August 6, 1945 is the day when the first ever atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Hiroshima and three days later, a second bomb devastated Nagasaki. “Let all the souls here rest in peace, as we will never repeat this mistake” a message scripted on a commemorative plaque in downtown Hiroshima reads. An estimated 140,000 died in Hiroshima, many of them in weeks and months after the blast from the effects of radiation exposure. In Nagasaki, about 74,000 people were killed almost immediately, and a similar number was injured. The death toll is estimated at 80,000. The bomb affected people would later suffer from the aftereffects of radiation exposure, including malignant tumors and leukemia. The devastation to human lives caused by weapons of mass destruction on those fateful days is a reminder once again to work for a peaceful and nuclear free global order.
While the debate on nuclear power is technical the use and misuse of energy has political implications. Interestingly, those who defend use of nuclear energy give moral, economic and political arguments. The famous Russian scientist Dr Andrei Sakharov once said that nuclear energy would sustain the comfort and quality of life for generations to come. The economists would argue that it would create alternate sources of energy at cheaper cost and for US business the export of nuclear reactors has over the years become a paying proposition. The political defense is that it will help assert national sovereignty (case of India and Pakistan) through deterrence of enemy attack. Interestingly, another factor compelling the US and its allies to develop nuclear energy is that they do not want to continue their dependence on Arab oil. At the end of the day whatever the argument regarding harnessing energy, the very use of nuclear energy carries its misuse. For to fabricate nuclear weapons one of the ingredient needed is fissionable material such as uranium or plutonium of sufficient enrichment. And fissile material is good for two things. One is boiling water, the other is making bombs. With the plutonium that a person can carry with one hand a bomb could be made with the power of the one that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At the same time, a ton of uranium can make enough steam to generate a year’s electricity for a mini city.
The irony of it all is that the world’s fuel for electricity is the fuel for its most terrifying weapons. The main point to be remembered in the debate on the use and misuse of nuclear energy is that the use of nuclear power for civilian use like electricity cannot be separated from its use for military or defense purposes. The use of nuclear energy carries its misuse. Weapons capability comes with the development of nuclear powers. The issue that faces mankind is, should we takes both electricity and bombs or suppress them both? In the aftermath of the recent tsunami (natural disaster) that destroyed a nuclear plant in Japan and the fear of large scale radiation, besides the danger of terrorists getting access to nuclear materials, one wonders if nuclear energy will ever be safe and secure. A rethink on its energy use and the prospect of developing safer non-nuclear technology should be pondered upon by world governments, scientists, international bodies and policy makers.
While the debate on nuclear power is technical the use and misuse of energy has political implications. Interestingly, those who defend use of nuclear energy give moral, economic and political arguments. The famous Russian scientist Dr Andrei Sakharov once said that nuclear energy would sustain the comfort and quality of life for generations to come. The economists would argue that it would create alternate sources of energy at cheaper cost and for US business the export of nuclear reactors has over the years become a paying proposition. The political defense is that it will help assert national sovereignty (case of India and Pakistan) through deterrence of enemy attack. Interestingly, another factor compelling the US and its allies to develop nuclear energy is that they do not want to continue their dependence on Arab oil. At the end of the day whatever the argument regarding harnessing energy, the very use of nuclear energy carries its misuse. For to fabricate nuclear weapons one of the ingredient needed is fissionable material such as uranium or plutonium of sufficient enrichment. And fissile material is good for two things. One is boiling water, the other is making bombs. With the plutonium that a person can carry with one hand a bomb could be made with the power of the one that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At the same time, a ton of uranium can make enough steam to generate a year’s electricity for a mini city.
The irony of it all is that the world’s fuel for electricity is the fuel for its most terrifying weapons. The main point to be remembered in the debate on the use and misuse of nuclear energy is that the use of nuclear power for civilian use like electricity cannot be separated from its use for military or defense purposes. The use of nuclear energy carries its misuse. Weapons capability comes with the development of nuclear powers. The issue that faces mankind is, should we takes both electricity and bombs or suppress them both? In the aftermath of the recent tsunami (natural disaster) that destroyed a nuclear plant in Japan and the fear of large scale radiation, besides the danger of terrorists getting access to nuclear materials, one wonders if nuclear energy will ever be safe and secure. A rethink on its energy use and the prospect of developing safer non-nuclear technology should be pondered upon by world governments, scientists, international bodies and policy makers.
