One result of the natural disaster in Japan is a renewed debate over the future of nuclear energy in the U.S. and around the world. Many have argued that nuclear power can deliver the "most bang for the buck," so to speak (excuse the pun), while others argue that the dangers outweigh the benefits.
Today in class we watched the beginning of a debate between Mark Jacobson and Stewart Brand:
It's important to note, perhaps, that both of these speakers - and the debate in general - assumes a need for an alternative to fossil fuels. As I said, most folks agree that we need to free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil; the question is how to do that. Alternate energies is one answer. Another, more immediate answer, is more drilling. We can debate that, as well.
For an explanation of how nuclear power works, as well as some perspective on what's happening with Japan's nuclear reactors at the moment, watch this video. And for the article that I mentioned on Chernobyl, read this.
It's important to note, perhaps, that both of these speakers - and the debate in general - assumes a need for an alternative to fossil fuels. As I said, most folks agree that we need to free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil; the question is how to do that. Alternate energies is one answer. Another, more immediate answer, is more drilling. We can debate that, as well.