Towards Nuclear 4.0

Science is under attack, and not just on TV talk shows. Ideologies and fears often take the place of data and arguments, especially when it comes to energy. This is where physicist Antonio Ereditato begins — co-author, with colleague Stefano Buono of Il nuovo nucleare- Rimettere la scienza al centro (Egea, 2025, 136 pages, €16, in Italian) — to explain how nuclear energy today is not so much a technology to be defended, but rather a testbed for our ability to discuss the future rationally. Focusing on topics including the fourth generation of reactors that are safer and more sustainable, the geopolitical challenges of energy independence and the decisive role that nuclear power could play in reducing global inequalities, Ereditato calls for a reflection that goes beyond the technical — what’s at stake, he argues, is the very quality of our democracy.

The title of your book is clear: "Placing science back at the center". What do we have to defend science from today, and why has nuclear power become the terrain of this cultural battle?

Everyone can agree that today science is attacked by sectors of society and politics, both in Italy and abroad. For some, science and its method — which over the centuries have opened the way to knowledge and led to us living better and longer lives — have become a topic of debate, that is sometimes shouted and without arguments, as often happens for the most disparate subjects. And the issue of energy is no different, with positions that are ideological and not based on quantitative arguments. Unfortunately, the battle is not cultural, but reflects an unjustified attack against culture. 

You write that "energy is power", and that energy independence will be one of the crucial factors for the democracy of the future. In this scenario, what is the real strategic issue of the return to nuclear energy? Is it more technical, geopolitical or economic?

In the book we show that energy is the power to do things, to build and create, to keep life alive. And so, control over energy and the achievement of energy independence have become drivers of democracy and equality. Three issues — technology, geopolitics and economics — are intertwined and contribute equally to motivating the need for a calm reflection on future energy portfolios, in particular on the contribution of nuclear power.

What really distinguishes the "new nuclear" from the old? Can you explain what it means, in practice, to move from the third to the fourth generation of reactors?

The generational transition is similar to what occurred with the invention of personal computers: there was a shift from the large centralized mainframes of the 1970s and 1980s to widely distributed computing power. The new reactors are smaller (from tens to a few hundred Megawatts, compared to a few Gigawatts of today's large reactors), cheaper because they are modular and industrially built and, above all, safer, more efficient and more sustainable. Technically, this can be achieved, for example, through the use of fast neutrons, cooling with molten salts or liquid metals, and by using waste from old reactors as an essential part of the fissile material.

In the book you argue that nuclear power will also be fundamental to reducing global inequalities. How can it contribute to rebalancing relations between the Global North and South?

It’s only natural that a broader distribution of energy would help reduce inequalities and better meet the needs of the most disadvantaged societies. The Global South has basic needs that are often not recognized: food, water, knowledge, democracy and, last but not least, access to clean, cheap and efficient energy, such as fourth-generation nuclear power.

What are the main applications of civilian nuclear power today outside of energy production? And are there any that remain relatively unknown to the public?

One of the many examples are medical applications. As we discuss in the book, today nuclear power contributes to modern diagnostics and medical therapy. Cancer radiology treatments save millions of lives around the world, and thanks to diagnostic devices such as PET, serious diseases can be identified earlier and more accurately. Topics like these, often seen as too technical or already settled, tend to stay out of public debate in favor of issues that are more immediate or emotionally charged. It’s essential for professionals in the field — including scientists themselves — to do more and do better when it comes to informing and communicating.

From an economic point of view, is nuclear power really competitive with renewables today? And what conditions would allow it to retain its competitiveness?

Today the cost of the nuclear kilowatt hour is low, although the construction costs of the current generation reactors (to be amortized in any case over many decades of uninterrupted operation) have reached tens of billions of euros for a large plant. For the future, the combination of small, inexpensive and widespread SMRs (Small Modular Reactors) will lead to a further reduction in energy costs for users, also taking into account the lower costs of transport, management and the drastic reduction of complex ancillary systems.

Let's talk about costs and construction timelines: how much does bureaucracy in Europe affect the development of new nuclear projects today? And what needs to change?

The time required for the design, authorization and construction of a nuclear reactor depends on the country, whether in Europe or other parts of the world, and is actually very lengthy. Streamlining many of the procedures or creating ‘fast-track’ channels between the authorities of different countries could help standardize reactor design and thus enhance their modularity, with positive effects on costs. All this is facilitated by the fact that these are small devices, with a low environmental impact, less complexity and cost, and designed with passive safety criteria that should help to greatly reduce the complexity of bureaucratic and authorization procedures.

In the book you address the issue of fake news and unfounded fears. How can nuclear power be communicated today without slipping into technocracy on one side or denial on the other?

To quote our book: by placing science at the center. By using quantitative arguments that are as objective as possible. By speaking calmly of safety, costs, benefits and the many positive side effects, such as the ancillary production of rare earths, hydrogen and industrial heat, and the possibility for SMRs to act as "nuclear scavengers" by consuming the radioactive waste accumulated around the world over the last 80 years.

Let's talk about social acceptance. In Italy, despite past referendums, polls show a growing support for nuclear power. How do you think public opinion has changed?

Three main factors: 1) the need for decarbonization, which is an important issue for the younger generations, 2) an awareness of the significance of economic factors, which have come to the fore due to the recent international turmoil over energy, and 3) the fact that between the reactors currently in operation and fourth generation reactors, the same difference exists as that between an old car from the 1950s and today's modern cars, with lots of active and passive safety systems, and which cost, consume and pollute less.

France has just relaunched its nuclear program. Can Italy afford to stay out of this European development? And what would the economic consequences be for our country?

France has always adopted a bipartisan policy on energy and nuclear power in particular, aiming for energy independence and economic convenience. It is no coincidence that the French will probably be the first in Europe to benefit from the first fourth-generation reactors, produced by Stefano Buono's newcleo. If Italy is not a part of this new "gold rush" the price to pay will be very high: one group of countries will dictate the economic and political agenda to the others. 

You experienced the transformation of CERN from a young physicist to a laboratory director at the University of Bern. How important is the European research ecosystem today in the race for the energy of the future?

As Mario Draghi recently said, Europe risks political irrelevance. I would add it even risks economic irrelevance if it does not focus decisively and coordinately on science and technological development, mitigated and guided by those social and ethical principles that have always been the trademark of our continent since the post-war period. Let's not forget that Europe (and Italy) may lack major energy resources, but it holds considerable soft power in its engineers, researchers and technologists, and their remarkable and widely recognized expertise.

The book also talks about the space economy, medicine, batteries, diagnostics. Which field of application of nuclear power are you most passionate about today?

I can say that I am personally excited by all the potential developments you listed. Perhaps the link between new nuclear power and the space economy and medicine are the two aspects most present in the collective imagination.

The book closes with a "look towards 2050": a world where nuclear power is widespread, safe and green. Is this a realistic scenario or the hopeful vision of optimistic scientists?

We believe, with the optimism of reason, that our outlooks are realistic views of the world to come.

If you could speak directly to Italian students and young researchers, what would you tell them about the future of nuclear power?

To approach the new nuclear age just as they do the future of bioengineering, quantum computing or cosmology: by following their curiosity, guided by scientific rigor and driven by the ambition to build a better world.