind despite the atheism. Or perhaps, even more right if you are atheists, who feel inclined to believe that beautiful theory - now forgotten - on the planet Gaia and its ability to defend itself and regenerate "despite" the human beings who have ever seen? maybe you are able to interpret a message as timely. With proper reluctance to speculate about a tragedy so immense and not yet concluded, but even more with the other proper attempt to avoid, if possible, one can not but reflect on the alert nuclear power these days, came in just in the middle of the resumption of nuclear work the lobby for us, the debate on the referendum.
And with difficulty, because the papers of the Right thunder against the "jackals ecologists, but you have to be real villains like the mayor of Rome to embark on that vulgar populism that pretends not to have approved the return to Italy to declare nuclear "Ah, but all plants here in New York ever, we were already working well." Other regions, of course, thank you. Maybe let's put in Abruzzo, Sicily, Irpinia, in Friuli ... Be 'is not worth another word, of course.
While it deserves some respect for fundamental reasons of this story: the first, emphasized by piece on the Manifesto, is the most emotional, the one that immediately comes to think about. Fifty-five plants in a highly seismic Pease, with a high population density in an area surrounded by the sea and large (ie small) since Italy: it is a challenge to fate, for which it would be nice to invent a new medical discipline, the psicoetologia nations. Impossible not to think about a kind of revenge, or removal of gigantic, just about having the only two atomic bombs the whole story. And now it seems that fate, and removal - which have been told interesting things, like ostracism given to the heirs of the atomic bombings - to win.
more rational considerations, instead, centers on two points: the first is the inability to predict, and thereby ensure the safety point of view, every possible trouble can happen to a plant. One of the incidents in the past, I think Three Mile Island, was said to have been caused by a technician to check a gas leak, came up with a burning candle. The reality was less straightforward, no doubt, but the so-called human error was also instrumental in the disaster of Chernobyl . That, as you know well who has deleted important documents from your computer even after repeated warnings, "but are you sure you want to delete the disk ", is never completely controllable.
The second aspect, in hindsight perhaps the most disturbing of all, is the unreliability of information in the event of an accident: he was silent the Soviet Union, the United States fell silent, as did Britain. And now Japan, despite the world's eyes focused on the risk, it seems to live up to tradition and do not know what he is saying and what not. This was denounced by scientists and experts , not environmentalism. But even if they do not, although now the Japanese government was telling the whole truth, because they espouse the cause of a power source that combines such a high risk to such a limited knowledge of its mechanisms, its possible effects, even of its operations?
Perhaps, for those who you know, it's nice to know among the elect: but where there is a small group of elected officials, there is always another group of more elected again, who knows how to maneuver the knowledge to increase their profits and their power. Then comes perhaps a Linux that puts it (a little ') in crisis, and how does it do? Expanding knowledge, making everyone more or less know what is going on and can tell her.
The wind turbines are ugly, the economic lobbies of renewable energy will be all right now, but if you fall on the house a wind turbine I have no need for expert knowledge (or more likely not to know) that I will have trouble until the third generation, that eat contaminated salad for a thousand years, that I must not breathe for some shine.
The campaign in favor of nuclear power in Italy continues with legal and illicit means, Despite arguments to say the least mad, like energy independence (full of uranium here, eh?) and, unfortunately, is a bipartisan campaign almost . There are also people of the left, pro-nuclear power is not in good company, but it exists.
The final consideration: when pointing to the bogeyman of "go back" when they talk about the need for power plants to meet our energy needs, a bit 'maybe they're right. To build and operate a power plant, in truth, it 
consume much energy and fossil resources that makes you doubt that it is economically sensible, but as I read on a blog that I do not know, "One day they'll think We were fools, to move a ton to carry seventy pounds. " Yeah, exactly:" our energy needs "is not ours, is required and desired by those who derive profit from above. That 's what makes us sick before can save us, is what makes us sit all day before the gyms spread like wildfire, is what it takes to give us the vitamins, supplements, and so on. We are used to this way of life, that void, while suffering from the charm, but many already are, we are, trying to change at least some aspects. It would not be worth to subscribe to a higher possibility of change (and not necessarily defeatist, even) to permanently prevent the risk involved with nuclear power plants? As noted Greenpeace, which launched an appeal to combine the elections, we already have the money you wasting for the referendum in June rather than with the elections: "With 400 million euro could install wind turbines to power about 200,000 Italian families. Ask the Minister Maroni to vote in May, encouraging democratic participation and saving public money." For a start, eh?
