Looking toward the compounded disaster in Japan, I can't help but think back to the first time I heard about nuclear energy and the very real possibilities of long term destruction.
At the time I was living in Santa Cruz and there were many protests occurring in the California community around this issue. It was the early 1970s and at the time the Three Mile Island meltdown had not yet occurred (1979), nor had the Chernobyl disaster (1986). But early on, there were many who felt the possibility for man-made or natural accidents was very real, and frankly, this fear has been borne out in Japan.
The unraveling situation in Fukushima should give us all pause... is nuclear power really the best possible solution for supplying our energy needs? Especially when the potential for catastrophic nuclear meltdown is always part of the equation.
As of today, the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) is reporting the current situation at the disabled plant as “very serious.” While precautions are underway to prevent contamination of water and food sources, radiation leaking from the damaged storage tanks has escaped into the sea and soil surrounding the plant. But I want to know exactly what “very serious” means in the scheme of life... I guess I want some reassurance that the residents living in the area affected by this situation will ultimately go home without having to worry about cancer down the road. Rather presumptuous of me...
No comments:
Post a Comment