>They are so safe that nobody has ever attempted a terrorist attack against them since the first fission reactor (1941)

Attempts are made regularly, and nuclear plants all over the world implemented additional security measures after 9/11.

"A foiled Chechen rebel assault on the Russian city of Nalchik in October 2005 would have involved an attempt to hijack and fly one of five aircraft into a nuclear power station. Papers released in the UK in February 2005 under the Freedom of Information Act (2000) revealed there were more than 40 cases of potential security breaches at UK civil nuclear sites from 2004 to 2005."

https://www.rusi.org/publication/countering-threats-nuclear-...

>why are Italians like me paying twice as much for electricity as the French, even though 70% of their energy comes from uranium and 0% of ours

It's complex but a simplified answer is that Italy pays what it actually costs, while the French leaves a lot of the cost to their children.

The children (of the people who built the french nuclear plants) recently had to pay over 50 bn euros to cover the debts of EDF, and will likely have to pay another ?? bn to cover lack of maintenance on the aging reactors. (Google it). For 50+ years, france sold nuclear electricity at a loss, mostly unknowingly.

Once they have paid the sins of the parents, the remaining costs to maintain the plants for another 20+ years again will likely be postponed to the next generation, since covering the cost today would make the electricity too expensive to sell.

Note that France is running their economy at a much larger deficit than Italy for the past few years. Nuclear power that is not paid by electricity consumers now, but instead by the government, is of course not the entire explanation but it's part of it.