America’s “Liberation Day”, on which the Trump Administration imposed tariffs on the country’s main trading partners, moves the globalization-based world order one more step closer to crisis. Characterized by geopolitical disorder and economic policies that are fragmented or entirely lacking, a crisis of this nature is without precedent but has clearly identifiable causes.
The overly rapid realization of the globalization system – which was conceived as the application of a Utopian concept of market-led economy – is the source of deep economic and social imbalances. In just a few years, Western economies found themselves importing not just goods but poverty for their industrial workers. They tried to address this situation through a merely financial response which proved ineffective. And now history, the end of which was declared decades ago, has returned to center stage and is increasing the risk that borders no longer crossed by goods will be crossed by armies.
Against this background, the American tariffs seem to be not so much a trade policy tool as part of a shock strategy designed to renegotiate global relations. The consequences of this decision remain to be seen, because the repercussions on the stock markets – and so on a significant part of the American population, which entrusts its future welfare benefits to pension funds – are a threat to the variegated coalition which supported Donald Trump’s re-election.
The measures approved and the new uncertainties on the horizon have created a problematic scenario for Europe, not least because of past mistakes that have undermined the continent’s industrial competitiveness. To these industrial policy errors can be added the lack of a true energy policy, a factor that increases the burden on businesses and their activity.
The European Union (EU) is called upon to address the current challenges. To do so, it must first understand that strategic autonomy in the industrial sphere must also include security in energy terms. Energy security needs to evolve from a simple reduction of vulnerability to a very real form of “insurance” for the system against certain key risks linked to climate change, the continuity and reliability of supply, and price volatility.
Italy is in a particularly delicate situation in terms of energy costs, which are considerably higher than for other international and European competitors. Spain is particularly interesting in this regard. Starting with energy price levels similar to Italy’s, it has succeeded in a decade in reducing its supply costs as a result of significant investment in renewables (now accounting for 60% of the mix, compared with 40% in Italy) and the base level provided by nuclear power.
Indeed, nuclear energy is attracting new interest, including in Italian public opinion. After the negative outcome of two referendums, in 1987 and 2011 – which took place, it should be noted, in the wake of incidents such as Chernobyl and Fukushima – Italy now has a relative majority in favor of reintroducing nuclear to its energy mix. This is an important foundation on which to base the public debate, which must be accompanied by information emphasizing the security and flexibility provided by the new technologies. In particular, fourth-generation small modular reactors have changed the scenario because they are smaller; cheaper to run, given that they are produced on an industrial scale; and safer and simpler to produce, as they can lead to a notable reduction in radioactive waste.
Until the results promised by fusion are attained, the new nuclear fission technologies are, and will remain, an important factor to consider in constructing a balanced energy portfolio, especially given the challenges posed by the climate crisis and increased energy demand at the global level. This trend is being led by the emerging economies which, given their hydrocarbon-heavy energy mix, are causing a considerable increase in CO2 emissions. Yet the responsibilities of the more mature economies, which still produce very high emissions if per capita data are considered, are by no means secondary. In this respect, the digital transition, with the expansion of energy-hungry data centers, deserves a chapter of its own. To meet the resulting exponential growth in energy demand, by the end of 2026 additional production equating to Japan’s entire consumption will be needed.
For this reason too, after the global warming report approved by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2018, the world has seen the role of nuclear energy in combating climate change gain a new impetus. COP28 (the 28th meeting of the Conference of the Parties) saw a call for installed capacity to be tripled; commitments by several countries are moving in that direction. In the scenarios produced by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), installed power is projected to increase substantially, from today’s 373 GW to, potentially, 500 to 900 GW by 2050.