Risk

     In 2011, when the world watched in horror the tragedy of the tsunami and earthquake in Japan and the nuclear meltdown that ensued, I thought, "this may be the death of nuclear power as we know it." I knew that the world's opinion of using atomic energy to generate electricity would suddenly become more negative because the inherent risks of nuclear power would be brought to people's immediate attention. But, at the time, it did not have a significant impact on me. I did think that it was a shame that such an efficient method of  creating electricity would be abandoned, but I can't say that I was saddened by the inevitable decrease in popularity of atomic energy. "The risks of a meltdown or other malfunction outweigh the benefits" is what I thought.
     The last few weeks in my international relations class have been centered on an oil unit, where we learn about petroleum's effects on the world's conflicts, economy, diplomatic environment, and physical environment. It was in the first few days of this unit that I realized that all major methods of harvesting energy have risks. The oil trade stirs conflict between nations. It also significantly contributes to global warming, which experts have claimed will cause the death of hundreds of millions, if not billions, over the next few centuries. Making power by burning coal is inexpensive, but it also perpetuates the greenhouse effect at an exponential rate. The risks that come with nuclear power are different than those of carbon-based sources of energy, but they are ultimately equal to those of oil and coal over a long period of time.

Editor's note: I do not mean to marginalize the tragedy of what happened in Japan in 2011.