As Japan frantically fights to prevent power reactors meltdown following last week’s overwhelming earthquake and tsunami, I entreat that the world takes a hiatus and reflect. Perhaps I’m in a panic – or have I immersed myself too deep into junk news and analysis? Whatever the case, I have a right to choose hermeneutic of suspicion and doubt if we are being told only but the truth about the Fukushima radiation levels. The facts are neither consistent nor convincing. For the benefit of doubt though, I recognize the challenge of evaluating such a massive catastrophe.

But what lessons will the world learn from Japan? I must confess that the more I read opinions from the media outlets the more I get disappointed. Many proponents of nuclear energy hysterically suggest that the world should now build and operate modern nuclear reactors that use the latest and safest technology. But didn’t Japanese use latest technology for Fukushima reactors four decades ago? Correct me if I’m wrong. And how on earth can a natural calamity respect “safe” technology?

Predictably, some analysts have quickly turned their eyes to the emerging economies, China and India in particular. Though their concerns appear genuine, I submit to them that responses so far from these very nations have been an echoing disillusionment. Both Chinese and Indian governments say Japan’s catastrophe offers imperative lessons but they gave no indication that they will reconsider the ambitious development of nuclear plants. To be fair, but in a rather remarkable turnaround, China announced suspension for all new nuclear power plants until the government could issue revised safety rules. Yes, until a revised safety rules are issued… then what? Earlier, the Chinese vice minister of the environment allegedly said China will not change its plans to develop nuclear energy despite what happened in Japan. In other words China is likely to resume building reactors, about 28 reactors, or nearly 40 percent of the global total.

India’s own atomic scientist Dr Gopalakrishnan was quoted warning that nuclear safety in India has been compromised. India has plans to buy 21 foreign nuclear power reactors at time when, according to former the AERB Chief, Indian engineers are yet to grasp new and unfamiliar technologies – a dangerous situation should an accident occur.

The rest of the world with ambitious nuclear energy pursuit seems undeterred. In South Korea, for instance, the much the government has done in the wake of Japan tragedy is to undertake an anti-earthquake training. Korean peninsula is generally safe when it comes to earthquakes. If your guess is as good as mine, Korea’s nuclear expansion and export plans remain intact.

In another development, though France has called for an emergency G-20 meeting, I doubt whether the message will be to stop nuclear energy development and take on renewable energy path. I stand for the latter.

While a number of countries rely on nuclear energy, last week’s earthquake is an open wake-up call – a call to heed the advice to undertake alternative energy and shun fossil and nuclear resources altogether.

Whether developing countries and newcomer nuclear countries will reconsider their energy investment strategies or not, the lesson is for them as well.

There are a number of reasons why the world’s lesson from Japan should point towards renewable. First, owing to the realities of climate change, governments need to drastically reduce reliance on fossil fuels and rethink nuclear power ambitions. Secondly, one of the greatest unacknowledged threats to global economy is the looming peak of global oil production. And thirdly, natural calamities are neither 100% predictable nor its destructive capacity controlled.

Serious problems associated with nuclear energy include enormous cost of establishing a nuclear power plant. Again, the intrinsic problem of what to do with nuclear waste arises. The highly radioactive byproducts of nuclear fission create a massive health and security hazard. The world admits that no easy way to handle nuclear waste today and we are yet to see that when Japan recovers.

On the other hand, renewable energy can supply a significant proportion of energy needs, create jobs and offer other benefits including environmental improvement, increased fuel diversity and national security. It also has economic development benefits. Renewable energy is also advantageous over nuclear in that there is no need to transport fuel to generators since hydroelectric dams take advantage of existing streams; photovoltaic cells utilizes direct sunlight; and wind generators take advantage of the atmospheric movement inherent in a rotating planetary body.

Renewable energy, especially solar and wind power, is also tremendously scalable. Multiple generators can be installed across a wide geographic area. The recent improvement of floating wind turbines means that the geographic area does not necessarily have to be on solid ground.

Ultimately, there is the overall human responsibility of stewardship over the environment. In fact, any religion, education, art, government, culture or philosophy that has no concept of stewardship on environment and indeed all of creation may be as good as notoriety of cancer – killing slowly.