March 11th will mark 6 years since Japanese Earthquake, and while most of the damage has since been fixed. However, one area where destruction wreaked havoc hasn’t even begun to be repaired, that is the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, the site of a level 7 nuclear meltdown, the only such event in human nuclear history the 20 kilometre exclusion around the plant including nearby towns and villages remain completely uninhabited by the regions habitants. While unlike the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster, no loss of life was recorded, this does not take away from the risk that this structure continues to pose 6 years on.
The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant continued to release radiation into the atmosphere posing a number of significant environmental issues. Is nuclear energy safe? Is it reasonable for us to risk potential nuclear disaster in a work that continues to demand more energy? These questions can be pointed towards Britain as following the decision to construct a new nuclear power plant in Hinkley Point, Somerset in the south of the country with a majority of the funding coming from French state-owned energy supplier EDF Energy and Chinese state-owned CGN. However, while the UK is not at risk of environmental disasters as Japan questions can still be raised towards the use of foreign contractors to construct the plant. If the move was done to save money instead of using a British firm shouldn’t this be concerning? Is your nuclear power plant an area in which you want to be saving money? Especially when you’re hiring a country with a less than great record in infrastructure construction quality?
As scientist and engineers continue to try and repair the damage caused by the disaster the world, and The Occasional, will have to look at the safety behind nuclear energy, if 2 is too many, what do we say when the next nuclear disaster occurs?