Incoming search terms:

• www sinopnkp org
• nuclear power plant alternative
• sinopnkp org

To date, the emphasis on alternative energy source experiments can be broken down into a fairly small set of options. The search for alternative methods of generating electricity is divided between those turning to the sun, the sea or the wind and those turning to science and nuclear energy.

It is unlikely that the future lies in the ugly installations to harness wind and wave power. Apart from the visual impact of such installations the bottom line remains that when and where there is no wind there is no energy. Relying on tides and waves to generate electrical power is not as fickle as depending on the wind but these installations are expensive to build and install and could never be used in the volumes required to provide all the electricity even a small country would require. And of course they are not an option at all for countries without a substantial coastline.

At the present time it would seem that the practical solution comes down to a choice between solar energy and nuclear energy so which of these is the better option? The answer is clearly solar power, a clean, viable, sustainable option.

The sun shines daily on most of the planet and delivers billions of joules (the standard unit of measurement) of energy to the earth everyday. Some of this energy is absorbed by all the creatures and plants living on the planet, and some is absorbed in the form of heat by the land and the oceans. But most of it is simply bounced back into space, what we might call lost energy. There is no valid reason why we should not avail of this lost energy to provide electricity and heat in our buildings.

People are accustomed to the idea of large, centralized generating plants providing power to tens of thousands of homes and factories and in truth it is not practical to build such a generating plant to run on solar power. But there is really nothing to stop governments from insisting that every dwelling, shop, factory, hospital etc. is provided with solar panels so that it can generate its own electricity and providing grant aid or tax incentives to have the work done. The initial cost would be high but the long-term benefits would more than compensate for that initial investment.

It is certainly a better option than building up an ever-increasing pile of nuclear waste, by-products of the nuclear generating process, garbage that will be radioactive for thousands of years and which will form a large and dangerous part of our legacy to future generations.

Incoming search terms:

• why solar energy is better than nuclier energy?
• is solar power better than nuclear power
• is solar power the right choice for better future
• solar power better than nuclear

The next major incident happened just nine years later at Chernobyl in the Ukraine, which was then part of the old USSR. A series of explosions in the plant and loss of reactor control resulted in damage to the reactor and the release of large amounts of radioactive gas into the atmosphere. This accident happened as a direct result of an experiment by engineers at the plant in which they were trying to improve emergency shutdown procedures.

The most recent serious incident took place at Fukushima in Japan in 2011. Damage to the plant occurred as a result of a major earthquake and the ensuing tsunami which knocked out the plant’s cooling system leading to uncontrolled reactor activity. The build-up of pressure and hydrogen gas led to explosions in the plant and the release of radioactive gas. Attempts to use external water as coolant resulted in that water being contaminated and flowing from the plant in a completely uncontrolled environment.

The common denominator between the three events is that once an incident had occurred, regardless of its cause, the operators struggled to bring the reactor back under control and there was a significant release of radioactive material into the environment. In the fifty-seven years that have elapsed between the first and last major incidents, nothing seems to have been learnt.

Many more less damaging accidents have been reported and it is almost certain that there will have been lots of accidents which were never reported. When commercial interests are at stake, there is enormous pressure on groups and individuals to protect resources and avoid lawsuits for damages.

A nuclear accident can be defined as an unintentional release of nuclear radiation or radioactive material into the environment. Such accidents lead to living creatures being exposed to harmful radiation and possibly suffering health problems as a result. Humans, animals and fish can be directly exposed by having, for example, radioactive dust fall directly on them, but they can also suffer exposure by eating contaminated plants or other contaminated animals. Contaminated matter can remain radioactive and dangerous to health for decades after release and operations to clean up nuclear fallout can also last for decades and cost billions, the bill usually being footed by the unfortunate taxpayer.

Incoming search terms:

• effects of nuclear accidents
• radioactive materials released from nuclear power plants accident

Radiation exists all around us and we are all exposed to radiation from a variety of sources throughout our lives. We have evolved to be able to cope with this background radiation as long as it is below a certain level. When we start getting exposed to higher levels of radiation, our bodies are unable to cope and we can develop a number of disorders which can lead to death. For example, excessive exposure to radiation from the sun which may occur when sunbathing without adequate protection is now thought to be the cause of a significant rise in the number of skin cancers, especially melanomas.

Radiation is very much a silent enemy because we are totally unaware of any damage being caused until that damage becomes visible in some form, by which time it is often too late for successful treatment. Often the presence of excessive radiation is only discovered after an unusual spike in the numbers of not-so-common diseases within a particular geographical area. An example of this happening is when a spike in cancer numbers in a particular town led scientists to investigate and discover higher than normal levels of radon gas in homes.

Radon gas is radioactive and comes from the breakdown of uranium in the earth’s surface. It is now recognized as a significant health hazard in the developed world and the US Environmental Protection Agency reckons that over 20,000 citizens die each year from lung cancer caused by inhalation of radon gas. This gas occurs naturally in the soil and would normally dissolve harmlessly into the atmosphere, but modern homes act as traps for the gas leading to higher concentrations which is where the problem lies.

While we have evolved to cope with background radiation within normal boundaries there is ample evidence to suggest that the radiation level does not have to increase by a large amount before it becomes a health problem for humans. Levels are increased by human activity such as nuclear power generation and disposal of nuclear waste, nuclear weapons testing, and the application of radiation in medicine and science. Exposure to normal ranges from perhaps one of these sources may not be significant but cumulative exposure would undoubtedly be serious.

One of the biggest problems in establishing accurate figures relating to the health problems associated with exposure to nuclear radiation is that it is almost impossible to categorically associate illness in an individual with a particular source of nuclear radiation. The nuclear industry has a formidable record in defending itself against lawsuits for criminal negligence and numerous independent inquiries into nuclear safety have felt unable to conclude that the activities of the nuclear power companies have resulted in an increase in background radiation in a given area. In many areas it can be empirically shown that the incidence of leukemia, for example, rose significantly when the nuclear plant opened and this has to be more than just coincidence.

Incoming search terms:

• impacts of nuclear accidents

When Ernest Rutherford succeeded in creating the first nuclear reaction in 1917 it was only a matter of time before military use of this technology would be explored, and the driving force was the upsurge of Nazism in Germany and the outbreak of the Second World War. It was widely believed that the Nazis were making progress on the development of a nuclear weapon and the US set up the Manhattan Project in 1942 to ensure the US was not left behind in this area. The project had the participation of physicists from the US, Canada and the UK as well as immigrant physicists from other countries. They succeeded in their mission and the first nuclear powered explosion took place in July 1945. The test proved to be spectacularly successful and the bomb they had created, which was about the size of a torpedo, created an explosion equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT.

Less than one month later a nuclear bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in Japan completely destroying an area of about 5 square miles and instantly killing at least 70,000 people. The Hiroshima bomb was followed three days later by the dropping of a second bomb on Nagasaki. Nagasaki was not the mission’s primary target, which had been obscured by cloud, and even though the explosive power was greater than at Hiroshima, the bomb exploded over an industrial area of the city thereby taking a lower death toll of around 35,000 people. A third bombing was planned for later that August and six more over the following two months, but the Japanese surrender meant these attacks were not required.

To date, these are the only two occasions that nuclear weapons have been exploded but work has continued on developing even more lethal weapons such as hydrogen and neutron bombs with explosive charges measured in the equivalent of millions of tons of TNT. And the US is no longer the only nation with the technology. Russia, China, the United Kingdom, France, India, Pakistan and North Korea have all exploded test devices and there may be other countries with  nuclear weapons capacity.

The biggest threat from nuclear weapons in the present day seems not to be from countries at war with each other but from rogue nations or terrorists managing to detonate a small device in a major city. It is almost inevitable that this will happen.

There are many dreadful diseases which cause the human body to essentially shut down bit by bit and radiation sickness does likewise but with the added and sinister ability to modify the very genetic structure of cells causing terrible mutations.

There are several types of radiation which are harmful to humans and those who contract radiation sickness may have been exposed to one or more of these types in the same dose. The outward appearance of an individual may display burns but this would normally be after exposure to a relatively close nuclear explosion.

More commonly, exposed people develop what appears like a skin rash which can be extremely itchy. This rash is usually accompanied by a feeling of nausea which eventually leads to vomiting episodes.  Patients with low doses of radiation are unlikely to display further symptoms. The onset of symptoms may not occur immediately after the exposure, although once again the level of the dose affects the speed of onset with higher dosages causing symptoms to appear sooner than low doses.

Exposure to medium to high dose radiation will lead to much more debilitating symptoms. Radiation will affect the patient’s blood cells causing a whole series of problems. Blood cells are made up of platelets which control clotting, white cells which provide the bodies defenses against infection and red cells which provide oxygen to the organs and muscles. Damage to platelets results in hemorrhaging throughout the body. Visible bleeding will be seen in the mouth and gums, the patient will experience nosebleeds and vomit and diarrohea will often contain blood. Damage to white cells opens the body to attack from all kinds of bugs and the patient will develop infections and fever. And damage to red cells affects oxygen supply throughout the body leading to muscle control issues, feelings of fatigue and cerebral problems.

As the damage to the brain increases and the muscles struggle for oxygen, the patient begins to lose mobility control. Motor functions begin to become unpredictable and the patient will be unable to speak normally. Limbs will begin to jerk uncontrollably and the patient will also lose the ability to control eye movements.

Exposure to doses of radiation high enough to cause the onset of radiation sickness is a very serious matter for the patient. At the higher level of the dosage scale, every individual exposed will die, often within two days of the exposure. Medium level exposure may also have a 100% mortality rate. If the radiation sickness is detected quickly and appropriate treatment given the death rate is reduced, but not by a lot.

The danger of a mass nuclear bomb attack in a war scenario has greatly receded since the peak of East-West tensions before the break-up of the Soviet Union. The threat today is more likely to come from a rogue country or from terrorist organizations detonating relatively small devices but almost certainly in a densely populated region for maximum impact. The very randomness of the locations that might be selected for terrorist attacks, makes it extremely difficult to be prepared and protected against the nuclear fallout.

If advance notice of a nuclear bomb attack is received, then the best protection is to evacuate the area. It is important to bear in mind that potentially tens of thousands of others will also be evacuating at the same time. So it might be a good idea to be prepared for spending a very long time in your car or on a bus or train. If you have advance notice that an incident leading to evacuation is likely to occur, it is a good idea to prepare an emergency evacuation pack in case you are stranded. This should contain non-perishable food and water in sufficient quantities to provide for you and your family for up to 24 hours. If you are expecting to be confined to your home you should ensure you have supplies for two weeks. You should also check if your building or community has designated shelters.

To protect against radiation following a blast, you need to surround yourself with the densest materials you can find to absorb or deflect harmful rays. Furniture and books can be used to build protective walls. Cellars or basements should be used to shelter in if available. Remember to bring food, water, a radio and flashlights to your shelter. Stay in the shelter until you receive the all clear from the authorities (monitor your radio if possible).

If you are threatened by radiation from an accidental leak at a nuclear plant, you need to inform yourself as to what the extent of the contamination is and how high is the dosage. If the plant has emitted a cloud of radioactive gas into the atmosphere it will be blown in the same direction as the wind. If you are downwind from the plant try and find shelter in a cellar or basement. At the very least stay indoors. You are at risk from falling radioactive dust particles so try and ensure they cannot fall directly on you. Following the contamination, ensure you eat and drink only foodstuffs and liquids that are sourced from a non-contaminated area. Seek medical treatment as soon as its safe to do so.

Incoming search terms:

• measures and protect yourself nuclear radiation

The man-made accident occurred as engineers were carrying out tests on emergency shutdown procedures. They had previously established that in the event of an electrical power failure emergency generators would not kick in quickly enough to allow cooling systems continue to do their work and were experimenting with a new electrical system to overcome this. They managed to cause a massive power spike with which the system could not cope leading to the emergency.

The biggest source of nuclear contamination was the result of fallout from the radioactive clouds of gas that escaped from the nuclear power plant. However, as was to happen 27 years later at Fukushima, attempting to cool the reactor by spraying on millions of gallons of water resulted in that water and steam made from it being radioactively contaminated and escaping in an uncontrolled fashion into the environment.

It took 10 days to bring the situation under control and dangerous radioactive material was being spewed into the air throughout those 10 days. Soviet military helicopters were used to dump tons of material from above into the exposed reactor until leaking radiation levels were low enough to allow emergency workers on the ground to get near the damaged reactor. The reactor was eventually sealed in a massive concrete ‘sarcophagus’ and the rest of the plant, which contained three other reactors, has been decommissioned.

Soviet scientists claim that 60% of the radioactive fallout fell within a relatively short distance of the plant. There is plenty of evidence from around Europe and as far away as Canada and Japan of radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl plant. Weather forecasts at the time included charts of the progress of the radioactive gas clouds.

The Soviet authorities had to evacuate nearly 120,000 people from areas surrounding the plant up to a radius of almost 20 miles and a permanent exclusion zone was set up in the areas immediately around the plant. Many of those evacuated had already been exposed to critical radiation levels and there was a massive increase in the incidence of thyroid cancer following the event (caused by exposure to radioactive iodine).

There is considerable debate as to the death toll arising from the Chernobyl incident, the only consensus seeming to be that 2 workers died from the initial explosion. At the very minimum, a further 60 people died from acute radiation sickness in the immediate aftermath. It is likely that there were many more deaths further afield and in the months and years following the disaster.

Incoming search terms:

• chernobyl disaster
• chernobyl nuclear accident damage
• chernobyl nuclear disaster
• struggled to bring Chernobylâ??s nuclear reactor under control

Using the Fukushima meltdown as an example experts were afraid that the radiation may have affected the Japanese waters which might later have been transferred to the United States’ West Coast area through the gulf stream. This was a false alarm as the levels of radiation were not high enough to do that but in a situation where the levels of radiation were high enough, the people on the West Coast region would have been in trouble. During the Chernobyl disaster the radiation levels were so high that the fallout from the radiation was carried by the wind and condensed with the rain clouds in the United States and fell as rain which posed a very huge health risk in the United States. The effects of this radioactive disaster were felt mostly in the Ukraine and Belarus where lives were lost and the number of cancer patients increased significantly.
Although experts say that nuclear power plants are safe it is clear that a small error could cause much damage. Far more than the nuclear powers’ worth. The effects of a nuclear disaster will not only affect the current generation but also the others to come. As you have read the effects are not only felt in the country the disaster happens but the entire world could be at risk from nuclear disasters. It is therefore better to seek and embrace other alternative sources of energy. Sources that are safe, environmentally friendly and effective. Nuclear power may have its benefits but the the risks are far too dangerous. Nuclear warfare should not even be a factor to consider when at war because the effects of the nuclear disaster it causes might just come right back to haunt us.

It is hardly surprising then that millions of people throughout the developed world have serious reservations about the spreading menace of nuclear power and that many organisations have sprung up for the purpose of opposing nuclear development and educating people as to its inherent dangers. Concern grew initially with continued development of nuclear weapons and more specifically the testing of these weapons, which many people perceived was itself a great danger.

The Anti Nuclear Movement

As the world of science became more aware of the problems associated with exposure to radiation more and more groups were formed to try and bring about a cessation of nuclear weapons testing and many of these groups also expressed concern at the expansion of the nuclear power industry. Protest marches took place all over the world. In the US  up to 50,000 marchers in 60 cities took part in a protest campaign against nuclear weapons called Women Strike for Peace in 1961.

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament was founded in the UK in 1957 to protest against Britain’s participation in nuclear weapons testing. It objected to development, testing and transport of nuclear weapons and campaigned against the sale by Britain of nuclear materials to other nations. The following year CND commissioned a logo which has been adopted as the international peace symbol. Its membership reached its highest level in the early 1980’s when tension increased between east and west over American deployment of missiles in European bases. Conversational Hypnosis CND is still active today and organizes an annual protest march from Central London to the nuclear research facility at Aldermaston.

Friends of the Earth International is a loose network of organizations from many different countries around the globe. The organization is opposed to developments which adversely affect the environment and includes opposition to nuclear power in its portfolio.

Another international organization opposed to nuclear power is Greenpeace which is headquartered in Holland and has branches in more than 40 countries including the US and the UK. As with Friends of the Earth it is not exclusively concerned with opposition to nuclear power. Greenpeace received worldwide publicity in 1985 when a special operations unit of the French foreign intelligence service blew up the Greenpeace vessel Rainbow Warrior in New Zealand. The Rainbow Warrior was in New Zealand en route to lead protests against France’s testing of nuclear weapons in the Pacific.

One of the longest anti-nuclear protests to take place was at the Greenham Common air force base in England. The protest began in 1982 and eventually a number of small encampments were set up around the base and remained there until 2000.

Nuclear power plants are dangerous neighbours

The near-disaster at the Fukushima power plant in Japan in early 2011 following an earthquake and tsunami highlighted once again the dangers associated with nuclear power plants.

It is less than sixty years since the first nuclear power plant opened in Russia and in that relatively short time there have been numerous accidents ranging from what scientists label “not too serious” to potentially devastating disasters.  And there have been many,many more incidents which could chillingly be described as near misses.

To understand why nuclear power plants are dangerous it is necessary to know what goes on inside a nuclear power plant. A nuclear plant is designed to generate electricity from turbines which are powered by steam.  Fat Loss 4 Idiots The steam is created by using energy released during nuclear fission to heat water. Nuclear fission refers to the splitting of atoms of uranium and the process results in the release of very high amounts of radiation.

Radiation contaminates everything it comes in contact with and apart from generating electricity, the nuclear power plant is also generating lots of potentially harmful radioactive material and this material must be contained safely within the plant and managed safely after its removal from the plant. It is the presence of so much radioactive material that makes nuclear power plants so dangerous because once radioactive material is released there is very little that can be done to prevent contamination of people, animals and the environment.

If the release of radioactive material is into the air, that material can distribute contamination for thousands and thousands of miles. It is literally in the laps of the gods as to how the wind blows and carries its deadly cargo with it. Following the explosion at Chernobyl in 1986, scientists throughout Europe were able to detect radioactive particles from the plant and their colleagues in Canada and Japan could do likewise.

The accidents at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were down to human error while the one at Fukushima was due to a natural disaster. In all three cases it is clear that despite making safety a top priority in designing and building nuclear power plants these plants remain a hazard to the public. Recognising this hazard, the Italian people voted in a referendum in 1987 to close down Italy’s nuclear power plants and reaffirmed their opposition in 2009 when rejecting attempts by the government to commission new nuclear power plants.

The death toll from nuclear accidents is impossible to calculate because radiation can be a slow and insidious killer. People can develop cancers a long time after being exposed to the radiation. Added to this is the fact that contamination takes decades to disappear and there is no precise way to link a radiation triggered illness to an event that happened many years in the past. The Power Of Conversational Hypnosis  There is also evidence that the children of exposed people who were not even conceived at the time of the exposure have a higher tendency to develop life-threatening conditions but these would never be included in any official death toll.

Nuclear power is bad for the environment

Nuclear power simply cannot exist without compromising the environment.  The manufacturing of electricity by using nuclear energy requires the creation of continuous nuclear reactions in a controlled environment. Nuclear energy plants create steam to drive turbines, but they also create, as a by-product of the process, tons of radioactive material. Apart from the risk of an accident causing the release of dangerous radiation into the environment, a nuclear power plant has to manage the disposal of radioactive waste which is created during the process. The risk of contaminating the soil and water supply is very real and even steps such as growing fruit in an orangery or housing animals in sheds won’t protect against exposing vital food supplies to hazardous material.

The world’s first nuclear power plant opened at Obninsk in Russia in 1954 less than ten years after the United States had demonstrated the awful power that could be created by nuclear chain reactions. Argan Oil Many countries around the world were quick to follow suit, with the United States opening its first nuclear power plant in 1958. Nuclear power was seen as a better, more economical means of generating electricity than traditional methods.

The nuclear power lobby was commercially driven and when money is the bottom line attention to safety and adopting a cautious approach are not high priorities. Billions were spent on marketing campaigns to convince people that nuclear energy was clean, efficient, commercially cheaper than other forms of energy and most of all that it was safe.

Many of the facts about the dangers of radiation published during these campaigns were based on expert opinion about safe levels of radiation at the time. But hindsight is a wonderful teacher and many of the so-called safe limits for exposure to radiation have been drastically reduced since the first plant opened. Gossip Column Unfortunately, many people have lost their lives or contracted serious illnesses and many communities have suffered the dreadful side effects of radiation exposure and still the issue of safety in the nuclear industry does not appear to be at the very top of priorities.

When a nuclear power plant goes wrong, it tends to go spectacularly wrong and the outcome is often massive and widespread environmental damage. Ledome Aruba It is not an exaggeration to say that the extent of the environmental damage caused by a nuclear accident can be global.

Most types of man-made environmental crises tend to be correctable. They may cause extensive damage and take many years to put right but the environmental damage can be repaired. Emergencies like the BP oil-well explosion in the Gulf of Mexico cause extensive damage, but that damage is repairable.  The oil that escapes can eventually be mopped up and is unlikely to cause any problems on the other side of the globe.

Environmental damage caused by radiation leaks is far more difficult to repair. Radiation will contaminate everything it comes into contact with. This means that a leak of radioactive water into the sea will contaminate fish and marine plants and every creature that eats or comes into contact with these will also be contaminated. This contamination continues right up through the food chain. Rise Up Inc The only way to clean up is to track down and remove every radioactive particle – an impossible task.

Treaties to stop the use of nuclear weapons

Almost immediately after using nuclear weapons to bring about the surrender of Japan in the Second World War, the United States, recognizing the awful destructive power of the technology it had developed, set about trying to make sure that such weapons would never be used again.

President Truman commissioned a report into how the US could arrive at a situation where it could safely dismantle its nuclear weapons facilities. Apartments Miami The report team came up with the suggestion of an international authority which would supersede the authority of every government and could impose sanctions on any country found to be developing weapons or trying to manufacture fissionable material (such material is required to make a nuclear weapon).

The proposal was presented to the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission where it was rejected because the Soviet Union vetoed it. But it did lead indirectly to the formation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 1957. This agency was formed by and is financed by the UN, but is supposedly autonomous in nature. Its brief is to promote peaceful applications of nuclear science. Nowadays its main concern is with nuclear safety and the promotion of best practice in nuclear applications.

Despite the setting up of the IAEA, development, testing, deployment and stockpiling of nuclear weapons continued apace with the Soviet Union, Britain and France soon joining the US in the nuclear arms race. As relations between the US and the Soviet Union became more and more strained as the Cold War escalated, efforts to encourage dialogue between the two nations with a view to encouraging disarmament grew in intensity but to little avail. Instead, the nations carried on regardless eventually arriving at the situation whereby each had a sufficient arsenal of nuclear weapons to obliterate the other entirely. This scenario came to be known as mutually assured destruction with the very appropriate acronym MAD.

When China successfully detonated a nuclear weapon in 1964 it served to kick-start efforts to produce an international agreement that would limit the development of nuclear weapons and hopefully lead to disarmament. These efforts led in 1968 to the formation of the Eighteen Nation Disarmament Committee, which presented a proposal to the United Nations General Assembly. The proposal led to the drafting of the Non-Proliferation Treaty which was eventually signed by the US, the UK, the Soviet Union and 40 other countries in 1970. Today the treaty has 189 signatories. North Korea did sign the treaty but then broke the terms and withdrew form the treaty in 2003. Israel, a country many people believe has nuclear weapons, never joined the treaty. Neither did India or Pakistan, both of whom have detonated nuclear weapons since the treaty came into existence.

The most effective treaties to stop nuclear weapons have been the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties drawn up by the US and the Soviet Union, later Russia. The first treaty was signed in 1991 and the second in 2010. Texas High School Football Hall Of Fame The first treaty led to the gradual removal of nuclear weapons over the duration of the treaty and at the end had resulted in an 80% reduction in weapons.

Preventing nuclear disasters – the impossible task

Prevention of nuclear disasters can only be achieved by the dismantling of all nuclear weapons and halting all research, decommissioning all nuclear power plants, seeking environmentally friendly alternative power generation options and establishing an international monitoring body with real powers to ensure that every country is genuinely nuclear free. It is necessary for global laws to be introduced to ensure the adherence of all countries to anti nuclear policies; just as an injury lawyer is needed to ensure that large companies honor the rights of their injured workers according to the law.  Nothing short of “nuclear free” status is ever going to provide insurance against nuclear disasters. Incidents like that at the Fukushima plant in Japan prove that man is incapable of building safe nuclear power plants. Fukushima is one of the newer nuclear plants designed to remain safe in the face of human error and damage due to external factors, yet it demonstrated graphically that a common geological problem which Japan was fully aware of and has faced since time immemorial clearly had not been taken fully into account when the plant was commissioned.

Even if global nuclear free status were to be achieved, as a global society we have already stashed enough nuclear waste in holding areas around the world to give ourselves the potential for a disaster and that potential is set to last for hundreds of years. However, to continue down the path we are now on will only make the prevention of disasters an ever more difficult goal to achieve.

There has never been a time in written human history when there was not a conflict between tribes somewhere in the world. As our species became more inventive, the weapons of choice used in conflicts became ever more deadly, culminating in the most deadly weapons of all – the nuclear bombs and missiles. In the brief history of the nuclear weapons age, we have seen how deadly these weapons can be. We have also seen that in the nuclear age, nuclear facilities themselves become prime targets in offensive missions. So we now live with the dreaded scenario of a nuclear missile being dropped on a nuclear silo or a nuclear processing plant thereby magnifying the damage caused by the attack.

This type of scenario can never be prevented by improving defenses or adopting strategies such as never keeping weapons at the same location for long periods but moving them to different locations on a regular basis. Trying to move missiles undetected is essentially impossible in the modern era and nuclear generating stations by definition have to be static. Therefore, both these types of nuclear installations are always going to be vulnerable to attack and the only safe option is to remove them completely.

The very transportation of nuclear weapons, nuclear fuel and nuclear post poses its own substantial risks. Those responsible try to reassure us that every possible precaution is taken to ensure maximum safety from crash-proof storage of nuclear material to the prevention of terrorist attacks. The trouble is that no system can be proved safe until it has been subjected to every possible form of attack and history has shown that it is attacks, whether by nature or humans, in unexpected areas or by unexpected means that have revealed the weaknesses and vulnerabilities in defensive systems.