Nevertheless, Tokyo Electric Power Co. can be faulted for taking too long to report broken pipes, radioactive water leaks and a small release of radioactive material into the air. It was not until hours later when smoke and fire were seen at a transformer site near the plant that the utility made a public statement, noting that 315 gallons of radioactive water had made its way into the Sea of Japan, although it said such amounts were negligible. The company also said that small quantities of cobalt-60 and chromium-51 were released via smokestacks but that the level of toxins would not cause any harm.

"I believe that nuclear power plants can only be operated with the trust of the people," says Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, in a press conference in Tokyo, about 160 miles south-east of Niigata prefecture, where the earthquake occurred. "If something happens they need to report on it thoroughly and quickly. We need to get them to strictly reflect on this incident."

Japan, which has no domestic oil and gas industry, generates about a quarter of its power through nuclear energy from 55 separate facilities. The nation is also one of the most susceptible places to earthquakes with experts giving it a 90 percent chance of getting hit with a major trembler in the next 50 years. That potential, along with the fact that accidents have plagued the industry, re-enforces to opponents that nuclear power is unsafe. In fact, two nuclear workers in 1999 died in a fuel processing plant accident while another four died in 2004 from a similar misfortune. Meantime, Tokyo Electric admitted in 2002 to falsifying records and covering up problems since the 1980s. That caused it to temporarily shut down its 17 nuclear plants.

"This fire and radioactive leakage reminds us yet again of the serious threats posed by nuclear power," says Jan Beranek, Greenpeace International Nuclear Campaigner. "There is a real risk in Japan, and globally, of larger earthquakes and other natural disasters, as well as of terrorist attacks that could lead to far more serious nuclear accidents." Nuclear power undermines the real solutions to environmental challenges, he adds, by eroding the resources necessary to build out the renewable energy sector.

Bad PR

Kashiwazaki-Kariwa -- where the latest mishap took place -- is the world's largest nuclear plant in power output capacity. It generates 8.2 million kilowatts of electricity and by comparison, the United States' largest nuclear generator at Palo Verde, Ariz. produces 3.88 million kilowatts, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute.

During the earthquake, three of the seven units that make up the Kashiwazaki facility were down for repair. Only one of those reactors, designed by General Electric and similar to ones found in the United States, suffered a leak. The functioning units at the time, which were automatically shut down during the incident, must undergo government safety inspections before they will be allowed to return to operation.

About ten people were killed and another 900 injured, all earthquake-related and none of them because of any leaks at the nuclear facility. Despite the event, Japan remains committed to nuclear power. Roughly 13 nuclear reactors are under construction there and officials say that nuclear will play an even bigger role than it does now because of the country's commitment to greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

"Personally I think a nuclear power plant is the safest place you could go in an earthquake," Hisashi Ninokata, a nuclear engineering professor at Tokyo Institute of Technology, told Reuters. "That's how much care they take over construction."

That's overstated to illustrate a point. Still, proponents of nuclear power maintain that it's not only safe but also necessary as the world grapples with dwindling oil and gas supplies as well as to how to combat climate change.

Nations around the globe are interested in prospective nuclear technologies. The difference between the so-called Very High Temperature Reactors and current designs is that the future ones will operate three times the temperature of today's light water reactors. That results in a more efficient use of fuel and the ability to create hydrogen in the process. All of that makes the proposition a lot more economically attractive.

Meantime, those future reactors will be cooled by helium gas and not water. That means that the reactors rely on gravity to flush water through the system in the event of emergency. Therefore, the odds of any leaks and subsequent meltdowns are close to zero, say advocates of the design.