Commentary on an editorial about Nuclear Energy.

The recently held G8 summit which was held in France could almost be termed a damage control event, as it was taken by unfolding events, not the traditional and always planned agenda issues like economic growth and security of member states.  This year it was the internal unrests in Arab countries especially Libya and the Fukushima nuclear disaster that were the main focus items on the agenda for discussion.

    I think the discussions on the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster, as the editor plainly pointed, were very sticky with all the member countries being huge beneficiaries of Nuclear Energy, especially France, America and even Japan the country in question.  It  was also a very politically sensitive area to trade on countless protests in the member countries.  So after of all the diplomatic gabling, the member states were only able to agree that they need to find safer and more sustainable energy forms, while working on improving safety in nuclear energy, so that they will not be a repeat of Fukushima again.  Only Germany took the bold step by stating that they already have plans in the pipeline to be 100% free of nuclear energy by 2020.  Already they have decommissioned 8 nuclear plants in the last 3months alone.

   The truth is that nuclear energy will constitute a significant chunk of our energy pie, so long we do not have another form of energy to match in volume, economical cost, environmental cost and ,yes, safety.  Unless we can answer all the questions on cost, environment and volume, nuclear energy will still be lighting our homes and factories in a millennium.  I am sure the so called Nuclear Summit, announced by Naoto Kan will also propose the same thing that I have above.

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/editorial/T110528002300.htm