The Leak of Nuclear Material in Fukushima - Japan on 11 March, 2011

The leak of nuclear material happening in Fukushima, Japan on 11 March, 2011 was measured level 7(the highest level) on the International Nuclear Event Scale. That catastrophe ranked number two on top nuclear disasters (along with Chernobyl Disaster in 1986) ("Analysis"). A large area around Fukushima nuclear power plants is left desert for the necessary recovery, which will take at least 20 years, according to Japanese government, before it is acceptable for residents to move back. Nuclear power, as energy of a new generation, has been applied in more countries and areas. It is known for its efficiency and cleanness, and takes important position in power supply. The mentioned disasters, however, serve as the dark side of this new favorable technology. Nuclear materials for generating energy are highly reactive, which means these materials will cause damage to natural environment, and in which animals and humans live. Considering the heavy price human beings may have to pay for taking advantage of nuclear energy, many people do not support operating or building more nuclear power plants (NNPs). However, it is definitely necessary to build more NNPs to let them play dominant roles in energy supply as it addresses environmental issues, brings economic benefits, and contributes to energy security.

Many opponents allege that taking the long-lasted damages radioactive materials bring to environment and human beings into consideration, risking the future of ecosystem and human welfare in exchange for the electrical need of the hour is not worth it. Besides, the spending on nuclear power plants' building-up, they also asset that, will beget heavier budget liability to the government, even to tax payers in any way. In addition, what is still believed by someone is that thermal power plants can keep reigning worldwide until renewable clean energy such as solar power, tide energy replace fossil fuels.

These allegations above are, however, confronted with challenges from the people who are positive about nuclear energy and support to popularize nuclear power plants.

Rather than begetting harm to human beings and ecosystem, NPPs can address various environmental issues. Atomic energy is generated by fusion of atoms, hence the apparent name, which is processed within completely sealed reactors. These reactors can protect the fuel inside from leaking by zirconium coat. In this way, the main part of a nuclear reactor does not involve combustion reaction, i.e., a nuclear reactor does not produce energy by burning fuel, which is the crucial part in thermal power plants (TPPs). Based on common knowledge, it is evident that TPPs discharge a large quantity of carbon-emissions, which have brought damage to the environment. In addition, as V. A. Gordianco, a specialist in physics, acknowledges, more than 90% TPPs do not equip with flitters that helps to reduce 97.5% pollution to the environment, so TPPs cause emissions 5 to 10 times more than NPPs ("Nuclear"). Another outstanding strength of NPPs is that NPPs' waste is more useful than TPPs'. Part of NPPs' waste can be utilized for other physics or chemical reaction playing other functions, but TPPs' waste cannot. Expert Gordianco also claimed that the products burning coals leaves are ash and slag, which can barely be used as any resources ("Nuclear"). Therefore, the waste NPPs produce actually is doing less harm to the environment than TPPs. Besides these issues NPPs can combat, generating electricity by nuclear energy can also solve the problem of soil waste, which is cannot be overcome in TPPs. As fuel resource needed, a huge amount of coals, shale, and galena are being exploited everyday in the whole world. As result of excavation, the soil, under which coals are buried, has been abandoned and wasted. Gordianco says so:

"to provide the annual operation of a TPP using coal with power of 2 GW per year we need 6 million tons of coal (about 150000 platform cars);the consumption of oxygen is about 1010 m3/year, and about 1.4 million tons (800000 m3) of solid wastes are accumulated per year. For an NPP of the same power we need fuel that can be provided by about two cars per year, oxygen is not consumed, and the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) amounts to 40-50 tons (about 5 m3) per year.

Form this contrast, it is obvious that TPPs waste more land than NPPs.

Granted, the initial cost to build NPPs is not many local governments are able to afford, which is a barrier of NPPs' worldwide spreading. The long-term economic