Japan’s Earthquake Crisis and Nuclear Energy Debate

Image of smoking Fukushima facility from CNA

The recent earthquake-tsunami disaster in Japan renewed worldwide concern over the use of nuclear energy as several reactors at the ageing Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station have been besieged by fires and explosions, causing alarm from surrounding populace over radiation leaks.

The debate over nuclear energy has been an ongoing one as our modern world grapples with the need to weigh the high risks of such energy use against depleting fossil fuels and increasing energy demands. A nice background of the debate is available on BBC while a more in-depth view of the opposing views from various quarters is also accessible on Debatepedia.

Is nuclear energy justified and should it be expanded?

Should Singapore adopt nuclear energy in the future?


4 thoughts on “Japan’s Earthquake Crisis and Nuclear Energy Debate

  1. No doubt at all. I always view nuclear energy as one of the best alternative energy sources. It is effective and it generates a lot of energy to support the industries.

    Of course, the radiation is the biggest threat of all about this nuclear energy. Many people who are against nuclear energy is always talking about the danger of radiation. They always remind us with Chernobyl tragedy.

    Fukushima incident is a very unlucky situation for Japan. After horrible earthquake followed by tsunami, they now must face the danger of radiation. The massive 9.0 earthquake disrupts the nuclear power plants.

    Japan, a country who wants to reduce their dependency of foreign oil, sees no option but building nuclear power plants. It is a very wise decision. Imagine the money they need to pay for the foreign oil. It harms the environment as well if there is exploitation of oil well due to rising demand of oil.

    I have no doubt Japan people can tackle this horrible radiation threat. I believe they have learnt a lot from Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings in 1945.

    In Singapore, we must look the voices of the people. It is obvious that planting nuclear power plant is a very highly debat-able political decisions. Moreover, Singapore must make sure that there are enough educated workers to control the nuclear plants — if they decide to build one. There is no doubt that nuclear power greatly reduces foreign oil dependency.

  2. I think that nuclear energy is justified. though it carries with it threats and risks, I still believe that nuclear plants should be installed as they reduce our dependancy on fossil fuels. Thus it acts as an alternative source of energy. Nuclear plants also provide cleaner energy and reduce the harm done to the environment.

    Yet I do not believe that Singapore should install nuclear plants. Firstly, there’s a lack of space. Building a nuclear plant would consume a large amount of space, something which Singapore does not have in abundance. Building such a plant would mean the migration of affected paople to other parts of Singapore. Furthermore, the miniature size of Singapiore also works against it as a leakage or harm in the the nuclear plant would lead to severe destruction to the country and cause great inconvenience and danger to countries in the surrounding region. I believe that only countries with sufficient amount of land should build nuclear plants as they might be able to contain the harms of the plant in and around the region and not let it spread out of control. Though building a nuclear plant is advantageous, I believe that a small country like Singapore should not undertake such a task as the risks outweigh the benefits.

  3. Nuclear energy is justified and should definitely be expanded given safety regulations are revised and consistently enforced.

    Singapore should not adopt nuclear energy. Firstly, nuclear reactors have to be located at least 40km to 50km away from residental areas to ensure safety, and this is clearly impossible in Singapore due to land constraints. Instead we should implent the use of solar energy as Singapore is tropical country that receives sunlight all year round. This has already been put to place as 1 or 2 HDB blocks have been used as test subjects with solar panels placed on their roofs, with the building running totally on solar energy.

    Singapore is a knowledge-based country equipped with cutting-edge technology and infrastructure to support the building of the nuclear power stations. Moreover, Singapore has been known to be a disaster-free zone minimizing the chances of natural disasters hitting the nuclear power stations.

  4. Nuclear energy is justified as it is relatively “cleaner” to our environment despite the danger that comes with it. Moreover, the high output of nuclear plants can help quell mankind’s increasing need for energy. Even though it has many potential risks as can be seen from the recent disaster in Japan, it also has the potential to be a lasting source of energy to feed our ever-growing needs. With proper measures and safeguards,these risks can be kept at a minimum in order to fully maximize the benefits of nuclear energy.

    However I do not believe Singapore should go into nuclear power. the recent disaster in Japan affected an area of about 300 square kilometres. Should this happen in Singapore, it would wipe out our entire country in one blow. Now where would we go? Batam?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s