The Effect of Radiation - Essay Example

An Ecological Assessment of the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster of The effect of radiation on the economy, ecology, and society. Anthropology: Culture, Society, & Technology Date: 06/16/2011 Table of Contents Introduction 2 The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster 2 The Ecological Impact 5 The Economic Effect 7 The Social Consequences 8 An Ecological Assessment 9 An Anthropological Assessment 10 Conclusion 12 Sources Cited 13 Introduction The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant suffered a critical breakdown of operations following an earthquake and tsunami that occurred off the coast of Japan on March 11th, 2011. This earthquake is one of the strongest recorded in the last century, measuring 9.0-9.1 on the Richter scale. The effect of the earthquake off the coast of Japan caused a tsunami that destroyed the back-up power generation facilities that had been maintaining the plant after the initial earthquake. The Fukushima Daiichi facility was apparently unable to withstand the dual shocks of the earthquake and tsunami within a short timeframe and entered into a situation which can be described as nuclear meltdown of the reactors. The information about the Fukushima disaster was initially limited and possibly misrepresented by TEPCO and Japanese government administrators in order to downplay publicly the degree of seriousness of the situation, and this has led to difficulties in academic or public verification of the ecological and social threats that the meltdown portends for Japan. It is not overestimating the situation to state that in the worst instance a significant portion of Japan could have become uninhabitable due to the disaster, and currently there is an evacuation zone in effect around the facility. This essay will examine the ongoing nature of the Fukushima Disaster, highlighting the fact that the facility may still not have been properly brought under control and the degree of uncertainty that exists because of this in determining the over-all consequences of the event. The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster There is now little doubt that a full nuclear meltdown occurred at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan this year. According to Julian Ryall in an article published in the Telegraph as "Nuclear meltdown at Fukushima plant" (12 May 2011), “Engineers from the Tokyo Electric Power company (Tepco) entered the No.1 reactor at the end of last week for the first time and saw the top five feet or so of the cores 13ft-long fuel rods had been exposed to the air and melted down. Previously, Tepco believed that the core of the reactor was submerged in enough water to keep it stable and that only 55 per cent of the core had been damaged. Now the company is worried that the molten pool of radioactive fuel may have burned a hole through the bottom of the containment vessel, causing water to leak. ’We will have to revise our plans,’ said Junichi Matsumoto, a spokesman for Tepco. ‘We cannot deny the possibility that a hole in the pressure vessel caused water to leak’. Tepco has not clarified what other barriers there are to stop radioactive fuel leaking if the steel containment vessel has been breached. Greenpeace said the situation could escalate rapidly if ‘the lava melts through the vessel’.” (2011: p.1) One of the problems with the design of the Fukushima plant is that it had been storing depleted nuclear fuel rods on the same site as the reactor, cooled with water. After becoming exposed, this fuel may have added to the critical mass of the meltdown reaction and also caused additional radiation to be released into the environment during the initial period of the disaster. The additional force of this reaction may have been sufficient to burn or melt through the very bottom containment layer of the reactor itself, the final protection layer that prevents a meltdown lava flow from entering the local environmental system through the earth and water systems. The use of sea water to flood and cool the reactor following the meltdown has inevitably led to groundwater radiation being released into the local water tables and sea environment. Thus one of the main questions is how much radiation has been released and how accurate the official statistics of the event are for reliable assessment planning. The noted quantum physicist Michio Kaku has been one of the most vocal academics in analyzing the Fukushima disaster from the outside, based on publicly available statistics and new developments in what is known about the disaster. It cannot be stated more emphatically that the division between the official and public records of the account and the actual events may be at a great variance when wider historical perspective is established. As Kaku stated on CNN May 31st, 2011, “Last week there was this enormous bombshell dropped by the government, they finally admitted there was a 100% core melt in Unit 1, possibly in Units 2 and 3…. all these reassuring, soothing words mean nothing. One hundred percent core melt, what stopped the reactor accident at the time was the sudden influx of sea water. If they didn’t put that sea water in at the right moment we would have lost Northern Japan. That’s how close we came to a national, worldwide tragedy... Now we realize that there’s partial breachment of one, maybe two containment vessels. In other words, radiation is still coming out. And we have this mystery, where is the radiation coming from? It’s coming from a breach of containment, it’s leaking through cracks in the containment and melted holes, we now know there was a breach of containment, it did not create a steam explosion, thank God, because they put seawater in, in time. But radiation, the multi-uranium, leaked out.” (2011: Transcript) To summarize an enormously complex issue as simply as possible to highlight the environmental problems with the Fukushima nuclear disaster, it appears from current records and reports that as many as three of Fukushima’s reactors went into critical meltdown following loss of power and over-heating. The TESCO engineers and Japanese government managed this situation by flooding the reactors with sea water, but this has led to entry of radiation into the ground water and sea. The greater threat of a Chernobyl type of explosion that dispersed radioactive material over a wider geographical region through aerosols, dust, and the force or magnitude of the explosion has been avoided through the use of sea water coolant. There is now a period where the extent that the final containment structures were breached must be established as well as the leakage in radioactive material from the site. Furthermore, a long term plan of clean-up, repair, and rehabilitation of the environment in the region must be undertaken. Due to the extent of the disaster this may take decades and the local area may become uninhabitable for a longer period of time. Scientists such as Kaku and others also warn about the effect of excess radiation in forming cancers, genetic mutations, and other diseases in both the animal and human populations in the region, requiring significant future monitoring. The Ecological Impact The ecological impact of the Fukushima disaster is clearly too early to determine clearly or precisely, and this is because similar environmental situations are rare historically and the statistics being released by authorities who are managing the emergency for TEPCO and the Japanese government are inclined to downplay or distort public release of statistics so as to mitigate fear in the society. The ecological impact of Fukushima will be determined by the amount of radioactivity and radioactive substances released into the environment over time, and the result of this in the health of animal, human, and plant populations. The degree to which this radioactivity is dispersed in the environment and the concentration in a particular locality will condition the overall effects of the problem. The current focus in the Japanese media is on the existence of “hot spots” or radiation that was released from the Fukushima reactor site into the atmosphere and travels unpredictably in the local environment. These concentrations can settle on a region or move without the authorities being able to understand or track the movements efficiently. As the Mainichi Newspaper (2011) writes in Japan, “There are some areas called ‘hot spots,’ where high levels of radiation have been detected even though they are far away from the crippled nuclear plant. When radioactive substances leak from a nuclear facility as a result of an accident and spread through the sky, they fall on some limited areas depending on geographical features, wind direction and rain, resulting in high concentration of radiation in these areas.” (2011: p.1) The hot spots represent the realities of radiation clouds or concentrations released into the environment that travel unpredictably. These hot spots can conglomerate in a region outside of the evacuation zone and cause increases in radiation that are harmful to biological health. According to Reuters (2011), “Data so far shows the most heavily contaminated area is to the northwest of Fukushima, where experts believe radioactive debris was carried by winds in March and then deposited as snow and rain.” (2011: p.1) Radioactive Plutonium, Uranium, Iodine, and Cesium are considered to be the primary dangers environmentally as they enter the local water supply, atmosphere, air, and ground. The concentrations of these elements and their radiation is what is most harmful to biological life, however the “hot spot” phenomenon points to mobile patterns of radiation dispersion that are not uniform or predictable by currently available scientific instruments in Japan. The Economic Effect The economic effect of the Fukushima disaster can be related to the overall consequence of the tsunami and earthquake in the region, or it can be isolated to search for the effects related only to the meltdown and radiation problems. Widespread testing of produce in Japan for radiation has resulted in numerous crops and products being lost by farmers. These include particularly tea, milk, spinach, tomatoes, fish, and other agricultural products particularly exceeding the radioactive rate of Cesium in their biomass. (Reuters, 2011) The release of the radiation through both air and water contamination in the environment places the largest burden on the detection of concentrations that exceed the permissible daily exposure level for radiation. Bloomberg’s Aya Takada and Yasumasa Song reported (Jun 15, 2011) in “Japan’s Ad-Hoc Radiation Tests Raise Concerns” that, “Three months after an earthquake and tsunami crippled the plant, Japan doesn’t appear to have a comprehensive food testing regime, said Peter Burns, the former chairman of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Prolonged exposure to radiation in the air, ground and food can cause leukemia and other cancers, according to the London-based World Nuclear Association... Products including spinach, mushrooms, bamboo shoots, tea, milk, plums and fish have been found to be contaminated with cesium and iodine as far as 360 kilometers from the station. Contamination was detected in 347 food samples from eight prefectures by June 9, according to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare.” (2011: p.1) Initially the earthquake and tsunami caused billions of USD in structural damage to the Japanese economy that will need to be replaced by new construction and paid for by insurance coverage, government assistance programs, or private savings. This represents a drain on the future of the Japanese economy as well as a limiting of current production. The damage to the electrical grid through the earthquake and tsunami caused the decrease in electricity production and rationing of power nationally. The Japanese government has been forced to effectively nationalize TEPCO and the Fukushima nuclear plant in order to co-ordinate the emergency response. However, this also represents a sizable loss to the country financially in terms of public resources that must be committed to the problem in the national budget in the next 10 to 20 years. Furthermore, the damage to the position of nuclear power as a sustainable resource for energy generation has been seriously questioned in Japan and internationally, possibly leading nations to be forced to convert away from nuclear power to clean and sustainable or “Green” energy sources, which will also have an economic consequence on the status quo financial relationships and even the basic plan for social energy and utility power. In this manner, agriculture, industry, and investment will all be affected in Japan and internationally by the Fukushima disaster for years to come. The Social Consequences The social consequences from Fukushima are far from clear or settled even at the moment. For now, what is clear is that a major disaster that could have threatened the long-term livability of approximately 25% of the Japanese island nation has been averted, but the long term impact from radiation releases into the environment is unknown. It is still not fully clear of the meltdown in the Fukushima reactor has been 100% stopped or if it continues to escape into the environment through breaches in the bottom container structures of the reactor itself. The amount of radiation released into the sea is also unknown, and the ability to track radiation hot spots in seawater is even more limited than on land or in the air. Because of this, there is considerable fear in Japan and internationally over the effects of radiation and nuclear power, leading Germany and Italy to even vote to change their national policies with regard to nuclear energy. It must be noted that Fukushima is presented in a context of risk management and disaster but is not in any way a “black swan” event. Innumerable academics and activists had warned about the dangerous combination of nuclear reactors with Japan’s volatile fault-lines and earthquake prone regions. Furthermore, the risk from tsunami from off-shore earthquakes was also known, as this has been exhibited not only in Japan but also internationally repeatedly over the last 10 and 20 years. Because of this one of the strongest social effects or changes is likely to be a more critical concern being given to the arguments that warn against the dangers of nuclear power, as well as increased drives to make nuclear energy either cleaner and disaster proof, or replaced by “green” energy sources such as solar, bio-fuels, hydrogen, fuel cell, natural gas, hydro-power, tidal energy, wind power, etc. An Ecological Assessment Ecologically, there can be expected to be an increase in radiation related diseases in the Fukushima proximity and possibly areas in Japan or internationally that experience the concentrations of “hot spot” radiation. Since the Fukushima reactors did not explode and release radioactive material into the upper atmosphere with the force that Chernobyl did, the environmental problems are related to steam explosion releases of radiation, ground water and sea water radiation releases, and the contamination of earth sources through water or air distribution of radioactive elements. The hot spot phenomena will keep radiation concentrations at dangerous levels until they are more widely dispersed into the overall environment causing a wider elevation of radiation levels in the larger macro-environment. Academic research suggests that the area of immediate location and the hot-spots of greatest concentration of radiation will lead to the worst long-term and short-term effects, yet the dispersal patterns are not distinguished as remaining solely within the radiant distance of the disaster. From the higher elevations of radiation exposure, cancers leading to death are the primary concern, as well as other diseases that lead to organ deteriorations, cysts, tumors, and loss of vital functions in organisms. The transmission from fish, animal, and agricultural products to the human body makes diet also an important location for the contamination to spread throughout Japan or internationally. From this fact, food exports are being monitored and food products are being tested for radiation levels across Japan currently. An Anthropological Assessment Anthropological research into disasters, both natural and human produced, are an important aspect of building understanding of the patterns that repeat in emergency situations from a social or community standpoint. From this the community can proceed to better management and planning for the unforeseeable emergencies that may strike rarely but in life-threatening ways. Anthony Oliver-Smith (1996) wrote in “Anthropological Research on Hazards and Disasters,” that: “Recent perspectives in anthropological research define a disaster as a process/event involving a combination of a potentially destructive agent(s) from the natural and/or technological environment and a population in a socially and technologically produced condition of environmental vulnerability. The combination of these elements produces damage or loss to the major social organizational elements and physical facilities of a community to the degree that the essential functions of the society are interrupted or destroyed, which results in individual and group stress and social disorganization of varying severity.” (1996: p.4) What Keesing & Strathern 1998) describe in “Cultural Anthropology: A Contemporary Perspective, Third Edition” as social identities and social roles may have played a major role in the development of this crisis. (1998: p.11) As the Japanese newspaper the Yomiuri Shimbun reported (2011): “’The nuclear power village--the promoters of atomic energy--was behind both the cause and expansion of the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 plant,’ said Tetsunari Iida, head of the nonprofit Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies. ‘They lack sufficient knowledge and technology, and the safety inspections they conduct are totally inadequate,’ Iida added. The nuclear power village is the nickname for a tight circle of government entities, utilities, manufacturers and others involved in the promotion of nuclear power who believe nuclear plants are safe and reject out of hand any opposing views. Iida used the term ‘genshiryoku mura’ (nuclear power village) in a magazine opinion piece in 1997, and it has now entered the vernacular. Mura means village, but also refers to a small, closed community.” (2011: p.1) In analyzing the operations of the “nuclear power village” or the community of nuclear power experts, engineers, corporate managers, and government officials overseeing and regulating the industry, and the respect and power they enjoyed in relation to the mainstream society before the disaster, anthropology can be used to question the social constructs that led to the disaster in practice, through sociological and psychological terms as well as statistical analysis. Conclusion The Fukushima nuclear disaster has radically changed public perception in Japan and internationally with regard to nuclear energy. It is no longer perceived as a relatively harmless and tolerable risk for power generation in Japan, Germany, and Italy particularly in reaction to the events. This is the most evident social change to result from the disaster, and should lead to more social organization to develop “green” sources of sustainable energy internationally. However, the economic impact from the disaster on the Japanese economy in both the long and short-term will be severe. The requirements of rebuilding and transforming the Japanese economy will be prolonged and expensive for the country. How the radiation exposure will continue to affect the population is unknown, but related to the concentrations of radioactive elements that persist in the environment. The clean-up of the Fukushima site may take many years or decades to complete, and the area may remain as isolated, evacuated, and quarantined for some time. Sadly, these events all point to the state of human hubris which defines many aspects of human technological prowess in the context of natural forces and elemental powers. The Japanese earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster is but one of many natural disasters occurring around the world related to weather, geo-physical, and oceanic forces of nature that are beyond human control. Through anthropological investigation and analysis, better planning for such natural disasters can occur through the understanding of ecological patterns as related to human behavior and technologies. Sources Cited The Economist Jul 4th 2002 “The invisible green hand.” The Economist (print edition). Hails, Chris (Editor) et al. 2008. LIVING PLANET REPORT 2008. WWF. PDF, accessed 06/16/2011. KEESING, ROGER M. & STRATHERN, ANDREW J. 1998. Cultural Anthropology: A Contemporary Perspective, Third Edition. Harcourt Brace & Company. PDF, accessed 06/16/2011. Kaku, Michio 2011. Transcripts. CNN, 2011. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1105/31/ita.01.html, accessed 06/16/2011. Kottak, Conrad P. 1999. The New Ecological Anthropology. American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 101, No. 1 (Mar., 1999), pp. 23-35. http://www.jstor.org/stable/683339, accessed 22/04/2009. Krolicki, Kevin and Takenaka, Kiyoshi 2011. Radiation "hotspots" hinder Japan response to nuclear crisis. Reuters, Jun 15, 2011. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/15/us-japan-nuclear-hotspots-idUSTRE75D1JT20110615, accessed 06/16/2011. Mainichi Japan 2011. Radiation leaking from Fukushima power plant should be monitored more closely. Editorial, THE MAINICHI NEWSPAPERS, June 9, 2011. http://mdn.mainichi.jp/perspectives/editorial/news/20110609p2a00m0na001000c.html, accessed 06/16/2011. Oliver-Smith, Anthony 1996. Anthropological Research on Hazards and Disasters. Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 25 (1996), pp. 303-328. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2155829, accessed 10/05/2011. Ryall, Julian 2011. Nuclear meltdown at Fukushima plant. Telegraph Media Group Limited, 12 May 2011. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8509502/Nuclear-meltdown-at-Fukushima-plant.html, accessed 06/16/2011. Takada, Aya and Song, Yasumasa 2011. Japan’s Ad-Hoc Radiation Tests Raise Concerns. Bloomberg, Jun 15, 2011. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-15/japan-s-piecemeal-radiation-testing-heightens-concerns-over-safety-of-food.html, accessed 06/16/2011. The Yomiuri Shimbun 2011. NUCLEAR CRISIS: HOW IT HAPPENED / Nuclear power village a cozy, closed community. The Yomiuri Shimbun, 2011. http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T110615005652.htm, accessed 06/16/2011. Word Count: 3177 Read More