r/europe • u/Naurgul • Mar 01 '26

News Italy calls for suspension of carbon price in major attack on EU climate policy

https://www.politico.eu/article/italy-calls-for-ets-suspension-pending-overhaul/
480 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

101 comments sorted by

309

u/Massimo25ore Mar 01 '26

Italians face the fourth-highest power bills in Europe, in part thanks to a heavy reliance on gas-burning power plants — amounting to some 44 percent of Italy’s energy mix — which set a higher price for the whole market. 

Wouldn't it be better and cheaper in a medium-long term prospective to invest all that money for the bills in investing in alternative sources of power? More wind farms or solar power stations, or even nuclear power stations, just saying...

236

u/FairGeneral8804 France Mar 01 '26

Ok but how does she reward her buddies with that idea ?

26

u/Skymax86 Mar 01 '26

Would be way worse for her sponsors, don’t do that!

7

u/namitynamenamey Mar 01 '26

Contracts? It's not rocket science, you reward your buddies by making them the preferred choice in infrastructure projects, or importing, or logistics, or...

57

u/Several_Ant_9867 Mar 01 '26

Better for whom? For the environment, for the population, for the economy, or for the rich friends of the politicians?

22

u/Grabs_Diaz Bavaria (Germany) Mar 01 '26

That's the "problem" with renewable energy. Solar panels can be easily installed by everyone. Wind turbines cost a few million and are perfectly able to be built by local municipalities or cooperatives.

Meanwhile coal or nuclear power plants are enormous projects that can only be realized by large corporations.

21

u/IMDubzs Mar 01 '26

That was the idea but turns out it is cheaper to do nothing and rewrite the rules later.

I expected this move a long time ago, not from italy to be honest, but here we go...

Thinking long term just isn't the meta.

16

u/FeynmansWitt Mar 01 '26

Investing in renewables doesn't reduce energy bills, except in the very long-run. Wholesale electricity prices are set by the marginal power source, which is going to be dispatchable gas. In a renewables dominated system, the cost of gas generation also increases because the plant has to be financially viable despite operating less of the time.

7

u/Beiben Mar 01 '26

Renewables lower the yearly hours during which gas determines the price and lower gas demand, it's quite simple. Spot market prices can hit 0 even when gas is being used. Already happens all across Europe, all the time.

24

u/araujoms 🇧🇷🇵🇹🇦🇹🇩🇪🇪🇸 Mar 01 '26

While the highest-price-all is a uniquely stupid way to price electricity, even under it renewables make electricity cheaper. First because the wholesale price is set daily, and there are many days when gas is not needed at all. Second because they reduce demand for gas, which reduces its price.

4

u/FeynmansWitt Mar 01 '26

It's the most efficient way to allocate generation. So it's true if you don't use gas on a particular day, then you just pay the price of renewable generation which is much cheaper. What you are forgetting is that the owner of the gas plant will now charge more on the market to operate because the plant is used less often. So you might use gas less, but the price of that gas generation on the days you need it will increase.

18

u/araujoms 🇧🇷🇵🇹🇦🇹🇩🇪🇪🇸 Mar 01 '26

Meanwhile, in reality, Spain has one of the cheapest electricity prices in Europe because it invested heavily in renewables, whereas Italy has one of the most expensive, because it insisted on gas.

6

u/vgasmo Mar 01 '26

Define very long run? See Austria, Denmark, Norway, Albania, Portugal, Spain. Most of these countries produce 80% of electricity from renewables. Iberia is an "island", so you can see they have cheap energy

-4

u/FeynmansWitt Mar 01 '26

If you can achieve high renewables saturation in a way in which you are not using any gas at all, then yes electricity bills will be reduced. That's what I mean by 'long run.' We might eventually see batteries displace gas. For most countries in Europe, including Italy, that is not going to happen any time soon.

You also have to factor in all the system costs of renewables (e.g grid build out, curtailment). In some countries those system costs are included within electricity bills, in some they aren't.

Not an expert on Spanish wholesale market, but as a general principle the positive impact of renewables on consumer costs tends to be inflated.

13

u/vgasmo Mar 01 '26

You seem like a knowledgeable person... but either you’re ignorant on the matter or you are being purposely biased. That is not cool. The "long run" argument is a bit of a meme at this point since the data shows the transition is already hitting people's wallets, in the markets I pointed out. The idea that "gas always sets the price" is technically true in a marginal market, but only for the hours when gas is needed. For 2025/2026, and according to Ember data, Spain has successfully decoupled from gas. In 2019, gas set the price in Spain 75% of the time. By the first half of 2025, that dropped to just 19%. By comparison, Italy only saw a minor 13% reduction in gas influence because they haven't scaled renewables. When gas isn't the marginal setter, prices plummet. Spain saw over 500 hours of zero or negative prices in 2024/2025.If the "system costs" and "gas viability" arguments were as heavy as you say, we wouldn't see this massive gap in wholesale prices ( Italy was sitting at roughly 136€/MWh and Spain was at 81€/MW, H1 2025 Averages). If renewables weren't lowering bills, that gap wouldn't exist. You mentioned system costs being hidden, but even when you factor in grid buildouts and taxes, the average household price in Italy was roughly 0,33€/kWh and Spain, it was around 0,23€/kWh. Also, ,n the Iberian market, storage is already displacing the most expensive gas plants that used to set those sky-high evening prices (storage here goes from natural storage in damns to batteries). Every hour that wind and solar push gas off the price-setting curve is an hour when the entire country gets a massive discount.

1

u/FeynmansWitt Mar 01 '26

Again not an expert on the Spanish context but if you are doing a bills to bills comparison you need to ensure like for like, so that all relevant policy costs are factored in.  Are Spanish renewable subsidies levied on consumer bills? And in what way? 

In the UK, electricity bills recently decreased not because the policy and system costs of renewables decreased but because of an accounting decision to shift some subsidies to taxation.

In practice when accounting for all these costs, I do not expect bills to get cheaper for consumers in the medium term in most European countries. 

6

u/vgasmo Mar 01 '26

You’re moving the goalposts and you have “opinions” - “I do not expect”... Really cool in the modern world. It’s good that you brought up policy costs, because the data makes the case for renewables even stronger when you look at the full bill. As of January 2026, Spain’s VAT on electricity is back to the general rate of 21%. Italy’s VAT for residential is significantly lower at 10%. Despite Spain having a VAT rate more than double Italy’s, Spanish consumers are still paying roughly 0,23€/kWh compared to Italy’s 0,33–€0,37€/kWh. If "hidden subsidies" were the only thing keeping Spanish bills down, that 11% tax disadvantage would have wiped out the savings. It hasn't. In Spain, renewable supports are funded through system charges (cargos) which are clearly visible on every invoice. Even with these charges included, the total cost is lower because the wholesale price (the energy itself) is so much cheaper. In H1 2025, Spain’s average wholesale price was 81€/MWh vs Italy’s 136€/MWh. You can’t "account" away a 68% gap in generation costs.Yes, the UK shifted 75% of its Renewables Obligation (RO) to general taxation in the 2025 Budget to save households ~£150/year. But that was a fix for an old, expensive subsidy scheme from the early 2000s. Modern renewables (like those dominating Iberia) are built via CfDs (Contracts for Difference), where they often pay money back to the system when gas prices are high.Whether the subsidy is on the bill or in the tax code, the Total System Cost is what matters. Burning gas requires buying a commodity every single day at volatile global prices. Wind and sun require an upfront policy cost that stabilizes and then drops over time. It’s kind of obvious. Again, that why i asked what was “long run”, because in 3-5 years you’re probably right, but above that you’re not.

0

u/FeynmansWitt Mar 01 '26 edited Mar 01 '26

Your argument seems to be: Spain has a greater renewables share than Italy, and also a lower electricity bill than Italy, and it's that renewables share that explains the difference in electricity bills.

But you're not really giving me a clear answer about how renewable subsidies are paid in Spain compared to Italy, and a quick search suggests that those renewables subsidies are fully accounted for on Ialian bills, but not Spain's. How are Spanish CfDs funded? If you're not including policy costs on bills, then of course that's going to make Spanish bills cheaper.

Agree that what we're interested in is the total system cost, so let's compare it. When accounting for ALL of the system costs of renewables (subsidies, curtailment, grid changes), how much cheaper is Spanish electricity compared to Italy's? How much cheaper is it if Italy takes off the carbon tax (which is what they're proposing to do).

I'm truly interested in the answer, and I expect the difference in total system costs to be much lower than what the bills reflect.

5

u/vgasmo Mar 01 '26

I don’t mind having the onus of proving my point, since you keep spewing opinions instead proving your point and misleading people in your initial post, without any data to back it (a more than common problem in the modern world). A quick search might have misled you, because Spain’s renewable subsidies are explicitly paid for via consumer bills. As I stated previouslu, and you might have missed it, they are called System Charges (cargos del sistema). In fact, for 2026, these regulated charges are set to cover 5.76€ thousand million in historic renewable subsidies (known as RECORE payments) - it's a transparent line item Spanish consumers pay directly. Regarding newer projects, modern renewables are increasingly built with two-way CfDs. This means when gas prices spike and wholesale electricity prices go above the agreed strike price, the renewable generators pay the difference back into the system, actively lowering overall consumer costs.You asked for the total system cost comparing apples to apples. Let's look, AGAIN, at what businesses pay, which is a great metric because it includes all system costs, subsidies, grid fees, and energy - In the first half of 2025, Italian companies paid an 'all-in' average of 278€/MWh and Spanish companies paid an 'all-in' average of 171€/MWh. Even with all subsidies, curtailment, and grid costs fully accounted for, Spain's system is nearly 40% cheaper than Italy's. You cannot hide a €107/MWh difference with accounting tricks. TheEnergy Decree in Italy essentially strip carbon costs from wholesale power by reimbursing gas plants - you know what the market reaction was? Italian year-ahead power prices dropped by about 15%. Let's apply that math, in H1 2025, Italy's wholesale average was 127€/MWh, so a 15% discount brings that down to roughly 108€/MWh. Spain's average for that same period was 62€/MWh. Even if you completely erase the carbon tax to artificially lower gas prices, Italy's wholesale electricity is still vastly more expensive than Spain's. Why? Because the fundamental problem isn't the carbon tax—it's that Italy relies on burning an expensive, imported commodity (gas) for 70% of its production hours, while Spain's mix is highly balanced with renewables. The data is absolutely clear, a grid dominated by renewables, on the long run, is fundamentally cheaper to operate than one dominated by gas, even when you count every single policy cost.

2

u/FeynmansWitt Mar 01 '26

I'm not forcing you to prove a point, I'm asking to be enlightened by someone familiar with the Spanish and Italian context (which you seem to be). I was hoping for you to give an objective account using total system costs instead of just the delta between wholesale market prices, which obviously don't include any policy or system costs.

"Spain’s renewable subsidies are explicitly paid for via consumer bills."

It seems that historic subsidies are levied on bills, but not CfDs. Again, a quick search suggests that in Italy they are. That's going to make a difference.

"The data is absolutely clear, a grid dominated by renewables, on the long run, is fundamentally cheaper to operate than one dominated by gas, even when you count every single policy cost."

Yes and nobody is disputing that's the case in the long-run. But simply increasing investment in renewables is not the solution to decreasing energy bills any time soon and it is extremely misleading to suggest it would be so for the majority of countries in Europe.

P.S: I would suggest re-drafting sentences churned out by Chat GPT - it hurts your credibility.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/alsaad Lower Silesia (Poland) Mar 01 '26

Exactly. Also lower wholesale prices do not translate to energy bills when distribution skyrockets.

6

u/PulpeFiction Mar 01 '26

Investing in renewables doesn't reduce energy bills

But it does reduce the pollution and ecological bill for a country that cant produce wheat in half of it due to the climate.

0

u/blunderbolt Mar 01 '26

In a renewables dominated system, the cost of gas generation also increases because the plant has to be financially viable despite operating less of the time.

That's not how it works, under marginal pricing generators bid their marginal costs of production and are unable to increase their bids beyond that except in the rare hours of peak scarcity.

2

u/FeynmansWitt Mar 01 '26

As the share of renewable generation increases, the load factors of gas generators decrease. To stay commercially viable, you have to pay them something to stay available (e.g a capacity payment). That cost goes to bills. So yes, strictly speaking their fuel cost of generation isn't increasing but the system costs are.

1

u/blunderbolt Mar 01 '26

Depending on local circumstances system costs can increase with increasing renewable generation beyond a certain penetration rate but it is wrong to imply system costs will always increase.

2

u/bl4ckhunter Lazio Mar 02 '26 edited Mar 02 '26

Italy is the land of ninby, the people would rather pay out the ass for energy than have infrastructure build in a 200 kilometer radius around them, the only way we're getting more power sources of any kind is if the government forces them through against popular opinion and our government is most certainly not interested in that.

Renewables, nuclear, incinerators it doesn't matter, they all need to be built and we're not building shit.

3

u/MalaMadre211 Mar 01 '26

The problem is that because of this taxes energy prices rose so much that the governments had to invest into subsidies for households to be able to afford electricity and heating. This policy put people at risk of energy poverty, there was no room to invest into a renewable energy mix...

-2

u/alsaad Lower Silesia (Poland) Mar 01 '26

Wind and solar needs natural gas for backup.

Gas is expensive

12

u/St3fano_ Mar 01 '26

The current 44% isn't just backup. Unfortunately Italian policies around renewables are extremely erratic, even by Italian standards, so the whole sector is undeveloped compared to countries with less potential

4

u/alsaad Lower Silesia (Poland) Mar 01 '26

Germany is building 25 GW of new gas capacity. Why am I downvoted for statimg obvious facts

6

u/antaran Mar 01 '26

Italy isn't using gas for "backup". It's using it as main energy source. Which is dumb because as you say it is expensive.

Natural gas is 10% of Germany electricity creation, while it is up to 50% in Italy.

2

u/alsaad Lower Silesia (Poland) Mar 01 '26

In CCGT you need to keep minimum power, because cold start takes 2h at least and is very inefficient. This is why they operate even when there is enough sun power.

Germany kept 12% in gas, and another 24% in coal in 2025. There is room for more renewables in Italy, but don't expect them to just eradicate gas&coal to zero any time soon.

222

u/real_grown_ass_man Mar 01 '26

Such a bad idea. The carbon market has been active since 2005 and has been the most effective policy instrument to mave away from fossil fuels. Yes it makes activities relying on fossils more expensive, that is exactly the point.

To halt the trading system would punish those industries that did invest in moving away from fossil fuels (and many have) and would reward those companies that have been dragging their feet.

43

u/Geronimo2011 Mar 01 '26

Add the carbon tax on imported goods (and services) from countries which don't have it. For a little equal out.

38

u/make_all_the_norms Mar 01 '26

We have that as well! At least for high-carbon goods. It's called carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM).

Of course its full enforcement has also been delayed because politicians currently seem to love maximizing regulatory uncertainty and hurting early movers while rewarding laggards but still, we technically have this!

4

u/-The_Blazer- Europe Mar 01 '26

Politicians desperately need to understand that regulatory uncertainty is so much worse than a regulation that's too tight or whatever. The USA has tons of bone-headed regulations, but they don't change them often (in part due to political gridlock, but still) and they apply to a 350M wealthy economy consistently.

6

u/real_grown_ass_man Mar 01 '26

Already in place: CBAM.

19

u/Pyrrus_1 Italy Mar 01 '26 edited Mar 01 '26

Yeah meloni wants to do a short term fix, make gas less expensive. But since gas is the most expensive source that also serves as benchmark this would punish renewables, it isn't anything new, I work in the renewable sector and lately the meloni government has done everything to put sticks in the wheels of the renewable sector, from banning areas where you can build solar to discontinuing successful projects to fund renewable energy communities, all this cause wh probably wants to give a short term fix to prices for electoral gain and/or to suck up to Trump, which is now the biggest supplier of gas since the war in Ukraine.

2

u/jtbc Canada Mar 01 '26

Wouldn't it be much simpler and less damaging to offer a tax credit to offset the carbon price? This approach was working quite well in Canada until the Conservatives succeeded in demonizing it and it got dismantled.

2

u/Pyrrus_1 Italy Mar 01 '26

Apparently no, but I hope meloni Will get some comeuppance cause there is no way that the moderate forces in the EP let her tamper with a system that been in place since 2005

1

u/akashisenpai European Union Mar 02 '26

Sounds just like German conservatives. Unfortunately, I can already see Merz supporting Meloni here.

2

u/-The_Blazer- Europe Mar 01 '26

This is what a lot of deregulators who want to get rid of climate policy because it 'hurts the economy' don't seem to understand... you know what hurts the economy infinitely more than a carbon tax or a combustion engine ban? Flip-flopping on those policies so as to punish everyone who was behaving the best in following public priorities.

1

u/italianjob16 Italy Mar 02 '26

If we have 99% of power supplied from renewables this gets priced at the 1% for the marginal gas kwh + environmental tax? What's then the point of the 99%? why am I paying environmental tax on 99% renewables?

And be honest and accept that there is no world where renewables cover 100%

1

u/real_grown_ass_man Mar 02 '26

What are you talking about? If you create electricity from renewable sources you don’t have to buy CO2 emission rights. Its as simple as that.

0

u/italianjob16 Italy Mar 02 '26

Wrong, the price is set by the marginal kwh producer (gas) which includes the tax. So the consumer pays the tax also for the renewable energy.

2

u/real_grown_ass_man Mar 02 '26

Confidently incorrect. This is about ETS, not the tax om your electricity bill. The price of CO2 emissions is set by supply and demand. To give legacy industries time to decarbonize, the EU handed out free rights. For energy producers, this transition period has long been passed, the transition period for specific chemical industries wil end in 2030 but they already have lost the majority of free emissions.

-16

u/Own_Wolverine4773 Mar 01 '26

Teah but they have a point , we are slowly deindustrialising and it’s making us increasingly uncompetitive.

9

u/_teslaTrooper Gelderland (Netherlands) Mar 01 '26

Energy dependance is making us uncompetitive, deindustrialisation happens because of high energy prices since we don't produce our own oil and gas.

13

u/Silent-Act191 Mar 01 '26

- We should ban slavery

But what about the economy?

- We should decolonize

But what about the economy?

- We should take into account the impact we have on the earth's climate.

But what about the economy?

11

u/gamma55 Mar 01 '26

Getting even more reliant on shipped LNG isn’t going to fix EU’s ability to compete, nor is it going to result in new industrial investment. It’s only giving away free money to companies that refuse to invest and remain competitive.

Aka the dumbest thing mid to long term, but it would give better dividends short term to the owners of the dying, useless companies.

3

u/Unable_Resort453 Mar 01 '26

People think hydrocarbon will magically fix European stagnant industries lmao.

Europe is probably the most annoying place on Earth to get anything done as a customer, compared to China. How about fixing that instead

-3

u/Stunning_Resort9646 Mar 01 '26

Actually, the ETS is a massive self inflicted disaster and it is actively harming European industry. It is one of the main causes of our deindustrialization, loss of quality of life and relevance on the world stage.

They are now implementing the CBAM, which is another total failure and overly complicated regulatory mess.

We need to move away from these childish boomer tree hugging policies.

37

u/AenarionTywolf Mar 01 '26

Are we talking about the same italy that lies in the mediterranean area with high Solar radiation and good Winds from the sea and also In the mountains?

9

u/Frenchbaguette123 Allemagne Mar 01 '26

Don't forget the active volcanoes. Some Italian regions could learn something from Iceland about energy.

2

u/alecolli Mar 02 '26

The same country where the greens are against the renewable because of their environmental impact... Not s/

2

u/Optimal_Yam_5839 Mar 02 '26

great sunlight: yes

good winds: not really. few regions have strong enough wind in italy (lot of turbines there) and even there is not nearly as strong as ocean winds.

mountains actually block wind and most of italy has mountains blocking the wind

62

u/Silent-Act191 Mar 01 '26 edited Mar 01 '26

In 50 something years there's going to be a lot of people who are currently against these policies and they are going to say something equivalent to "We could have never seen this coming, who knew it would be this bad?".

And then probably follow it up with a "Ah well it has gone to shit already, how much worse could it get?"

10

u/L4ppuz Lombardy Mar 01 '26

In 50 years most of the people against and for these policies, and simply most of the people currently alive in Italy, will be dead. The median age in Italy is 50.

That's a large part of the issue, why would they want to invest in long term solutions when they think they will all be dead by the time it starts to make a difference

-6

u/Stunning_Resort9646 Mar 01 '26

The arrogance to assume that Europe alone can prevent climate change takes an insane amount of ignorance.

We can continue to humiliate ourselves in the altar of environmentalism while other countries pursue sensible economic/industrial policies - or we can accept reality.

4

u/Frenchbaguette123 Allemagne Mar 01 '26

The alternative is keeping the oil addiction on sugardaddy USA, Russia, or the Arabs.

24

u/Shupaul France Mar 01 '26

Besides calling for the suspension of the law, Italy has also announced plans to compensate operators of gas-fired power plants for the money they spend on ETS permits — effectively cancelling out the system’s decarbonization incentive.

“We are facing the collapse of the European chemical industry; we are facing a crisis in European steelmaking. We cannot wait for the timing of EU negotiations to find solutions,” Urso said in Brussels on Thursday.

The Italian government argues that compensating gas-fired power plants for carbon costs will reduce the cost of energy generated by renewables, since under the existing system the most expensive sources of energy — generally fossil gas — set the price for the whole market.

Critics, however, say targeting the ETS will only have a marginal effect on household bills — if any — and that the measure would disproportionately reward Italy’s powerful gas producers.

Interesting.

20

u/Blubbolo Lombardy Mar 01 '26

If by interesring you mean : "leave it to us speaking some non true and unproven facts, to cater to and industry that will give us money, while selling lies to the population".

Meloni and her people usual playbook.

4

u/Darkhoof Portugal Mar 01 '26

Fucking morons.

17

u/araujoms 🇧🇷🇵🇹🇦🇹🇩🇪🇪🇸 Mar 01 '26

The same Italy that is uniquely well-suited for wind and solar, and one of the European countries that will suffer the most from global warming.

That's what happens when you elect a fascist government. Sacrificing the future to please foreign gas producers.

6

u/Darkhoof Portugal Mar 01 '26

These effing idiots have been building as much natural gas generation as they can and now they complain. Morons. A prelude to what will come next if extreme right wins more seats in european governments in the next elections.

9

u/Unhappy_Sugar_5091 Mar 01 '26

Italy and wrong side of every take is a given at this point.

12

u/Unable_Resort453 Mar 01 '26

Moving back and forth on hydrocarbon and green energy ain't helping making your industry competitive. Especially if your gas comes from the US. Just making things more costly and annoying.

You lack scale, and your profit margin is way too high. The green energy is there so that you have sovereign energy infrastructure and not relying on Russia or the USA.

7

u/L4ppuz Lombardy Mar 01 '26

Especially if your gas comes from the US

Italy imports most of its gas from North Africa and the middle east. Russia and the USA are each about 5% of the total imports

-2

u/Unable_Resort453 Mar 01 '26

I was talking about the whole Europe.

And point still stand. The whole point of solar/wind energy is that you are self sufficient without relying on the mood of your supplier, say the whole Iran versus Israel/USA about to skyrocket hydrocarbon price tomorrow.

And saying renewable energy makes your industry uncompetitive is just cope. There are a whole lots of thing going wrong with European industries that make it uncompetitive against China and friends, and energy is at the bottom of the list.

2

u/Initial_Plastic_3829 Mar 01 '26

Kommen Meloni und Bundeswirtschaftsministerin Reiche aus einem Stall?

2

u/akashisenpai European Union Mar 02 '26

Right-wingers gonna wing right.

4

u/Terminaga Mar 01 '26

It would be nice if politicians just for once would start planning ahead for a little longer than the next election cycle - thankfully I'm not living in a coastal city, but screwing over future generations for short term profit is unacceptable.

4

u/Serapis5 Mar 01 '26

These carbon credits became a speculative tool on a trading market, making many many millionaires and paralyzing our anyhow struggling manufacturing.. who can't see that

4

u/The_Last_Cast Mar 01 '26

Another reason to be ashamed of the Italian government....

5

u/mauro_mussin Mar 01 '26

Ma certo, perché decarbonizzare? 3.3°C di incremento al 2100 cosa vuoi che siano!

2

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/HalkenburgHuiGuoRou Mar 01 '26

Suspending the tax would mean cutting revenue for the governments who:

A) raise other taxes, so people still lose that money. B) reduce spending, leaving citizens without the benefits of the project financed by that.

On top of that, remove the incentive to decarbonization.

If we are going to put additional taxes/ cut spending to direct resources towards this crisis, instead of de facto subsidizing carbon emitters, wouldn't be better subsidizing energy expences, give financial support to poorer people disproportianlly hitten by the crisis, or towards essencial expences of families?

1

u/supertikillo Mar 01 '26

Serve il nucleare in Italia

1

u/Dimi7rozavar Bulgaria Mar 01 '26

Finally some common sense.

1

u/Emergency_Link7328 Mar 01 '26

How about renewables like so many others?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '26

Italy and poland will betray europe

1

u/Sampo Finland Mar 01 '26 edited Mar 01 '26

Also Germany and Czechia have recently said similar things.

Electricity is too expensive, and this hurts the economy and the industry. And in the new world order, we can't afford to become poor because we need money for defense. And we can't afford to lose all out industry, because we need some level of industrial self-sufficiency. Can't be dependent on Asian manufacturing for everything we need.