Recently I came across this page (http://enformable.com/2012/03/california-kelp-affected-by-fukushima-iodine-may-have-affected-certain-fish-thyroid-systems/) which tells one of the aftermaths of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant damage.

Generally people think that the major problem with nuclear power plant is safety. I remember someone's comparing nuclear energy with air travel. Although nuclear, like airplanes, has the safest track record, but a single accident ruins all statistics and makes a huge headline. Another interesting fact argued is that if a family of four uses nuclear energy all their lives, the total waste generated will be of a golf ball size which if disposed rightly leaves behind zero impact on ecosystem or it is so believed. Very few know that there are some hidden environmental negative impacts of the energy. I shall be sharing four obvious concerns here. I have deliberately not discussed the disadvantageous impacts due to accidents and other safety hazards.

1: Nuclear power uses some of the most harmful elements/isotopes ever known to mankind. Although several methods have been suggested for final disposal of high-level waste, like deep burial, transmutation, outer space disposal etc. but so far, none of these methods have been implemented. It is sad to know that although highly discussed, no country in the world has yet opened such a site. Eben Harrel states in Time on Aug 15, 2011 that there are some 65,000 tons of nuclear waste now in temporary storage throughout the U.S.

2: Uranium, one of the most popular nuclear fuels, uses large amount of water, which may go up till 185,000 cubic meters per day. These water are preferably not reusable due to fear of radiation contamination.

3: Nuclear power plants exchange as low as 60% of their thermal energy, which is lower than coal power plant and thus being responsible for more waste heat. The waste heat released into the local water body has a separate world of negative impacts on the ecology.

4: As per Mark Jacobson, director of atmosphere and Energy Program at Stanford University, nuclear power results in 9 to 25 times more carbon emissions than wind power. Moreover, Comparisons of life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions (calculating the emissions of greenhouse gases /carbon dioxide over the full life of a power source) reveals that nuclear power emits almost double amount of CO2 than the renewable source of energy generating the most amount of CO2. But the faint good news is that it produces fifteen times lesser than coal?

Of course, the sun, wind etc. provide safer and free energy but I fail to see why they are still untapped. In India, my personal opinion, I think that the people in power are not that intellectually developed to see the obvious things and give any priority towards saving the environment and taking the stuff seriously at a larger level.