This conversation is closed.
After Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl and Fukushima. Do we need to rethink the uses of nuclear energy, regarding pacific and warfare usage?
The experiences that were left by the uses of Nuclear energy are reminders of the danger that this kind of technology is to our lives and environment. Both warfare and pacific usage reclaim its price. The bombs delivered at Hiroshima and Nagasaki caused an instant genocide and the extermination of all natural life around by the explosion’s extreme heat. In addition, the radiation had consequences that lasted several years; the bomb’s explosion creates radioactive dust that pollutes air, water, fields and people. After World War Two, during the Cold War, in 1968 the USA and Russia had enough nuclear arsenals to destroy the planet several times. Now industries use this energy to power their machinery, we use its electricity at home as we use it in transportation. Nevertheless, the events in Chernobyl and Fukushima, the so called pacific use of nuclear energy, showed a great fault as to security, and the increasing numbers of nuclear plants, a lack of interest and investment in ecological and renewable sources and technology. Nowadays, atomic bombs are owned also by China, France, England, Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea and Iran.
Is it necessary to think about the pros and contras of nuclear energy? How can we take side and make this responsibility to participate all of us? How can we lecture the average man and rise a voice that cannot be taken as retrograde?