The word “nuclear” immediately beckons images of mushroom clouds, radiation and perhaps even Godzilla or other travesties that represent the apocalypse.

And for good reason. History abounds with instances of nuclear disasters, nuclear destruction and arms proliferation, especially during the Cold War. Well known disasters, including Chernobyl, Fukushima Daiichi, Three Mile Island and Windscale are events that encircle the populace’s mind. Negative connotations with all things nuclear are valid. Chernobyl was caused by a mixture of Soviet engineering failure and inadequate personnel training, causing the release of deadly doses of radiation that spread through the wind throughout Europe and even to America. Radiation exposure due to Chernobyl caused the death of countless firefighters and plant workers who fought the seemingly insurmountable battle that was the disaster. According to the World Nuclear Association, the radiation the exposed nuclear reactor core spewed out increased the rates of birth defects and cancer throughout Ukraine and Eastern. Radiation itself is also quite a scary phenomenon: its ability to tear apart of the machinery of cells, to punch holes in the human genome and to fully dysregulate cell function produces gruesome, indescribably painful conditions such as acute radiation syndrome, says the ARS.

All in all, it makes sense to see nuclear power as a scary thing.

However, it is important to note that while these disasters are certainly terrifying and radiation is deadly, many of the events that give nuclear energy have been exaggerated.

Take for example Three Mile Island. Miscommunication between federal workers and officials, inadequate media coverage, journalistic mishaps and exaggerated claims by the governor of Pennsylvania contributed to highly exaggerated claims of the severity of the nuclear mishap occurring at the power station, which itself had a partial nuclear melt down due to a coolant failure that released a small amount of radioactive gas that had negligible health effects, according to The Heritage Foundation.

Moreover, radiation exposure is a natural part of living life. We are exposed to about 6.2 millisieverts yearly, says the EPA, which comes from a mixture of solar radiation, man-made sources (such as x-rays) and even natural sources that are around us (such as radon in the ground). It takes about 400 to 450 sieverts, on average, to cause death in 50% of a population exposed to such a dose, according to the U.S. NRC.

This is all to say that radiation exposure, while deadly in high doses, is part of our lives and represents an integral part of our health; it being used in various diagnostic procedures and even medical procedures like radiotherapy to treat certain cancers.

How does this all translate to nuclear energy? While nuclear power itself is not a renewable source of energy, the use of nuclear fission to create energy is clean; it does not pollute the air with greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.

Nuclear waste remains a major concern for many, but it is important to note that other energy industries themselves produce waste of similar or higher quantity that is also as or more toxic compared to other industries such as coal.

Moreover, much of nuclear waste can be reprocessed for reuse (over 96% of it, according to the World Nuclear Association). About 0.2% of the waste is considered “High Level Waste,” which necessitates effective and safe storage. Facilities throughout the world have found ways to safely store such radiation for the centuries to come and can easily be adopted by the United States.

For example, in Finland, nuclear waste disposal has been done through “Deep Geological Disposal,” which stores nuclear waste in deep, stable geological formations. Highly effective, such disposal uses the three barriers of individual package shielding, the manmade repository inside the geological formations and the overall geology of the surrounding area to effectively store the waste until it has become safe to be in contact with, which takes close to a thousand years according to the World Nuclear Association.

In an age of limited resources and inadequate means to fully harness renewable energy, nuclear energy represents a logical step to a more sustainable future.