As the heartbreaking stories in Japan continue to unfold on live television, questions about the safety of nuclear power plants around the world have been raised. Germany and Switzerland have decided to hold off on extending the life of some of their older nuclear facilities. Austria is looking into testing their facilities to make sure they are up to withstanding a significant earthquake. In the United States, Senator Joe Lieberman has called for the suspension of planning and building new nuclear facilities, but are these actions needed…Senator Lamar Alexander says maybe not?

A strong proponent of nuclear power, Sen. Alexander says we need to learn from what is happening in Japan but not discontinue the use and development of nuclear facilities. [ed. note: at the time of this writing] He notes that the safety systems in place at the ailing Japanese facility have managed to contain most of the radiation coming from the reactor; and that the tsunami, not the earthquake itself, delivered most of the damage. Alexander also boasts that no one has ever been killed by a nuclear disaster within the United States and says our systems are much safer and more advanced than they were during the Three Mile Island meltdown in 1979.

Sen. Alexander seems to make some relatively decent points on why we should move forward with our nuclear plans, but I thought it would be best to see what kind of seismic circumstances the world was looking at before forming an opinion.

The Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (www.iris.edu) monitors and records seismic activity across the planet. The IRIS website has visual representations of seismic activity and frequency over time.

It appears that both central Europe and the majority of the United States are far from being hot zones for major earthquake activity. So why are leaders in these seemingly stable areas halting plans and shutting down existing facilities?

I understand that politicians have a need to placate their constituents and a responsibility to provide a safe, clean environment within which their fellow citizens can live and work. However, pandering to special interest groups or deciding to halt future nuclear development is simply political reactionism run amuck.

Instead of dusting off Jane Fonda and anti-nuclear rhetoric from the 70s, our thoughts and prayers should be with the people of Japan as they try to gain control of a horrifying situation. Our leaders should not be focused on how they can benefit from this disaster. Our political leaders’  focus should be  on how the intellectual and financial capital we elect them to represent can be allocated to help the Japanese people regain control of their nuclear facilities and rebuild their coastline. Once the area is made safe and recovery has begun can a debate begin on how we move forward with energy development.