As many of last week’s events made clear, the future of nuclearism will depend, in many ways, on just how the international community is able to forge a balance between the spread of nuclear power and the curtailment of nuclear weapons. Just as presidents Obama and Dmitry Medvedev came to an agreement that is widely viewed in both Russia and America as a critical step towards a new, less nerve-racking relationship between the world’s two greatest nuclear powers, Russia unveiled plans for a system of floating nuclear plants that may be more harmful to the environment and vulnerable to terrorism than traditional, stationary nuclear power plants.
The tension between the widespread development and proliferation of nuclear power plants and the increasingly urgent obligation to prevent certain countries from attaining nuclear technologies will require a clever, paradigm-shifting solution from policy makers. Over the last few years, over forty developing countries have contacted the U.N. with plans to launch nuclear power programs. While the reasons most often cited are logical and apparent enough—the economic need for fuel independence and the ability to conform to new emissions standards—the prospect of a spread in nuclear power—particularly in politically vulnerable regions like the Middle-East—has left many experts wary of a new, clandestine, globalized arms race.
The inherent difficulties of regulating the expansion of nuclear power are being intensified not only by the felt exigency of cheap, clean fuel, but also by the increasingly small-scale and portable nature of nuclear projects. From the more flexible and transportable model of nuclear infrastructure being pioneered in Russia, to the small start-up, ‘Silicon Valley-like’ approach to nuclear progress being advocated in the USA, nuclear power appears to be heading toward a more privatized and scattered future that will make international, governmental oversight increasingly difficult.
While the recent agreement between the United States and Russia is a promising step forward in addressing these upcoming challenges, it is going to take a new level of multilateral coordination to establish and enforce just how—and who—will be able to enact nuclear power programs. From the extension of the G8 to a G20, to the establishment of an international body that manages nuclear energy, to creating a “global architecture” that makes the US-led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) legally binding, there are myriad plans in the works that will make the security issues involved in the growth of nuclear energy one of the most collaborative issues the world has known. While the recent compromise between Obama and Dmitry Medvedev is significant in itself, it is only the beginning of what will have to be a profoundly global series of negotiations on one of the more challenging issues we face today.
Discuss
tim hall on July 15, 2009, 1:25 PM
You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Until humans realize that they are continuing down a road of self destruction, they will continue to use and abuse sources of energy that are destructive to the planet Earth.
The most destrutive is the individeulist view of selfesh need. Once the inteligence overcomes individeulism, energy can be reduced by half. Just get rid of the stupid Dodge and turn the light off when not using it. Ignorant and selfish humans will destroy themselves before they learn. What a shame.
Joyce Johnson on July 15, 2009, 6:47 PM
The biggest and scariest enemy of man is surely man himself. I fear that it will be too late before we learn our lesson.
tim hall on July 19, 2009, 5:20 PM
Joyce,
You know, it is not about turning off the bright advertisement lights in Vegas or New York. Or about turning down the amps on your guitar. It is more about just simple habits and better technology. Just simply turn off your amplifier while not in use. Turn off computers at night. Regulate the temp. in your home by dampening registers, instead of turning the thermostat up and down. Don’t overload appliances, it makes them run hard and waste energy. Make it a point to stop at the store or bank on the way, instead of special trips. Think about what type of automobile really makes sense for your lifestyle.
My greatest beef is “next day or same day delivery.” These trucks are running hard to please peoples procrastinations. I read a study on this. They found that 80% of these quick turn around deliveries in government and companies throughout the U.S. is do to workers waiting till the last minute. Plainly, just poor management.
ed hardy on August 28, 2009, 4:41 AM
thanks, the article is very good~~
by ed hardy
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register