Learning from Japan's nuclear crisis

The recent devastation in Japan, caused by earthquake and tsunami, raises some pertinent questions about the disaster preparedness of countries across the globe. Though there many susceptible areas which need attention for immediate action for rehabilitation, the major one is the nuclear power plant safety because of its wide range impact on the environment. Being in an energy-hungry world, thanks to the rapid industrialization and urbanization that are catching up emerging economies, most developed and developing countries are opting for clean-energy technology such as nuclear power plants, without even considering the potential risks attached to them.

For records sake, the last 50 years in human progress have witnessed to the huge nuclear disasters that have emerged from critical accidents such as Chernobyl and Tokaimura; by natural calamities such as Fukushima and Three Mile Island; or by human errors such as Canadian Manhattan Project. It's now the time for the pro-nuclear communities to learn the lessons from Japan's nuclear crisis that attracted the huge criticisms from the environmental activists and ecologists across the globe. As most nuclear scientists claim that nuclear power is the most environment-friendly energy source, it's now a serious proposition for them to ensure how they can build a safety mechanism for plants to withstand the world's worst natural calamities, be it a magnitude-10 earthquake or a high-powered tsunami with epicenter as close to the location of the plant, or a man-made disaster like missile attack or dropping a nuclear bomb during war.

Let's look at the helplessness of Japan while fighting relentlessly to avoid the nuclear disaster due to power backup failure in the plant. This triggered a huge radioactive radiation upto 5 on a maximum severity scale of 7. The unscientific methods used there like pouring sea water from the top to cool the reactors display the extreme exigencies that a economically developed country even doesn't mind to follow not only to block the simmering situation, but also to ensure larger environment safety, which might trespass to bordering countries. So here arises a series of questions that Japan had never attempted to address before deploying these nuclear plants. First, the reactors used in Fukushima Daiichi were 40 years old and were Generation II types, which carry more risks than the Generation III and III+ reactors. Second, the power backup diesel generators were housed in an underground building close to the coast, so once a 7-metre tsunami flooded the room, the power generators failed to work. Third, there was no tertiary power supply to the reactors to trigger cooling process. And there are many other serious questions on the designing of the entire structure of the nuclear complex so close to a series of fault lines around Fukushima.

Now this is a strong message for the countries which are opting for large-scale deployment of nuclear plants for power generation. Before moving ahead, they shouldn't ignore the mistakes of Japan's recent nuclear crisis. Maybe, they can then avoid some potentials risks stored in for them along the life cycle of those plants.