In the last few years we have been inundated with images of immense devastation on a regular basis. From the earthquake in Haiti, the floods in Pakistan, the Asian Tsunami to the more recent earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, we have seen human misery on display on an unprecedented scale. What differentiates this calamity from the others is not only its epic scale but also the fact that a natural disaster gave way to the creation of a man made disaster which is proving to be deadlier than what nature had intended.
As we watch the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant descend into certain meltdown, the all too familiar feeling of a catastrophe unfolding causes extreme discomfort. Like watching another giant wave crest on the horizon, and not knowing which way to run, the people of Japan watch and wait as information about the situation gets hazier by the hour. As experts and pundits on television ponder worst case scenarios, mentioning Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, images of men in Hazmat suits screening people in plain clothes, conjure up unnerving visions of a nuclear apocalypse. Ever since the atomic bomb was dropped on this nation a generation ago, the Japanese have pondered a nuclear holocaust in all avenues of their popular culture. Now that vision seems to coming true with panic lurking just under the surface.
Since the moment humans began harnessing energy from splitting atoms, there has always been grave cause for concern. Ever since Enrico Fermi demonstrated the first self sustaining nuclear chain reaction there has been serious debate about its promise versus its danger. Much like the debate surrounding genetic technology and its far reaching impact in an ethical world, nuclear technology has had its strong critics who saw the monster that lay within. That monster was on full display when it scorched Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Everyone including Albert Einstein, who once championed nuclear technology, saw the sheer horror that lay within, when left to man's devious actions. After the savagery of an atomic explosion one would have expected a roll back on nuclear technology. But in direct contradiction to logic, human diabolical duplicity prevailed, and the technology leaped forward making giant strides. Sixty six years later, the planet is now over populated with nuclear bombs and power plants, with more and more nations thirsting to get their hands on this technology. The tiny earthquake prone island nation of Japan has 54 nuclear power plants on its back, the United States has 104, France has 58, Russia has 32, UK has 19, altogether 439 nuclear plants are in operation across the planet.
The proponents of nuclear technology claim it is safe, clean and cost effective and is the only way to feed the insatiable human apetite for energy. The situation unfolding in Fukushima disproves this idea outright, much like Chernobyl did in 1986. No matter how much the scientists and their sponsors prove to the public that nuclear technology is safe, and the advances that have been made in sixty years make it even safer, the nature of this creation is such that if it gets out of its containment the destruction it causes can in no shape or form counter the good it does. While this technology may be "green" by not emitting pollutants into the atmosphere, it makes up for it by producing deadly nuclear waste which has no sustainable way of disposing yet. For the last six or more decades the planet has been swallowing spent fuel rods into its crust as though it were an infinite reservoir. We all have come to know in recent years, that everything on this planet is finite and if we do not take that into account, we lay the foundation for our own doom.
As the vivid descriptions of what high dozes of nuclear radiation can do to the human body are contemplated, what no one is foreseeing are the long lasting effects of such a disaster. The nuclear Tsunami that invisibly washes over people, destroys the body at cellular level causing cancer. The area around the disaster site will not be habitable for hundreds of years to come. The area around Chernobyl two decades later is still a wasteland and anything that grows in its vicinity is poison. And the stories the walking dead of Kiev have told since that blast, are haunting. I dread hearing stories coming out of Japan, especially having seen what they have already been through with the earthquake and the tidal wave.
Watching what is taking place in Japan, I wanted to immediately know how close I was living to a nuclear power plant. I found out that I was just under fifty miles from an aging nuclear plant called Indian Point located in Buchanan, New York. 20 million people live in the vicinity of this plant which went online in 1962. With three reactor cores on location, this plant has had issues in the past, where it has leaked radiation into the atmosphere and water. The supporters of this plant, claim it is safe and has done a phenomenal job in keeping pollutants out of the air while meeting 30% of New York city's gluttonous appetite for electricity. They also say unlike the Japanese reactor this is not in an area of seismic activity or a Tsunami, therefore there is no cause for concern. Both Chernobyl and Three Mile Island incidents were not caused as a result of any natural disaster, but because of human error. So the reason to have a monster inside an aging shell, so close to such a densely populated region is inexcusable. I would rather have Times Square go dark few times a week, than contemplate what the Japanese are facing in my backyard. In contradiction some politicians like the New York governor are calling for the closure of Indian Point, but the nature of humanity is to live on borrowed time. So for the one hundred or so nuclear plants that feed the incessant and infinite need for electricity in the United States, a time of reckoning has come. For the people who live near these contained monsters, the time is here to ask, how safe do you feel and how much are you willing to sacrifice to get your energy via other means.
Yes nuclear power plants provide jobs and energy to millions of people. Seeing what is taking place at the Fukushima Daiichi powerplant one cannot help asking the fundamental question "is it worth it". More nations around the world want this technology. Either claiming to meet the growing need for energy or just as an excuse to build an atomic bomb. Ironically India recently signed a multi billion dollar deal with Japan to purchase nuclear fuel and technology. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are vying do build nuclear power plants, mostly to counter Iran's moves. Israel already possesses this demon as do India and Pakistan. The Germans and the Chinese have suspended their nuclear projects immediately as a result of the present disaster.
As the Japanese catastrophe forces us to examine a dooms day scenario, supporters of nuclear power plants, like Fareed Zakaria are asking us to look at the present disaster in context and not get usurped by the shock value the word "nuclear" conjures up. The age old argument, that more people die in car accidents and coal and oil kill more people than nuclear energy has been effectively used in a short sighted manner. What they do not address are the long lasting effects of a nuclear disaster. Those that linger on for generations, contaminating the food chain and causing ghastly genetic mutations and cancer.
Are we as a people willing and able to honestly look at what we have created in nuclear technology or are we going to continue to live in denial until the next big disaster. From my estimation, the Japanese situation will soon move off the headline. The harrowing stories of the aftermath will shake us to the bone. But we will go back to our old ways until the next disaster, basing the idea of "safety" on the death toll statistic. It is what we always do. It is what it is.
As the Japanese catastrophe forces us to examine a dooms day scenario, supporters of nuclear power plants, like Fareed Zakaria are asking us to look at the present disaster in context and not get usurped by the shock value the word "nuclear" conjures up. The age old argument, that more people die in car accidents and coal and oil kill more people than nuclear energy has been effectively used in a short sighted manner. What they do not address are the long lasting effects of a nuclear disaster. Those that linger on for generations, contaminating the food chain and causing ghastly genetic mutations and cancer.
Are we as a people willing and able to honestly look at what we have created in nuclear technology or are we going to continue to live in denial until the next big disaster. From my estimation, the Japanese situation will soon move off the headline. The harrowing stories of the aftermath will shake us to the bone. But we will go back to our old ways until the next disaster, basing the idea of "safety" on the death toll statistic. It is what we always do. It is what it is.
