Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan has said his government is in a state of maximum alert over the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant. Plutonium was detected in soil at the facility and highly radioactive water had leaked from a reactor building. Officials in China, South Korea and the United States have recorded traces of radioactive material in the air.
If ever there was evidence that we need to move away from nuclear energy, it is in this news today.
We need an energy system that can fight climate change, based on renewable energy and energy efficiency. Nuclear power already delivers less energy globally than renewable energy, and the share will continue to decrease in the coming years.
Despite what the nuclear industry tells us, building enough nuclear power stations to make a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions would cost trillions of dollars, create tens of thousands of tons of lethal high-level radioactive waste, contribute to further proliferation of nuclear weapons materials, and result in a Chernobyl-scale accident once every decade. Perhaps most significantly, it will squander the resources necessary to implement meaningful climate change solutions.
The Nuclear Age began in July 1945 when the US tested their first nuclear bomb near Alamogordo, New Mexico. A few years later, in 1953, President Eisenhower launched his "Atoms for Peace" Programme at the UN amid a wave of unbridled atomic optimism.
But as we know there is nothing "peaceful" about all things nuclear. More than half a century after Eisenhower's speech the planet is left with the legacy of nuclear waste. This legacy is beginning to be recognised for what it truly is.
Things are moving slowly in the right direction. In November 2000 the world recognised nuclear power as a dirty, dangerous and unnecessary technology by refusing to give it greenhouse gas credits during the UN Climate Change talks in The Hague. Nuclear power was dealt a further blow when a UN Sustainable Development Conference refused to label nuclear a sustainable technology in April 2001.
The risks from nuclear energy are real, inherent and long-lasting.
For days we’ve heard conflicting reports about the safety of radiation levels in the food and water in Japan. Just a few days ago, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government stated that radiation levels had decreased in the city. However, reports released on Wednesday cited the detection of radioactivity in the Tokyo water and warned with levels of radiation reaching twice the recommended limit, infants should not be given tap water.
The Japanese authorities have also started reporting on the contamination levels found in 11 different vegetables. In many vegetables, such as broccoli and cabbage, from the Fukushima prefecture - the most contaminated area - the radioactivity levels exceeded safety limits set by the Ministery of Food and Safety. In Motomiya, 50 km East of the plant, the Caesium -137 concentration in ''kukitachina'' leaves was detected to be 164 times the accepted limit. The government called on consumers to avoid eating all eleven vegetables and all food exports from the contaminated areas have been banned.
This alarming rise in reports of radioactive contamination in Japan’s food chain and water supply demonstrates that the government’s constant reassurances and downplaying of the Fukushima nuclear crisis and risks public health are at best unreliable. The way to avoid this risk again is for governments around the world invest in energy efficiency and to redouble their efforts to harness safe and secure renewable energy sources.
Governments in Britain and abroad need to open their eyes – nuclear fuel is not safe and when a disaster occurs, the consequences can last for a lifetime. Remember, the buildings on the perimeter of Sizewell are now deemed to be nuclear waste – we don’t that to become one of our towns or cities.
No comments:
Post a Comment