For what reason, instead of making use of the knowledge that science makes available to us to defend ourselves from the dangers (earthquakes, pandemics and more), we decide, more or less consciously, to resort to the “red lucky horn”, “that we end up electing in our favorite prevention tool”? It is this question that acts as a common thread to the reflection of prof. Giancarlo Neri, author of the essay “The seismic bad luck: when fatalism wins over science”, published by Di Nicolò Edizioni. Already an ordinary of Geophysics at the University of Messina, a member of the National Accademia dei Lincei, Neri is an internationally renowned geophysicist. Like all scientists, the problem of how to encourage the approach of the common reader to themes that risk remaining confined to the circle of specialists, due to too technical and a (often inevitable) self -referentiality, has been the problem of how to encourage the approach of the common reader. The strength of this essay derives from the “simple language”, used by the author, on a short journey (145 pages) between science, school, costume and society.
“Some time ago I listened to the radio – so Neri immediately clarifies what the direction of this” journey “is – and, to the proposal of a political exponent to introduce compulsory insurance on the earthquake risks, the other guest of the transmission replied saying:” Here they are! They want to introduce the tax on seismic bad luck “. This statement was for me a sort of shock because it strongly marked a reality that we all have under the eyes … We all know that from earthquakes we can defend ourselves by implementing some prevention measures, building or renovating the houses in which we live adequately. But something happens that very often prevents us from translating this knowledge into practice. The culture of seismic bad luck is made and the reality of fatalism takes shape ».
First of all there is a cultural issue – the citizens who owns the home are often remained to invest in their safety and, instead, they show themselves to be inclined to invest in more tangible and immediate goods and services, better to buy a new car … – but also a great political question. Despite the proclamations, Italy is a country that does not invest enough on safety, especially in the regions with the highest seismic or hydrogeological risk. That’s why prof. Neri strongly underlines the contribution of science against the inertia of fatalism.
The author makes an excursus on the “Japan model”, a country always indicated as the most virtuous in the key of anti -seismic prevention, even if sometimes even the Japanese sin of underestimation and inefficiency, as was in the case of Fukushima’s nuclear disaster in 2011.
There is a chapter, the seventh, dedicated to the very current theme of the bridge over the Strait. The approach is technical, as regards all the design aspects concerning the resistance of the great work in the event of exceptional winds and destructive earthquakes, even if then Neri makes its personal evaluation: “Once the maximum quality of the project is guaranteed, the realization of the bridge represents an important step under many profiles: some concerning progress and innovation; Others referable to the surveillance that may arise from the execution of the work on a socio-economic level, for a territory whose population tends inexorably to age for the strong emigration of young people in search of a future elsewhere “.
