Our climate is changing. A shift in the number of wildfires, tsunamis, earthquakes, droughts, and heavy rainfalls has been attributed to climate change. These changes have had an impact on agriculture and wildlife, including the introduction of new pests and depleting habitats.

Humans and our current life style practices remain the leading contributors to climate change, with carbon being the main culprit.

The Impact of Carbon
According to Architecture 2030, nine hundred billion square feet of buildings will be newly constructed or renovated by 2030. Buildings are one of the leading contributors to carbon emission, mainly from their use of fossil fuels during operations. In fact, cities and urban areas are responsible for approximately 75 percent of carbon emissions. If these buildings continue to be developed and run in the traditional manner, the environmental damage will only progress.

Thankfully, with an increased focus on the hazards that buildings emit into the atmosphere, companies are starting to consider adopting greener initiatives. Cities worldwide are investing in climate action plans with the goal of reducing their environmental footprint. This includes “Smart City” initiatives to better manage existing infrastructure, zero waste policies, alternative energy sources, and researching the potential of developing net zero buildings.

Resource Efficient
Integrating sustainable resources that are long lasting is key to ensuring that a structure is fully sustainable. Products such as reclaimed wood, recycled plastic or glass, as well as energy-efficient, locally sourced materials such as concrete that naturally contains a high thermal mass, will ensure that the building is resource efficient.

Net Zero as a Solution
Net zero, however, for several companies and homeowners, still feels largely unattainable. Cost, restricting policies and procedures, and limited information often create roadblocks for making these energy-neutral buildings a reality. To be able to create these buildings, end users and investors need to both understand and value the chosen solution. This includes investing in energy-efficient solutions and advocating for standards that are environmentally responsible while being cost effective at the same time.

So what does it mean to be environmentally responsible? Creating an environmentally responsible building begins with an understanding of the current systems that negatively impact the environment, such as heating and cooling, and finding alternatives that will decrease the impact. This includes looking at both the site and size of the structure to reduce the amount of resources used. The key is to minimize the overall impact on the environment. Once the site is determined, architects and builders need to look at how the structure of the building can insulate (keep energy in), while also integrating solutions that will store any excess heat in the winter and that will pre-cool the structure in summer during the night.

A net zero building needs to produce as much energy as it consumes. This requires some outside-of-the-box thinking and the integration of a variety of solutions that seamlessly work together for a healthier environment. Because heating and cooling are two of the main sources of carbon, it makes sense to begin by looking at systems that will reduce the use of HVAC systems.

One project that did exactly this was the Ed Lumley Centre for Engineering Innovation at the University of Windsor campus. With a desire for cleaner air, this project included the installation of a bio wall. This wall, which includes 1,500 plants, naturally filters the carbon dioxide in the air and then transfers its freshness to the entire building. This building also boasts glass and solar systems, a green roof that collects and filters rain water, and hollow core slabs to both harness and store energy and in turn decrease the use of traditional HVAC systems.

Green buildings are not about implementing one solution alone; instead, the architects and engineers need to work in collaboration to find solutions that will lessen the carbon footprint. Each aspect of the building needs to be considered, from the insulation to how energy will be harnessed, stored, and released.

Developing a Foundation for Net Positive
Increased awareness of not only the value, but the necessity of adopting green building initiatives in new builds and retrofits is critical. All those involved in the green building industry, including builders, engineers, and architects, play a vital role in helping to shift thinking at both the industry and consumer levels. This includes educating and advocating for the adoption of solutions that will have a positive impact: green solutions that will pave the way to a net positive tomorrow.

As we all know that there are multi culture in India …in every state of India you will find a collection of different cultured people…like, their language will be different…. their costumes will be different …their rituals will be different…but only one thing is there which provides uniqueness to India , that all the people live together…..whatever their background is , they cooperate and compromise and live with unity….

we have seen so much examples of their unity…some are as follows:

we see a Muslim family’s child is participating in dress competition by wearing lord Krishna’s dress,

 we see that Sikhs are organizing langar for Muslims…

we see that a Muslim girl in Mumbai wins GITA contest…..

we see in a Hindu Ganpati Pandal in Mumbai which became a makeshift venue for Eid Namaaz for Muslims, as the nearby mosque had run out of space……..

We see in Mumbai a woman was in a critical condition and about to deliver when some female devotees took her to the Ganpati Temple, Wadala, Mumbai and gave birth to a baby boy. And, couple named the boy “Ganesh”.

We see when soldiers are on border they are there for India not for their religion.

We see when a cricket match is going on then everyone whatever they are they just cheer for India like, indiaaaaaa……indiaaaaaa….

we see that Muslims make way on road while Hindus pass silently during Ganesha chaturthi …….and the list is so long….

you know what there are mainly 5 religions India named as, Hinduism,Muslims,Sikhism,Christianity,Buddhism,Jainism…….

you know what there are 22 languages in India named as, Assamese,Bengali,Bodo,Dogri,Gujarati,Kannada,Kashmiri, Konkani,Maithili,Malayalam,Manipuri,Marathi,Nepali,Odia,Punjabi,Sanskrit,Santali,Sindhi,Tamil,Telugu,Urdu and Hindi….At present, as per the Ministry of Home Affairs, there are demands for inclusion of 38 more languages in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution.

In India whatever the person is Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian, Jain….if you ask them that who are they? Then you know what!!! What they will answer??…. They will say that they are AN INDIAN….how many languages speak in India but there is only one language that connect them with each other and that language is of love, humanity, respect, care……SO FEEL PROUD TO BE AN INDIAN…….and I can’t stop my feelings to share the famous lines and that are….

MAZHAB NAHI SIKHATA, AAPAS MEIN BAIR RAKHNA HINDI HAI HUM, WATAN HAI HINDUSTAN HAMARA…….

The judiciary is a system of courts which take decisions by interpreting the law. In judiciary is a independent body, which has separate powers, especially to interpret the constitution and other statutes to take any decision in the court of law. The judiciary is one of the organ of the government along with executive and legislature, and only if all of them function properly it lead to the development of the nation. When the judiciary goes beyond the provisions of the constitution and other statutes to take a decision, and thinks about the political, moral, ethical and social aspects of taking the decision, then it is said that the court law has taken decision through “Judicial Activism”. This has been defined by Black’s Law Dictionary as the “philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy, among other factors, to guide their decisions.”Ironically judicial activism is no where to be defined in the Indian Constitution or other statutes. Only the supreme courts and high courts can use the process of judicial activism to take a decision. There has been an evolution in respect to this concept from the times of independence. From those times efforts have been taken to implement judicial activism, however it is being effectively followed only from the past few years. P.N Bhagwati was the first one to use judicial activism to introduce the concept of PIL (Public Interest Litigation). 

In the starting stages, where the legislature was just building up, it did not give importance to judicial activism, rather it stuck to its old traditional ways. Only after a decade or two after India got independence in 1947, the concept of judicial activism just started to evolve. The course of judicial activism in the nation did take some wild turns, and its origin and evolution will de discussed further in the article. The concept of judicial activism started gaining power firstly in the Keshwananda Bharti case, where it was declared that the basic structure of the constitution shall not be prone to nay change, this decision was taken place when our hon’ble prime minister Indira Gandhi imposed an emergency in the nation, even though the judiciary was under pressure, it took the right decision by keeping judicial activism in mind. Later in the In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, the Supreme Court of India has rejected the claim that a person cannot be deprived of art 21 only by due process of law, but that procedure established should be reasonable and fair. It stated that this was a mistake of the makers of the constitution as it has been omitted by them during its making. This has taken another turn when the word “life” under article 21 does not simply mean mere existence, but means that every human being shall carry on life with dignity and respect in the society. Then in 1967, in the Golaknath & Ors vs State Of Punjab, the supreme court has given the judgement that the fundamental rights under part III of the constitution shall not be amended, even if it could be done as stated under article 368 with a two third majority in both the houses of parliament. The PIL case which was mentioned earlier has also judicial activism possible in India, as it avoids unnecessary litigation, and gives anyone the chance to file a case. There are several cases which were landmark judgments to the concept of judicial activism, like Hussainara Khatoon (I) v. State of Bihar, Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration,etc.

However, there have been some criticism that the concept of judicial activism is facing. Firstly, due to this concept the judge often displays personal opinions in the judgment given, which may or may not be considered good in the eyes of the society. Secondly, when the judiciary is using this concept to take decision in vital cases, it is displaying the power which wasn’t given to it, hence we can say that the separation of powers is not being followed. It is said that the judiciary which does not consist the elected members, is lowering the power of the executive and judiciary. There has also been a confusion between judicial review and judicial activism, where judicial review means the actions of the legislature and executive could be reviewed by the judiciary if they are complying to the provisions of the Constitution and other statutes. There is a very slight difference between both of them, and both have been considered useful in th terms of law. 

In Spite of the criticism judicial activism has been proven to be very useful, especially in todays world. The application of law should differ as per the changes in the society, as the trend, belief, thoughts and values change in the society the laws have to change for the well being of its citizens. The times has come where the judges should take bold decisions, and they have to use their power to provide equal and fair justice to all. Some recent cases where judicial activism has done a great service to the society are, declaring Right to privacy as a fundamental right in the Justice K.S.Puttuswamy v. Union of India and others case, criminalising triple talaq in the Shayara Bano v. Union of India case , legalising passive euthanasia in  Common Cause v. Union of India case, declaring Right to marriage as a fundamental Right in Shakti Vahini v. Union of India case, and many more such cases. 

Therefore, we can come to a conclusion that there are positives and negatives to judicial activism, it has been beneficial in bringing change through certain judgements, and it has been bad as it has affected the authority of elected representatives, government officials, ministries, and the police. If there is legislation on judicial activism, many problems related to power and authority maybe avoided, but this to may have some concern. However it did play a significant role in getting justice to different classes of the society. 

Artificial intelligence is a combination of a human intelligence and thinking capacities along with machines, when a machine conducts like a human being or animal, and displayed analytical and logical reasoning skills like a human, it is termed as “ Artificial Intelligence”(AI).  AI literally means use of a human intelligence not by a human, as it is artificial. It is a field in computer science, and AI can function like a human being without any human help. The rise of AI, has posed many challenges in the field of law. Many questions have arised regarding the legality of AI, its application, the legality of its actions, and the change that has to be brought in the books of law. The legal issues and challenges related to AI have been discussed as follows: 

• Liability: It is the state of being legally responsible for something, if in case an offence which led to some damage has been committed by AI, who would be held liable, would it be the creator, the consumer or any other middleman. Law has to make new provision regarding the apportionment of liability in the case of AI. Even if the liability has been established, what would be the nature of the offence, civil or criminal, and what would be the punishments and penalties for the same. 
•  Recognition of AI as a person/citizen: Should AI be recognised as a natural and legal human being and be bestowed with all the human rights, can we regard AI as a person who can fulfill human obligations, and should citizenship be granted to AI technologies like robots. These are issues which have made the legislature think about giving citizenship to robots. The law does not recognise a robot as a person, and if any offense has been committed by the robot, it is assumed that the manufacture, creator, and other parties are held responsible, but can they be held responsible is the question. A robot can be established for a particular reason, but there are things which are out of the control of the creator and actions can take place which have not been anticipated, when the mental intention to cause harm does not exist, can one be punished for the actions of their creation. The only nation which gives citizenship to a robot is Saudi Arabia, it has given citizenship to a humanoid robot named Sophia. 
• Data Privacy: For AI to operate, lots of data has to be analysed, collected, processed and uploaded to a robot or any other AI technology, there are high risks where there can be misuse of personal data, which can lead to various cyber crimes. Measures have to taken regarding the security of the data which s being used, they have to be taken in such a way where confidentiality of sensitive information can be maintained. Even if such measures are taken some data can be leaked involuntarily. The Personal Data Protection Bill 2018 (Data Privacy Bill) in India, has been implemented recently which makes the organisations using the data accountable for its privacy, there is a provision which states that AI should have the right to forget information which may pose a threat. However this provision is still highly debatable, as forgetting it may affect the learning abilities of AI even more. 
• Intellectual Property Rights (IPR): IPR are the rights given to intangible creations which have been created or invented out of human intellect. The four types of IPR are copyrights, trademarks, patents and trade secrets, these are given for different creations according to the conditions specified. These rights give recognition and protection to all intangible creations. All the above rights do not take non-human or AI creation into consideration, so what if AI creates new things out of its intelligence, hence in the future the definition of the above rights may have to change, and no longer its traditional ways can be followed. 
• Agreements and Contracts:  AI if used effectively and efficiently, can make up a perfect contact managing system, where all the disputes related to contracts could be solved using AI, The mechanism and procedures relating to drafting a contract can also be done by AI. In the future we can even expect smart contracts, where all the above functions will take place in the digital world, but for all these to happen either newer provisions or changes to older ones in the contract law has to be brought suitable to AI. 
• Competition Law: AI will use different type of technology for it to function better than a normal human being, and the companies and firms who possess AI mabe in an advantaged position than its competitors, as use of AI can lead to better services to consumers, and accurate decisions of pricing strategies. AI can capture the situations in the market, and accordingly analyse the information and give proper steps which have to be taken by the firm. However, this is considered to be anti competitive and illegal under the Competition Act, 2002, which prohibits anti-competitive agreements and combinations, and firms having a dominant position over others. Competition shall be in a fair manner. Therefore changes have to be made in the law to make sure no one gets the benefit out of using AI as a protection to the activities taking place in the firm.

These are the major legal challenges that are being faced due to artificial intelligence, these are not all of them, but they constitute some of the important ones. We are presently in a fast moving generation, in it becomes vital to understand the legal and ethical implications of AI and its effects. AI has been proved to be beneficial in many ways, but if not controlled properly, may act as a threat to the dignity of the nation, and the only way this can be avoided is by making provisions in the present legislative framework regarding AI and it applicability. The provisions should be framed after taking into consideration all the above challenges, and effective follow up action should also be done. The stricter the legislation, the lesser the problems. All the above challenges and issues act as shortcomings or drawbacks to the field of law, the traditional legal frameworks is no longer applicable, it should be changed according to the situations prevailing around us. AI will continue to face such barriers as long as no change ir brought, it high time we recognise new technology in the world. 

The principles of natural justice (PNJ) are set of principles and procedures which are used in adjudication of disputes between two parties, adjudication should happen in an unbiased way, and opportunity to be heard should be given by blithe parties, and bothe should have equal access to the tribunal. There is no specific definition of natural justice, it is a combination of a few principles which is used in the filed of law as common practices. These principles are universally valid, and are usually followed by all. The term natural justice has been derived form the roman term “Jus Natural”, and they are considered to be a part of common law. Ironically they have not been codified, it is assumed that they have to be followed in any situation. The principles state that proper procedure have to be used in the process of decision making, no matter what the decision is, but the procedure should be conductor in an effective and efficient way. There are three principles of natural justice:

1. The Doctrine of Bias: Nemo Judex In Causa Sua is a latin phrase which means “No one should be a judge in his own case” as that leads to a biased decision. The person who has the authority to give the decision in a case, which is usually the judge should be unbiased and impartial, the judgment has to be taken on the basis of arguments and evidence and nothing else. The probability of a bias existing is enough to prevet a judge from sitting in the judgement taking place. There are three kinds a bias which cane take place and they have been discussed as follows: 

• Pecuniary Bias: When the judge has pecuniary or financial interest or economic interest in the subject matter of the case, the person can no longer be considered a judge. If such a bias is discovered in the process of litigation he/she can be disqualified a s a judge making them unfit as a judge. 
• Personal Bias: Such a bias takes place when there is some sort of relationship existing between the party in litigation and the judge, the relationship can be in th form of friendship, family relations, professional, and enmity. The above stated reasons may take the form of a biased decision, but such a bias is highly unnoticed by the judge, as it takes place involuntarily just with the emotions. However if it is proved strict actions will be taken against the judge.
• Official Bias/ Bias as to the subject matter: If the judge has interest in the subject matter of the case, and if judgement is given in a particular manner may favour the judge professionally or personally of considered as an official bias. To disqualify the judge on this ground it has to proves that there is some direct connection between the judge and issues in the dispute.

2. Doctrine of Fair Hearing: Audi Alteram Partem means “to hear the other side”. This second principle pf natural justice means that everyone has to be given the opportunity to be heard. Action cannot be taken against the person if he was unheard. The process of litigation shall happen through fair hearing by both both the parties, they should be given a chance to present their arguments and cases, There are two parts to this doctrine:

• Notice: A prior notice has to be issued by the deciding authority to party involved against whom action is to be taken. The notice should contain all the necessary information place, times, the nature of hearing, and other material details. After the notice is given the lawsuit will be initiated in a fair manner. The notice should also indicate the evidence upon which the action will be taken . The notice is like the final opportunity the receiver has to resolve the matter without going to the court of law, it is ike the final warning. After the notice has been issued reasonable time has to be given to make representation of the case and evidence in the court. 
• Fair Hearing: The person against whom the order is passed shall be aware of all the actions that are going to be taken against him in full detail, the right to cross examination and the right to legal representation (right to have lawyer) has to be given to the parties, only if all the above are fulfilled it is considered that the principle of fair hearing has taken place. They are all a part of the right of fair hearing. 

3. The third principle of natural justice of “Reasoned Decision”, it states that reasonable reasons have to be recorded and told to the aggrieved party for taking the decision. Only if they seem satisfactory the decision will be considered valid. Giving reason can also be useful for one to appeal in higher courts as it is a requirement for appeal. Cessante Ratione Legis Cessat Ipsa Lex  means “Reason is the soul of the law, and when such reason ceases to be there so does the law”, this outlines the necessity and importance of speaking order (order containing the reason behind the judgement) or reasoned decision. 

There are several exceptions where the principles of natural justice are not followed , like when it is excluded in statutory provisions, constitutional provisions, are matters of confidentiality, public interest, during emergencies, etc. However it is majorly followed by all. We can come to a conclusion that the principles of natural justices were implemented so that the dignity and human rights of an individual could be protected, against the arbitrary legislative system where there are chances of injustice. It ensures that justice is given to all in a clear and fair manner. Hence, they play an important role in the field of law. 

The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which is popularly known as the NDPS Act, was implemented to make strict provisions related to controlling the operation of narcotics drugs and psychotropic substances, and other material concerned with them. The main reason behind the act to be legislated was that The opium Act 1852, The opium Act 1878 and the Hazardous Drugs Act 1930 were considered to be insufficient to regulate all the activities relating to drugs and psychotropic substances, hence it became necessary to enact a new law which could update the provisions in the previous acts and bring some change to its functioning. The NDPS Act has been amended three times till now, in 1988, 2001 and 2014. This act is applicable to the while of india, and to all of its citizens no matter where they are. Before we go into the details of the act, one should understand the definition of a narcotic drug and a psychotropic substance.

• A Narcotic Drug is a substance which is used for numbing your senses, relieve pain , and causes one to sleep. If it is used by medical practitioners in a limited amount its for a good cause, but it become illicit when one uses it without the guidance of a medical practitioner, for obtaining pleasure by changing the levels of consciousness, feeling and emotions. They go into their own world of fantasies, it is usually taken to attain happiness. Narcotic drug means coca leaf, cannabis (hemp), opium, poppy straw and includes all manufactured drugs as defined under the act. 
• A Psychotropic substances contain many drugs under it which are used to alter the functions of the brain, mood, actions and thoughts. Examples of such substances are alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, marijuana,  are usually legal if used by doctors, and the illegal ones are narcotics like heroin, LSD, cocaine, and amphetamines. 

Features, Aims and objectives of the act have been discussed as follows:

• Narcotic Control Board (NCB) was established under the act to fulfill its objectives, it id headquartered at Delhi. The structure of the Board members has been clearly given in the act. The narcotic commissioner and other officers are appointed bu the central government, and the board is responsible to frame the rules and regulation regarding producing and cultivating opium, measures to be taken to control the drug menace, and illicit drug trafficking, etc. 
• The act also provides the punishments and penalties to the offences that are committed under the act, and the offences are considered to non bailable, and cognizable, and it aims in increasing the penalties and the level of punishments for such offences. 
• According to the act, a committee named the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Consultative committee was formed which was an advisory committee which was established by the central government, to provide advices in matters of drug use control, not only this but also a fund separately for the purpose of controlling drug abuse was also formed, it was the National Fund for control of drug abuse. 
• The act clearly defined various terms like addict, cannabis, coca, and many other such terms. It has been defined in a clear and crisp way leading to no vagueness. 
• The act aimed to totally prevent drug abuse, it occurs when a person uses a drug more than prescribed not for medical use, but for other uses like to obtain pleasure. 
• The act has provisions which restrict the cultivation, manufacture and trade of dangerous drugs. It has provisions, where some drugs are totally prohibited to be cultivated, drugs which could be cultivated if controlled and regulated by the central government, and drugs which could be grown under the control and regulation of state government.
• The supreme objective of the act is to prevent a person from becoming a drug addict, so that they could live a happy life. This act ensures the welfare of the people. 

At a conclusion, we can tell that the act has brought a lot of change in the society, it was considered as a good step taken by the government. However there was some criticism which was associated with act, it was told that it has been poorly legislated as the same penalties was stated for many offences, there was no differentiation made between hard and soft drugs, degree of an offence was not realised, etc. Anyway, in spite of the criticism an impressive change has been brought in the society, efforts have been taken to formulate the correct strategies and policies, and awareness has been brought regarding the cons of drug and its use.  This act controlled the drug menace to a large extent throught its strict applications and laws.

Energy’s deathprint is the number of people killed by one kind of energy or another per kWhr produced. Coal is the worst. Energy’s deathprint is the number of people killed by one kind of energy or another per kWhr produced.According to the World Health Organization, the Centers for Disease Control, and the National Academy of Science, the worst adverse impacts on health comes from fossil fuel and biofuel/biomass sources. The World Health organization estimates that air pollution, the primary reason for coal’s high mortality rate, kills 7 million people annually.

This is because fossil fuel and biofuel/biomass cause upper respiratory distress from the carbon particulates that are burned, which is kind of a second-hand black lung. Our lungs don’t like carbon particulates, whether it is from burning coal or smoking cigarettes. The global average of deaths per trillion kWhr is 100,000, while China alone is 170,000. Because the U.S. uses scrubbers, the rate is only 10,000 per trillion kWhr. 

This strong performance is due to the Clean Air Act, passed in 1963, that covers a range of issues, from improving operational safety to limiting harmful emissions. These regulations require new coal-fired plants to capture 98% of Sulphur dioxide produced, and 90% of dangerous nitrogen oxide emissions.

Together, Coal and hydropower are accountable for more than half of the world’s electricity production, and the deathprints of both sectors reflect a similar pattern. Where regulation is stronger, as in the U.S., there are fewer deaths. The hydro mortality rate in the U.S. is just 5 per trillion kWhr. Whereas, the rate is 1,400 around the world. 

This tight regulation of the hydropower industry has helped to minimize unsafe practices. There are rules for the licensing, construction and monitoring of hydropower plants. The Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance handles the assessments of hydropower facilities once they are in commercial operation, ensuring an element of impartial federal oversight in projects over the long-term.

Power sources such as biomass, which are largely decentralized and common in developing countries, see substantially higher mortality rates, notwithstanding the relatively small-scale nature of these facilities. While biomass produces only 21% of the world energy, it produces 10,000 deaths per trillion kWhr.

Biomass is an essential fuel source for people in under developed countries. More than two billion people worldwide rely on burning wood, charcoal and animal waste to cook food on a daily basis. Because of inefficiencies in these cooking methods, human health is severely undermined. Lack of ventilation and the nonexistence of filters for harmful products, such as soot particles, contribute to the dangers to human health. The World Health Organization stated that around four million people die every year from illnesses associated to household air pollution.

Rooftop solar is much more dangerous than nuclear or wind power. It would be safer if the solar panels were imbedded in the shingles, or if robots could be used to install rooftop solar panels. 1 amp could easily kill a person. Imagine what could happen if you put your hands in the terminal outputs of a solar panel, which produces 6 amps or better. Solar panels cannot be turned off.  There is no switch to cut their voltage to zero. As long as there is sunlight, a solar panel will have open circuit voltage in its terminals waiting to close the circuit, whether it be a wire or heaven forbid, a human hand.  

Wind turbines can also cause injury to humans and wildlife. This is especially true in the immediate area surrounding the tower.  Although it’s rare today, a tower can throw a blade when a blade breaks free of the turbine and becomes a very large dangerous projectile.

Can wind power make people sick? The rapidly spinning blades can produce a faint but distinguishing noise. As the blades spin through the air, a noise is generated. The turbine machinery also makes a noise. Infrasound, is sound that is lower in frequency than 20 Hz or cycles per second. Infrasound is the main issue for those anxious about wind-turbine syndrome. Both the audible sound and the vibrations that come from wind turbines might be a factor with health problems reported by some people who live close to wind farms. Some symptoms of wind-turbine syndrome include headaches, sleep problems, night terror, tinnitus, irritability, anxiety, and concentration problems.

Workers falling off of towers and roofs during installation are the main causes of death. Hydroelectric deaths come from the rare but calamitous dam collapses, such as the Banqiao, China, tragedy in 1976, which killed 171,000.

So, what is the safest energy for the future? This might come as a surprise . . . nuclear energy is by far the safest energy source.  It has more than 330 times fewer deaths than coal; 250 times less than oil; and 38 times fewer than gas. 

How we generate energy in the future will decide if we will destroy the environment, promote political conflicts, and even cause human deaths as unasked for side effects. Even when we include Chernobyl and Fukushima, the math discloses that the amount of energy generated by nuclear is so extensive that it more than outweighs these incidents over the long-term. Nuclear energy results in only one-quarter the number of deaths per terrawatt hour as wind, which is the second safest.

When the reactors at the Fukushima plant in Japan went into meltdown there were no fatalities and no adverse health effects. Although the accident causing zero deaths, it provoked anti-nuclear demonstrations worldwide. The disaster at Chernobyl is unlikely to be replicated, as the safeguards at Chernobyl were deficient, lacking vital layers of containment, which would have confined the tragedy. It was these vital layers of containment that a partial meltdown on Three Mile Island avoided any deaths and no observable long-term health effects.

There are numerous advantages to nuclear power other than just the safety benefits. Nuclear power is clean, efficient and effective. Nuclear power does not discharge harmful emissions into the environment like coal and oil. Nuclear power does not need a daily consumption of resources like coal does. Nuclear power is fueled by uranium, which is a natural material that is abundant throughout the world.

Emotional not rational reasons are why people have rejected nuclear energy. Looking at the basic facts, nuclear energy is the cleanest, safest, and cheapest approach to energy production. The risks of nuclear energy are greatly exaggerated by activists, politicians, and the media, which promote agendas rather than fact.