Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant - Essay Example

? Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Introduction Recently, there has been debate on the viability of nuclear energy in the world, especially relating to the challenges that it presents in its development, usage and disposal. The crisis that occurred at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan subsequent to the disastrous earthquake brought much deliberation concerning the safety and practicability of the use of nuclear energy as compared to other sources (Tsubokura et al, 2012). The realities of the disaster at Fukushima can be described by such scary anecdotes with the ability to threaten the earth, yet the world is not doing anything to know the cause and the likely consequences of a similar occurrence in future. This happened at a period when there existed improved awareness regarding the usage and application of nuclear energy, and the sustained intensification of the erection of nuclear reactors to produce energy to service the ever-increasing demand for energy. After the incident of the Fukushima catastrophe, authorities have of late come to reconsider the safety protocols and designs of nuclear reactors as a mode of becoming equipped for impending calamities in case they do occur. However, most of those charged with making policies contend that nuclear power is fundamental in bridging the energy insufficiency regularly experienced by most nations because of increasing needs for energy due to industrial development. The nuclear calamity at Fukushima has accentuated majority of the arguments and counterarguments concerning the dire need to accept and adopt nuclear energy (Pineda, 2013). This paper seeks to evaluate the viability of the use of nuclear energy as compared to the challenges that it presents to the contemporary world in both the United States and other nations. There are many impediments and challenges to nuclear power usage and adoption both within the United States and many other countries globally. Its adoption in the generation of power has undergone numerous challenges in both the United States and internationally beginning from the catastrophic nuclear calamities that occurred at the Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island facility in 1979 and the Chernobyl fire tragedy in Ukraine (Davis and National Bureau of Economic Research, 2011). Most people argue, which I agree with, that the use of nuclear energy has the potential to bring about climatic variations; nevertheless, there have remained apprehensions that despite its acceptance, energy costs are expected to upsurge which is a major public fear. Nuclear power setups have encountered resistance in the modern-day world owing to disagreement in relations to its safety that can be owed to reactors failure because of inadequate training, lack of or absence of maintenance, deprived designs and lack of adequate research relating to the complications bedeviling the plants. Similarly, the issue or problem of storing wastes from nuclear reactors has proven to be administratively problematic due to the environment conservational anxieties raised by nation-states and other troubled stakeholders (Gleason et al. 2001). I have already come across literature that suggests that many countries on planet earth have protested or expressed their suspicions that the wastewater emanating from the nuclear plants may possibly have reached into waterbodies, as a result polluting it and making it unfit for human consumption (Futami, 2013). In order to ensure that nuclear energy remains both a viable option for energy for the United States and other nations, governments have enacted nuclear programs that are multifaceted in nature. This means that the regulations and policies address the barriers and the challenges inhibiting the development of nuclear energy and ensuring its safety in terms of the health of human beings (Sidel & Levy, 2007). This has been achieved through the addressing of opportunities that aim at developing new technologies and the intellectual capital to shape the global nuclear energy policy and infrastructure. This entails that we as the US can lead all other nations in enacting laws and guidelines that are designed at monitoring nuclear reactors especially relating to augmented expenses of commencement and building as well as limitations in issuance of licenses. Though the use of nuclear energy has its advantages and risks associated with it, we as the society can do more to ensure the better understanding of its use and address safety concerns. Ignoring the atomic theory because of its complexity will not make it go away whatsoever. I base this argument on the premise that having too much nuclear energy has the possibility of making the world a risky place due to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and nuclear wastes from reactors contaminating the environment. We should therefore engage in a sober debate and ensure that we use nuclear energy only for peaceful and economic purposes. It is therefore commendable that there are already attempts by countries in the world led by the United States in negotiations aimed at preventing Iran to stop the enrichment of the weapons through nuclear technology. Therefore, society should be implored to use nuclear technology only as the last hope or means of energy in order to make the world a better place but insist on the green energy such as solar and wind energy. Conclusion Since the advent of the nuclear era, the United States of America has been the dominant power in matters of nuclear energy and has played a key role in controlling the proliferation of nuclear regime as well as safety norms as shown by its approach in dealing with Iran and North Korea (Ragaini et al, 2006). This can be made possible by a strong domestic nuclear program and expertise as well as operations in the field of nuclear technology though the ability to control the proliferation of nuclear energy. Through the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) we can emphasize the need to have an independent regulatory regime, waste management and policies aimed at making the world a better place in terms of nuclear power generation and use. We can also restore the competitiveness of nuclear energy through government funding of exports with a program statement supporting nuclear-powered technology. The Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future stresses that the production of nuclear power must be well prepared for the challenges of the nuclear power generation from construction to the decommissioning of the reactors in order to mitigate against the losses that are likely to occur in case of a nuclear accident (United States, 2012). In order that nations manage the challenges posed by nuclear energy and its development, nations must develop frameworks that would enable them to have a clear means of dealing with the effects that may arise if they become a problem. Through such initiatives, we will be able to forestall the occurrence of such disasters associated with nuclear energy as it happened in Fukushima, Japan. References Davis, L. W., & National Bureau of Economic Research. (2011). Prospects for nuclear power. Cambridge, Mass: National Bureau of Economic Research. Futami T (2013) Three Losses and Three Diversities- How high is enough for Tsunami Barrier? J Nucl Ene Sci Power Generat Technol 2:2. Gleason, J., Kranowitz, J., Leary, P., National Parks and Conservation Association., Southern Environmental Law Center., & Izaak Walton League of America. (2001). Power that pollutes: Virginia's outdated power plants and the state of the air. Washington, D.C: National Parks Conservation Association. International Seminar on Nuclear War and Planetary Emergencies, Ragaini, R. C., & Zichichi, A. (2006). International Seminar on Nuclear War and Planetary Emergencies, 34th session: Energy, nuclear and renewable energy ... : "E. Majorana" Centre for Scientific Culture, Erice, Italy, 19-24 Aug. 2005. New Jersey: World Scientific. Pineda, C. (2013). Devil's Tango: How I Learned the Fukushima Step by Step. Chicago: Wings Press. Sidel, V.W., & Levy, B.S. (n.d.). Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons: Opportunities for Control and Abolition. American Journal of Public Health 97(9): 1589–1594. Tsubokura, M., Gilmour, S., Takahashi, K., Oikawa, T., & Kanazawa, Y. (January 01, 2012). Internal radiation exposure after the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster. Jama : the Journal of the American Medical Association, 308, 7, 669-70. United States. (2012). Blue Ribbon Commission report: Hearing before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, second session, to receive testimony on the final report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, February 2, 2012. Washington: U.S. G.P.O. Read More