One: nuclear weapons proliferation.

１. 核兵器の拡散

Nuclear technology made a violent entrance onto the world stage:

原子力技術は世界を緊張状態に置く

just one year after the world’s first ever nuclear test explosion in 1944,

1944年実験に成功した翌年

two large cities were destroyed by just two single bombs.

２つの爆弾で２つの都市が壊滅した

After that, reactor technology slowly evolved

その後原子炉技術は

as a means of generating electricity,

電力源として発展したが

but it’s always been intimately connected with nuclear weapons technology.

常に核兵器技術と繋がっていた

It’s nearly impossible to develop nuclear weapons

原子炉技術なしに

without access to reactor technology.

核兵器を作ることはできない

In fact, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty serves the purpose of

核拡散防止条約でも

spreading nuclear reactor technology without spreading nuclear weapons

原子炉技術の譲渡は

with limited success.

平和利用目的に限るとされている

In 40 years, five countries have developed their own weapons

だが今や５つの国が

with the help of reactor technology.

この技術で 核兵器を手にした

The fact of the matter is that it can be very hard to distinguish

核兵器計画と原子力の平和利用を

a covert nuclear weapons program from the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

外から見分けるのは難しい

In the 1970s, the big nuclear powers were happily selling peaceful technology

核の技術は 小さな国に

to smaller countries, which then developed weapons of their own.

平和な技術として売られたが

The road to deadly nuclear weapons is always paved with peaceful reactors.

それは核兵器になった

Two: nuclear waste and pollution.

死の核兵器への道は

Spent nuclear fuel is not only radioactive, but also contains

平和な原子炉で舗装されている

extremely poisonous chemical elements like plutonium.

２. 核廃棄物と汚染

It loses its harmfulness only slowly over several tens of thousands of years.

使用済み核燃料には 放射性で有毒な

And there is also a process called reprocessing, which means

プルトニウムが含まれている

the extraction of plutonium from spent nuclear fuel.

有害でなくなるには数万年が必要だ

It can be used for two purposes:

再処理という工程を施せば

to build nuclear weapons or to use it as new fuel.

そこからプルトニウムは抽出できる

But hardly any of it is used as fuel, because we don’t have

そして核兵器に使ったり

the right kind of reactors for that.

再利用したりできる

A milligram will kill you; a few kilograms make an atomic bomb; and even

しかし再利用の方は

an inconspicuous country like Germany literally has tons of the stuff

それに適した原子炉がない

just lying around, because reprocessing sounded like a good idea decades ago.

１mgで人が死に 数kgで爆弾が作れる

And where will all the waste go?

素敵な国 ドイツでも

After dumping it into the ocean was forbidden, we’ve tried to bury it—

何トンもこれを持っている

but we can’t find a place where it will definitely stay secure

昔は再処理が良く見えたからだ

for tens of thousands of years.

捨て場所も問題だ

Over 30 countries operate nearly 400 reactors, managing

海は禁止されたので 埋めるのだが

several hundred thousands of tons of nuclear waste

数万年持つ場所は見つかっていない

and only one is currently serious about opening

30の国で400の原子炉が稼働し

a permanent civilian waste storage: tiny Finland.

数十万トンの廃棄物が出る

Three: accidents and disasters.

廃棄物の貯蔵庫を持っているのは

Over 60 years of nuclear power usage, there have been seven major accidents

フィンランドだけだ

in reactors or facilities dealing with nuclear waste.

３. 事故と災害

Three of those were mostly contained, but four of them released significant

60年を越える原子力使用の中で

amounts of radioactivity into the environment.

７つの大きな事故があった

In 1957, 1987, and 2011, large areas of land in Russia, Ukraine, and Japan

そのうち３つでは

were rendered unfit for human habitation for decades to come.

大量の放射能が環境に放出された

The number of deaths is highly disputed, but probably lies in the thousands.

1957年 1986年 2011年

These disasters happened with nuclear reactors of very different types,

ロシア ウクライナ 日本で

in very different countries, and several decades apart.

数十年は人の住めない場所ができた

Looking at the numbers, we may as well ask ourselves,

死者は数千人はいると考えられる

“Are 10% of the world’s energy supply

災害は 異なるタイプの原子炉で

worth a devastating disaster every 30 years?

異なる国の異なる時期に起きた

Would 30% be worth another Fukushima or Chernobyl

数字上はこう問える

somewhere on Earth every 10 years?

10％のエネルギー供給は

What area would have to be contaminated so we say ‘no more’?

30年毎の災害に見合うか？

Where is the line?”

30％なら

So, should we use nuclear energy?

10年毎の福島にも見合っているのか

The risks may outweigh the benefits, and maybe we should

汚染していい場所は？

stop looking into this direction and drop this technology for good.

もう無理 というラインはどこか

If you want to hear the other side of the argument

原子力は使うべきか？

or a short introduction to nuclear energy, click here.

リスクに利益は付き物だが

Our channel has a new sponsor: Audible.com.

損得より 倫理に基づき考えるべきだ

If you use the URL <http://audible.com/nutshell>,

原子力の別の側面を知りたい人は

you can get a free audiobook and support our channel.

左をクリック

Producing our videos takes a lot of time,

Subtitles by the Amara.org community

and we fill a lot of it by listening to audiobooks.

For a really entertaining book, we recommend

“Into Thin Air” by Jon Krakauer.

He’s a great writer, and the story is really absorbing and true.

Go to <http://audible.com/nutshell> to get the book for free.

Thanks a lot to Audible for supporting our channel

and to you for watching!

Subtitles by the Amara.org community