Nuclear Energy, if harvested properly, can have many benefits for a society’s prosperity. A few kilograms of the nuclear fuel can generate electricity for a few years. This technology eliminates any further consumption on non renewable fossil fuels, and also the manufacturing with this technology opens up new jobs options for the people. This improves the economy significantly, and also helps the environment. Generating electricity from nuclear plant does not release CO2, a green house gas, or pollute the atmosphere therefore improving environmental conditions. On a negative side the disposal of the nuclear waste is a threat to the environment, as it takes thousands of years for it deplete.
Although the technology seems prosperous and highly efficient, the hazards accompanied with nuclear energy should not be negligible. Nuclear reactor leak, such as the Chernobyl accident in former Soviet Union, and the disposal of nuclear waste, which takes nearly thousands of years to totally lose its radioactivity, are the major threats to humans, environment and ecosystem. Another aspect of nuclear waste may involve important health impacts: the release of radon, a radioactive gas that naturally comes from Uranium. This is not as hazardous as the waste however, it does pose a threat.
If a country has nuclear technology, then its scientists can use the science technology in weaponry, to defend the nation against foreign invasion. The technology of the nuclear reactor was used to make the nuclear bomb, once triggered; it releases huge amounts of energy, equivalent to thousands of tons of TNT explosives. When the energy is released, it sends massive shock waves, demolishing construction buildings in the radius of impact. In the same time huge amount of heat can burn down anything along its shockwave. After the explosion, the radioactive fallouts drift along with the wind, and can cause radioactive poisoning to humans, for a period of few months.
The devastating effects of the bomb were witnessed during WWII. After Albert Einstein sent a letter warning president Roosevelt about the chain reaction which can subsequently lead up to the atomic bomb, Roosevelt quickly started the Manhattan Project. The sole purpose of this project was to build a bomb sooner than Hitler. With the available nuclear technology from Fermi, and developed by American scientist J. Robert Oppenheimer, the chief of the Manhattan Project, the nuclear reactor was slowly transformed into a nuclear bomb. The problem with developing the bomb was that the atomic bomb was the production of a large amount of “enriched" uranium to sustain a chain reaction. At the time, uranium-235 was very hard to extract. To make the task even more difficult, the useful U-235 and nearly useless U-238 are isotopes, nearly identical in their chemical makeup. No ordinary chemical extraction method could separate them; only mechanical methods could work. Over 2 billion dollars was spent for the project to be a success.
On August 6th and 9th, 1945, the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were destroyed by the first atomic bombs used in warfare. This was a testament to American engineering, and revolutionized a new era of warfare. This brings to mind the political affects of this technology. Having the greatest weaponry in the world undermines many countries that don’t have power and contradicts the idea of an equal world. Having a good political stand point on world related issues can open up many trade roots, and allows your voice to be heard in the national congress meetings held by the UN and etc. Fear is the main attribute to power, and having the most sophisticated weaponry technology available creates a good amount of fear.
On August 14, 2002, Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for an Iranian National Council of Resistance of Iran, revealed the existence of two nuclear sites under-construction: a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz. This caused hammock within the US, and other western civilizations. The very idea of a Middle Eastern country having the tools necessary to make one of the most devastating weapons seemed absurd to the western civilization. With the current situation in the Middle East, and the world demanding Iran’s cancelation of the nuclear program, the thought of Iran producing a weapon of mass destruction does not seem an impossible theory.
There are many moral ethics that comes with being a scientist, especially one that has the ability to create a weapon that can mass murder thousands of people. Hypothetically speaking, if by chance a war is raged on between Iran and the US, both countries have the ability and the technology to decimate one another. Imagine you’re an Iranian scientist, and have a PhD in nuclear physics. The government comes and asks you to create a bomb, one that can totally eradicate Washington DC. If by chance you accept you will be viewed as a patriot, one that has helped his country; however you will also be the person who murdered innocent people, because the politicians had an argument. You might be able to live with the fact that you helped your country, but the devastating effects of your action can be seen on the news, on the TV everywhere, and every time you close your eyes you see the souls of the people you killed. Harsh? Well that’s the spoils of war.
Scientists have the choice to agree, or to not agree on whether they want to create a weapon. They also have the choice of creating a weapon that can benefit mankind or one that harms it. Saying that the nuclear bomb is a bad creation would be absurd, if it wasn’t for the bomb the affects of WWII would be more catastrophic than ever; however, it wasn’t the best creation either. Scientists have created many other great things in the field of weaponry. some examples are the Kevlar vest and the taser. With these inventions soldiers benefit from not being killed when gotten shot in the battle field. Those inventions define a scientists actions and what he or she believes in.
In conclusion I think that scientist should be able to help their country, and defend the soldiers that fight for them. However, I disagree with creating weaponry that can kill thousands of innocent people. If the technology is used to protect, not to kill, that in my opinion is a great invention. In this day and age technology can mean the difference between life and death; having the greatest technology in weaponry can enable great protection for the soldiers fighting the war on your countries side, and can mean death for the other. It is for this very reason I think that science should be used for efficiency and the protection of the people, and not for mass murder, let the soldiers do the killing.
