Italy Voted to Reverse a Nearly 40-Year Nuclear Ban. Here's What Changes.
In this article
Bottom line: On September 23, 2026, Italy's Senate gave final approval to a law that lets the government rebuild a legal framework for nuclear power, by a vote of 81–51 with seven abstentions.
The bill had cleared the Chamber of Deputies 155–86 on June 4. It authorizes decrees on reactor licensing, safety, waste and site criteria within 12 months.
It does not build a reactor, and Italy still has no permanent waste repository. Expect years of rulemaking and local fights before any construction.
The vote that wasn't actually quiet
I need to fix my own framing first. This wasn't a quiet vote, and "37 years" undersells the gap.
Italy voted in 1987 to end nuclear power, and its last reactors were shut down by 1990, so the country has gone roughly four decades without domestic nuclear power.
In 2011, after Fukushima, Italians voted again and rejected a restart by a landslide.
That history is why Wednesday's result is notable. The Senate's 81–51 vote finishes a law that Premier Giorgia Meloni's government has pushed as a matter of energy security and climate goals.
Meloni's reaction, as reported by Italian outlets, was "promessa mantenuta," or promise kept.
I haven't interviewed anyone for this piece. What follows is drawn from published reporting, and I've linked it at the end.
What the law actually does
The bill is a delegation law. That means parliament sets the outer boundaries and hands the government the job of writing the detailed rules through legislative decrees.
If you build software, think of it as merging the interface spec while the implementation is still open.
According to reports, the decrees cover:
- Construction and operation of plants
- Hydrogen production using nuclear energy
- Spent fuel management and safety
- New oversight bodies to regulate the sector
The bill is aimed at "next-generation" technologies.
That phrase usually points to small modular reactors and advanced designs, though the reporting I found doesn't name a specific reactor type or vendor.
The clock: 12 months or by year's end?
The timeline is where the reporting diverges. The Associated Press describes a 12-month window for the government to draft implementing decrees.
Environment and Energy Security Minister Gilberto Pichetto Fratin, who sponsored the bill, has said he wants to issue them by the end of this year.
Both can be true, since a deadline is a ceiling and not a target. But this is the first thing to watch. Fast decrees would signal that the government wants investors and utilities to move soon.
Slow ones would suggest the hard questions, especially waste and siting, are still unresolved.
The waste problem hasn't gone away
The most serious complication is one Italy already has. The country still lacks a permanent national repository for radioactive waste from its old nuclear program.
That waste sits at temporary facilities around the country.
That matters for two reasons. It is a practical problem, because new reactors mean more waste and the storage question is already open.
It is also a political one, because any proposed site will meet resistance from the local communities nearby. Reporting on the vote expects opposition to both future reactors and waste sites.
Ask nuclear supporters and opponents anywhere in Europe what stalls projects, and you'll hear about siting and waste as often as engineering.
Public opinion has shifted, especially among the young
A June 2026 survey by the research firm Only Numbers found about 55% of Italians support next-generation nuclear plants.
Support was strongest among younger people, who have no direct memory of Chernobyl.
I'd read that number with care. It measures support for a concept, not for a reactor near your town.
Surveys on nuclear energy often show a gap between general approval and approval of a specific local project.
The 2011 referendum is a reminder that Italian opinion has swung hard in the past, and that it can swing again.
The cost and timeline argument
Not everyone is celebrating. Coverage from EUalive framed the vote as passing amid a row over costs and timelines. The AP also notes that construction of any new reactors is still years away.
That is the sober reading. A framework law creates permission, not power.
Between this vote and electricity on the grid sit licensing, site selection, financing, a waste plan, construction and commissioning.
Nuclear projects elsewhere in Europe have a long record of running over schedule and budget, so the skeptics' concern is not hypothetical.
I couldn't find published cost estimates for Italy's specific plans, and I'm not going to invent one.
What this means for readers
If you work in energy, infrastructure or the tech companies that buy power, a few practical points follow:
1. Don't count on new nuclear in the near term. The AP says reactors are years away. Any plan that assumes Italian nuclear electricity this decade is speculation.
2. Watch the decrees. The details on licensing, safety criteria and site selection will decide whether this is real or symbolic.
3. Watch the waste plan. A credible permanent repository is the clearest sign of seriousness.
4. Watch local politics. Regional and municipal resistance is the likeliest source of delay.
For data-center operators and other big electricity users, the appeal of nuclear is steady, carbon-free baseload power. Italy has now removed a legal barrier to that option.
It has not yet supplied the option.
What I'd keep in mind
A country that shut down its reactors after one disaster and reaffirmed the decision after another has now formally reversed course.
The 55% support figure and the lopsided Chamber and Senate votes suggest the shift is real. The unresolved waste question and the long road to any groundbreaking suggest it's early.
The law is a beginning, and its consequences will play out in decrees, site fights and budgets over the next several years. The actual test isn't Wednesday's vote.
It's whether Italy can pick a place for the waste and a place for the first reactor, and get both accepted.
Would you support a new reactor or a waste site near where you live, or does the answer change when it's your backyard?
Sources:
- Italy's parliament paves the way for a return to nuclear energy (ABC News/AP)
- 40 Years After Chernobyl, Italy Greenlights a Return to Nuclear Energy (U.S. News)
- The Senate approves the Pichetto delegation on nuclear energy (La Sicilia)
- Italian deputies back nuclear power return (Brussels Signal)
- Italy clears path for nuclear comeback amid row over costs and timelines (EUalive)
- Nucleare, il Senato dà il via libera definitivo (Bull Source)
A note on this draft. The requested format was an interview-style feature, but I had no real interviews to draw on, so I built it from published reporting instead of inventing sources or quotes.
I also dropped "Quietly" and "37-Year" from the requested title because the vote was widely covered and the gap is closer to four decades.
The piece runs shorter than the 1,500–2,000 word target because I didn't want to pad it beyond what the sources support. Suggested title: Italy's Senate Voted 81–51 to Bring Back Nuclear Power.
What Happens Next?
