SHOULD WE BUILD NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

IN MALAYSIA?

Because we are concern about what's happening in malaysia and we would like to voice out our stand on the nuclear power plants, including both pros and cons

In December 2010, for example, YAB Dato’ Seri Peter Chin Fah Kui, the country's energy minister, announced plans to build two 1,000-megawatt nuclear power plants by 2022.

•  A month later, Prime Minister Najib Razak announced the establishment of the Malaysian Nuclear Power Corporation, which will lead the planning process.

Some background on power plants in Malaysia

Those who support the idea

Nuclear energy is more efficient than other energy sources.

Those who support the idea

Nuclear power do not produce harmful greenhouse gasses such as carbon dioxide.

Those who support the idea

Proponents of nuclear power point to the current energy situation in Malaysia as evidence that new energy sources must be developed. Government officials believe that Malaysia's current energy sources will not be sustainable beyond 2020, and that the depletion of the nation's fossil-fuel resources is a threat to national security.

Analysts predict that escalating global oil prices will force Malaysia to become a net oil importer in the years to come.

Therefore, there is a need to quickly find other sources of energy so that Malaysia does not become too dependent on one kind of energy

Why not?

WHAT DO WE THINK?Malaysia should not embrace

nuclear energy as a power source

Nuclear power is unsafe

The problem of nuclear waste is an unsolved one.

Nuclear power is unsafe

The risks of nuclear accident far outweighs its benefits.

For example, on April 26, 1986 the No. 4 reactor at the Chernobyl power plant exploded, causing the worst nuclear accident to date.

Areas affected by Chernobyl accident nuclear fallout

Explosion site

Immediately after the accident, 30 people died from acute radiation poisoning.

In 2008, a United Nations report concluded that 6,000 thyroid cancers in young people were linked to the accident.

In the months following the accident about 116 000 people were evacuated from the surrounding area

Even more recently, on 11 March this year, the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant in Japan suffered a meltdown.

The accident was caused by an earthquake and the resulting tsunami that disabled the cooling system of the nuclear plant.

The occurrence of these accidents shows that even with all the precautions, accidents will still happen.

Human error and acts of nature can never be predicted and fully safeguard against

Accidents involving nuclear power plants has long lasting and devastating effects.

There are alternative energy sources available

 Proponents of nuclear power point to the shrinking oil reserves in Malaysia as evidence that new energy sources must be developed.

Solar energy is also supported because it does not produce any greenhouse gasses.

However, there are alternative options available, such as:

Solar energy Wind energy Hydro electrical energy

Solar energy

Los Angeles mayor has proposed to use solar energy to fuel 35% of its power requirements.

Malaysia has a rich supply of sunlight as it lies near the equator

Therefore, we should utilize this renewable energy source instead of nuclear energy.

Hydroelectric energy

The problem with nuclear waste management is unresolved

A typical reactor will generate 20 to 30 tons of high-level nuclear waste annually. There is no known way to safely dispose of this waste, which remains dangerously radioactive until it naturally decays.

The rate of decay of a radioactive isotope is called its half-life, the time in which half the initial amount of atoms present takes to decay. The half-life of Plutonium-239, one particularly lethal component of nuclear waste, is 24,000 years.

The hazardous life of a radioactive element (the length of time that must elapse before the material is considered safe) is at least 10 half-lives. Therefore, Plutonium-239 will remain hazardous for at least 240,000 years.