"Very serious." There was no doubt in the IAEA director-general Yukiya Amano's mind that the nuclear crisis in Japan remained as such. Of course, everyone has heard about the awful, tremendously tragic, pretty much indescribable crisis in Japan that began with a powerful 8.9 quake, and was followed by a relentless Tsunami. The problems that have resulted include water shortages in over 900,000 households, over 350,000 people who have been evacuated from their households, and what has been consistently on the headlines of every news agency: The Nuclear Power Plant meltdowns.
The damages caused by the earthquake on the Fukushima power plant have been frightening. After Nuclear disasters such as the one in Chernobyl and the Three-Mile Island accident, there is good reason to be frightened. Japanese officials are trying to ensure that people don't panic. It is fortunate, Amano says, that 3 of the 6 reactors at the Fukushima plant have had electricity restored and cooling has been fairly effective so far, particularly with reactors 5 and 6 which have had their cooling systems "fully" restored.
Nonetheless, radioactive fallout has been detected in the air, and in water and the earth surrounding the Fukushima plant. As seen in the image, a no fly zone has been established, and evacuations have already occurred. Furthermore, foods such as milk and spinach have been found to contain levels of radiation higher than "legal limits," as well as water. Japanese officials say though that, although higher than legal limits, the radiation iodine will not negatively affect health. The World Health Organization (WHO) claims that they have already detected exports from Japan that contain mild levels of radiation. Countries such as South Korea and China have tightened their checks on such imports. And to make things worse, the weather has made it difficult to improve the nuclear crisis at hand.
It is already devastating enough for Japan that an earthquake and Tsunami hit. Their economy has greatly plummeted, resources are scarce, but most of all, they have seen a loss of human life that hurts the hearts of those around the world, particularly those with relations in Japan.
Do you think the Power Plant is getting more media attention than the other aspects to this tragedy, such as the living conditions of the refugees, the continued searches and remarkable rescues, etc?
7 comments:
I feel that the nuclear crisis has not been given excessive attention. It is directly related to the welfare of the people. The refugees and rescues are important, but I think that the nuclear fall out relates directly to them too. I might sound mean, but I think it's more important for people (esp. in the Bay Area) to be aware of how this nuclear incident can affect them than how rescuers save people using helicopters.
We cannot rule out nuclear energy as an alternative energy source simply because of one accident. There's this Chinese proverb that says a man gets bitten by a snake once and so he becomes frightened at the sight of a rope for the rest of his life. We can't be like that. Instead, this fall out should encourage further research for natural disaster preventions in nuclear plants and how to improve nuclear energy to make it safer and more effective.
I am TOTALLY in agreement with LuShuang. I have been an advocate for the use of nuclear power for about two years now, and yes, there are risks. Great risks. But let's look at some facts. The facts remain that coal burning plants give off more radiation into the atmosphere than nuclear plants do. There is radioactive material in coal that is released into the environment along with particulate matter and other fun things like that. Nuclear power, however, can reuse its spent fuel rods by a new process, and nuclear technologies have greatly improved the risks (for example the spent rods can be stored on site, the emergency shutoff has been improved, etc.) since Chernobyl and Three-Mile Island. This being said, there obviously are risks. But those are more immediate, short term risks as opposed to the more serious long-term affects associated with coal plants. I'm worried about this story because I'm afraid this will set opinion polls back in terms of people favoring nuclear power, but I hope it recovers, because the fact remains that nuclear power is an excellent source of energy for the sustainability of our planet.
Although the Power Plant is a very important aspect of Japan's story, I personally would like to see more coverage on the Japanese people themselves. When I visited Japan the summer before last, the people I met there had a huge impact on me and it breaks my heart to know that they are having to deal with this terrible disaster. Whenever I tune into CNN or another news channel I feel that most of the coverage I see is on the Plant rather than the people. I would like to see more coverage on how the Japanese people are coping with not having certain necessities, with looking for lost loved ones, with fleeing from areas near the Plant, with working with the Red Cross and other foundations, etc. A news story where a reporter follows a family for a few days would be very interesting and educational. I think if we see what the people are going through then we will be more inclined to help them.
-Sandy Frank
I think the nuclear crisis is a big deal because even the people who are working currently at the nuclear power plants and keeping everything stable are basically receiving the amount of radiation in one day that they would get in a lifetime and everyone is only worrying about themselves right now. Well I guess I am worrying about the radiation coming to the bay area and possibly harming us so I would like the news to cover everything but I think there should also be more coverage on the people and not just focus mostly on the power plant for people overseas to know if Japan is doing okay or not and how much of everything was actually lost in this disaster.
There are tons of personal pieces flooding out of Japan. Don't be blinded by the fact that large scale news providers must deliver news to a large scale audience.
Even though this is a devastating event, these are the risks that come along with using nuclear energy for power. I do believe that this event will help benefit us all by allowing engineers to develop more reliable plants and in case of disasters like this, help create more effective protocols to reduce the leaking of radiation to surrounding areas.
Some people who commented on this forum, would like to see more coverage about the people, but like Bobby said, there are numerous events happening around Japan and I guess news broadcasters in the United States are more concerned about the nuclear fallout and radiation hitting the united states as that would effect many more people around the world.
Although I do agree with Jason, that nuclear power plants are better for the environment than coal plants, I still feel like there has to be a much better option.
At the moment, nuclear power plants produce nuclear fuel, but then have spent fuel that sits on rods. These rods are disposed of by being buried out in the desert somewhere. Yet they still take thousands of years to decompose. According to http://www.npr.org/2011/03/15/134569191/spent-fuel-rods-now-a-concern-at-nuclear-plant, they are "radioisotopes that come from the products of fission" and they are hot because of their radiation. I think that this cannot be good for the environment, us, or the planet, to be producing massive amounts of radiation, even if we do bury them deep in the ground so that they wont affect our generation. I think this should be changed. Even if they're stored on site, as Jason said, I do not believe that this will help anything. It's still scary to me that vast amounts of spent, radioactive fuel are just mounting up in factories. Some time in the future, despite multiple emergency switches, the number will just increase too much until we don't know what to do with them. Now that's a scary thought.
It's awful that it takes such an awful crisis like the one in Japan to show people how dangerous these things can be, and how much we need to change. While it may be a better source of energy that some, it's still far from perfect, and needs changing.
Post a Comment