It looks as if a monster steamroller had passed over it and squashed it out of existence. I write these facts … as a warning to the world. (Wilfred Burchett, Hiroshima, Japan, 5 September, 1945)
The irony is obvious: the world's first major nuclear scare is caused not by war but by a series of natural disasters; the earthquake followed by the tsunami. To build nuclear reactors on a fault line in the earth's crust seems an ultimate folly. There can be anything up to 1500 earthquakes in any given year. Yet, Japan became increasingly dependent on nuclear power to run its industries and to satisfy its domestic requirements.
Who will be next...Iran?
Some might object to the fact that nuclear installations on stable tectonic plates are safe: we have not yet had an earthquake or a tsunami or a large meteorite collision or an act of terrorism on a nuclear site within living memory it's true. But do we wait on a precedent and allow optimism to replace common sense about the real dangers of a nuclear accident and the following deadly fallout which will affect the land and lives of the people for next 10,000-years? Surely we can't take even the smallest risk. It is true that some places are safer than others, but in this world there is nowhere that is 100% safe. A balance has to be made between the chance of it happening and the catastrophic consequences if it does.
The alternative? A thorough research into the uses of natural resources of energy-water, wind and sun-without the connivance and interference of capitalists with the economic advantage of having interests in the petroleum and the nuclear industries.
