With the world’s attention focused on the earthquake- and tsunami-caused disaster at the nuclear power plant in Japan, there is renewed awareness of the risks of energy production.

In the past year, it’s been made clear that every major category of energy production comes with great risks — to humans and the environment.

The deadly underground disaster in West Virginia was a reminder of the dangers of coal mining. And mountaintop removal in coal country makes coal extraction easier, but ravages the environment.

Just as the world is watching the unfolding crisis at the stricken Japanese nuclear power plant, it was an oil platform and oil-soaked birds in the Gulf of Mexico that captivated the world’s attention last summer.

Sustainable, renewable energy is appealing, but it represents a small slice of the energy pie today. Barring some technological breakthrough, the reality is that coal, oil, natural gas and nuclear will remain the primary sources of the world’s energy for decades. Accidents in each industry should be studied and used to improve safety.

The crisis in Japan should help make nuclear power safer, not put the industry into a tailspin as the Three Mile Island accident did three decades ago.

As with coal, oil and nuclear energy, there are risks associated with natural gas.

On the plus side, natural gas is cleaner-burning than coal. It can also power vehicles, particularly big trucks and municipal buses, but that requires new engines. And, like coal, natural gas is plentiful in the United States, and can reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil.

On the negative side, natural gas production, especially with hydrofracturing in the Marcellus Shale formation, poses environmental risks.

The coal mine and oil drilling disasters last year resulted in a new emphasis on regulation and safety procedures. The accidents were studied by experts inside and outside the industry.

It’s expected that a similar analysis will follow the nuclear power plant crisis in Japan. Industry officials will work with independent experts and government to make nuclear power safer, possibly influencing the design of new nuclear power plants or leading to retrofits for existing power plants.

The same approach should be taken with natural gas.

Growing controversies over threats to well water caused by leaks in well casings, as well as risks to underground and surface water posed by fracking water, should be addressed in a transparent, balanced and science-based way.

It’s encouraging to learn that federal officials will study fracking water issues. Earlier this month, the Environmental Protection Agency announced it would study wastewater disposal practices of natural gas producers. The EPA action was, in part, triggered by an investigation by the New York Times that found wastewater from natural gas wells has been released to public waterways, posing risks to public safety and the environment.

The gas industry boasts of recycling the chemical-laden wastewater, but conflicting reports have damaged public confidence in industry statements. For that reason, the federal government should be involved.

The public should know what’s in fracking water so that appropriate treatment procedures can be developed. And government, not the industry, should monitor water treatment.

At the state level, Gov. Tom Corbett is not boosting public confidence. With $700,000 or more from the industry in campaign contributions, Corbett’s neutrality on natural gas issues is questioned by many.

There are concerns over his appointments to a Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission — 13 of the 30 members have industry ties, while just four are considered environmentalists.

The public should demand policy balance when it comes to natural gas development. The public wants to enjoy the economic benefits of expanded natural gas production in the state, but while protecting people and the environment. Most people reject the extreme views, not siding with the “drill baby drill” crowd or those who want to stop Marcellus Shale gas production.

The EPA should engage in a thorough study of industry practices. And Corbett should do more to ensure that the state will balance the interests of the gas industry with protecting lives and the environment.