Centralight

The facts about nuclear fuel don't lie. One uranium fuel pellet that barely measures 2 cm in length releases approximately as much energy as three barrels of oil, one ton of coal or 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas. Nuclear power accounts for nearly 14 percent of electricity used worldwide, including 20 percent of electricity in the United States and 34 percent in the European Union. The International Energy Agency's "World Energy Outlook 2010" highlights the increasing importance of nuclear power in meeting world energy needs while achieving security of supply and minimizing carbon dioxide emission. But as many people throughout the world anxiously tracked developments at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in the wake of the earthquake and tsunami that caused damage and threatened a meltdown, are the benefits of nuclear energy worth the potential health risks to humans, wildlife and the environment? Lakes Institute for Sustainable Systems at Central Michigan University. "Nuclear energy may be very safe, but you have to recognize the risks involved should a highly unlikely catastrophic event occur." "Every form of energy has its risks," says Tom Rohrer, director of the Great But for this study the historic 1986 meltdown at Chernobyl – which resulted in nearly 30 deaths within two weeks of the incident – was not included because the Ukraine was not considered a developed country. In addition, Rohrer says there is epidemiological evidence of morbidity and mortality due to increased thyroid cancers, especially in children. Ecosystem impacts from the overall release of radiation still are being studied. While overall numbers in this study still reflect favorably on hydro and nuclear energies, in predicting possible deaths from a catastrophic accident at an average site, Paul Sherrer Institute data projected that oil, coal and natural gas would account for a combined total of 633 possible deaths. Using the same criteria, nuclear energy has the potential to cause more than 10,200 deaths and hydro energy potentially could cause more than 11,000 deaths. Even in light of potential catastrophic events occurring, energy conservation and developing alternative and sustainable energy resources – including wind and solar – were common themes repeated by the CMU faculty members in separate conversations about whether the benefits of nuclear energy were worth the potential risks involved. "We have to invest money into all aspects of energy research," says CMU Geology Professor Sven Morgan. Swiss-based Paul Sherrer Institute tracked total fatalities from severe energy accidents in developed countries between 1970 and 2008. Based on its findings, oil industry-related accidents accounted for more than 3,400 deaths, while the coal industry was responsible for nearly 2,300 fatalities and natural gas accounted for more than 1,200 deaths. During this 38-year period, hydro energy accidents resulted in 14 deaths and nuclear energy accidents caused zero deaths in developed countries. Coal causes more immediate threat Risks surrounding worst-case scenarios involving nuclear power plants aren't deterring people from living near such facilities. 2010 U.S. Census information shows that the number of people living within the 10-mile emergency planning zones around nuclear power plants rose by 17 percent in the past decade, compared with an overall increase of less than 10 percent in the U.S. population. 16 centralight summer '11

• Cover