The Nazi regime was easily a calamity. But as compensation for bearing this hurdle, we received an interesting object- a form of energy.

Nuclear. Berlin of 1938 witnessed something very interesting. After years of similar ideas being experimented by people, German chemists Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassman discovered the phenomenon of a neutron, when collided with an atom, dividing the atom along with a great amount of energy released. This energy is compounded exponentially when a lot of atoms surround the division of one. A consequential division of several atoms releases a gargantuan amount of energy.

At the time of the invention, physicists were more concerned about the potential power of this phenomenon being used by the warmongers as a weapon of mass destruction. This thought easily superseded another that would gain attention only sometime later- as a tool of satisfying human energy requirement, a basic commodity that was growing insatiable by the day due to the human population explosion.

Despite our knowledge and capability, we still are yet to use this energy to its maximum potential. The intended substitute to the slow poison of fossil fuels is yet to note mass implementation. Only three countries- France, Slovakia and Ukraine- obtain more than half their energy from nuclear sources. A natural concern therefore arises about the big-brawny consumers: India (3.1%) and China (5%)? Oppenheimers, dive in!

Too dangerous?

Chernobyl is indeed the first word that springs to mind of the critical in this topic. And truly, the human error and Reactor No. 4 on 26 April 1986 that initiated this explosion was truly one of the most calamitous to exist. The Japanese government is under international condemnation, for releasing the nuclear water created at Fukushima into the Pacific. Every French shipment of nuclear waste into Germany is met with nationwide protests. In fact, there is an entire political party solely aiming at the collapse of nuclear energy. Each of these protestors represents fear, fear of what happened at Chernobyl and the bouts of cancers.

The guilt is not with the energy but with the lack of awareness. It is imperative to change the mentality from the Cold War era to the current age.

The majority of the notions are untrue. Nuclear energy contributes only 0.005% of an average American’s radiation (keeping in mind that the US produces the largest amount of nuclear energy in the world.)! That is less than the radiation one is subjected to during a CT scan or a flight from New York to Tokyo. The deaths-per-terawatt energy produced is a hallmark criterion for the sustainability of an energy source. Any guesses for nuclear? It is 0.03, while draconian coal hits the 25 deaths mark. Humans now boast of the pebble-bed nuclear reactor technology, which along with adequate human competence and appropriate site selection, render nuclear meltdowns not possible. The World Health Organization had the audacity to declare work in a nuclear reactor to be safer than a 9-to-5 job in a metropolitan. Impressive research from the MIT fantasized 1000 methods to win the Earth a 0-carbon lifestyle. And each had nuclear power plants in it. And Fukushima is impossible.

TOO EXPENSIVE?

True, the first glance may confirm this suspicion. A nuclear reactor of 1 gigawatt requires 5.4 billion USD to be constructed, and cost upkeep compelled the nuclear reactor at Diablo Canyon to shut. However, what about the blunder of proliferating nuclear weapons? The US alone spent 44 billion USD on nuclear warheads alone. Countries reeling under economic struggles like North Korea spent ginormous amounts on nuclear weapons, keeping in mind their current nuclear submarine launch. The question culminates not at just nuclear weapons, but other unnecessary warfare methods, where man assaults man. This unnecessary augmentation of Weapons of Mass Destruction not only put us farther from winning our aim of achieving sustainable development but also nudge us closer than ever to extinction.

Sanctimoniousness at its odious worst.

THE WASTE?

Nuclear waste is recyclable. It is not limited to just the amount of uranium and plutonium available on Earth. Used uranium-235 can be used again, by mixing it with fresh uranium or plutonium in new rods. Further, designs have been improvised, such as the sodium-cooled fast reactor, which are capable of utilizing used material for energy generation due to their facilitation of neutron fission without being slowed down.

Approximately 97% of the plutonium used is recyclable. The capabilities of this form of energy are far better than the conventional natural gas and coal.

Another report expressed fear of pollution generation in the construction of nuclear reactors. Already, 10% of the global energy is nuclear. A slow process of propagation would suffice just as much.

WHY NOT OTHER renewables?

True, other renewable sources like wind, water and the Sun are safer and even more eco-friendly. However, these are incompetent of producing energy sufficient to meet the requirements of our world of 8 billion. They are, however, efficient supplements intended for light to medium energy production. Countries, like Norway, are not gifted with vast amounts of sunlight or water to meet their energy demands. Here, these forms are not an option.

It is indeed this global implementability that makes nuclear energy such a talented successor.

Nuclear energy, simply put, is a giant chained by undeserved lambasting. We urgently require to stop fueling this colossal rate of non-renewable resource consumption that is destroying our environment and reducing our prosperity. We face indeed in climate change a formidable adversary, something that has wiped out 2 million people and 5.3 billion USD. The opportunity to emerge victorious has come once, and is not going to return.