The Real Consequences of the Fukushima Meltdown
By: Karina Munoz
Tags: The Daily Yomiuri , Nuclear, Environment

March 11, 2011 marks the day the magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami hit the Pacific coast of Tohoku, Japan. Following this, the cooling and power supply of three nuclear reactors experienced complete meltdown causing release of high amounts of radioactive material at the Tokyo Electric Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture. To this day residents of Japan endure the aftermath of the energy accident and natural disaster. The incident not only affected those directly at the heart of the situation but also still has great impact on the world as a whole.

The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident produced the largest discharge of radioactive material into the ocean in history. We as a global society are becoming more and more informed on environmental and social issues and as a result we can no longer afford to ignore the pressing concerns. By bringing awareness to this issue we can make real change towards effective disaster prevention and response.

Containing the Disaster

For many, the Fukushima disaster sparked strong feelings of fear and overall concern. Residents of Fukushima have had growing worry and uncertainty about the threat nuclear energy holds towards public health and safety.

What short term and long term risks of radiation exposure should citizens be informed of? What are the ways in which to respond to said risks?

These are critical questions that the public has failed to get clear answers for, and has led to a loss in trust and confidence of the government. The truth of the matter is, people of Japan are still having to deal with the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster to this day. The main public health consequences of the disaster relate to the evacuation and relocation of the people residing in Fukushima. These measures were taken based on safety considerations of radiation exposure and damage to the infrastructure and facilities. According to the World Health Organization, there had been an increase in mortality among temporarily relocated elderly people and an increase risk of non-communicable diseases, such as diabetes and mental health problems. The displaced population suffered from a sudden cut off from their homes, health care, employment, family ties, etc.

Not only that, but other parts of the world are also being faced with environmental problems caused by radioactive waste. Much of the radioactive waste from decontamination in Fukushima has been disposed near where people are currently living. Eventually, this waste will spread throughout the environment. Water containing radioactive contamination continues to spread into the Pacific Ocean each day as result of the cooling of melted nuclear fuel from the damaged reactors. Albacore tuna caught off the Oregon shore showed to have elevated levels of radioactivity in a published study from Oregon State University. Lead author on the study, Delvan Neville, a graduate research assistant in the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Health Physics states that “You can’t say there is absolutely zero risk because any radiation is assumed to carry at least some small risk” but as of now, the leaks of radioactive waste in the ocean affecting consumption of fish and sea life raises minute risk to human safety.

Invisible Radioactive Contamination

Over 70 percent of the area in Fukushima, mainly areas of forests and mountains, are not monitored for radiation. State-sponsored monitoring has created a significant amount of misinformation being sold to the public. The implications of this provide false reassurance for people of Japan. The Japanese government and supporters of nuclear energy continue to promote that the radiation and radioactive contamination in Fukushima and areas surrounding it are no longer a major risk to people. The main focus of the pro-nuclear agenda is to reassure the public of diminished threat. Influential mass media portrays the Fukushima disaster from the nuclear industry’s perspective with political motives in mind. The Daily Yomiuri — one of the most influential newspapers in Japan — represents the disaster in a way that portrays radiation exposure as contained and safe. In describing the radioactive conditions they have used the term “hot spot” to imply that the radiation is contained to ‘spots’ and therefore controlled. Representation in mass media and the news have great impact on how disaster can be perceived.

Exposure of Fukushima has recently been on the rise due to the coming Tokyo 2020 Olympics. The global sporting event is being promoted as the “reconstruction Olympics” in an effort to showcase Fukushima’s successful disaster recovery by Prime Minister Shinzō Abe and the Japanese government. Many activists have noted that better use of the Olympics budget could have sustained housing support for evacuees, but instead, the highly restricted evacuation zones have been recklessly opened for return of evacuated citizens despite worrisome conditions spreading over the region.

Medical journalist Aihara Hiroko explains, “Surely the Tokyo Olympics will be a superb occasion for displaying ‘recovery from disaster,’” but also for revealing to the international community the “real consequences of the human-made disaster resulting from the national nuclear energy policy: the imposition of long-term evacuation and sacrifice on the part of are residents.”

Tokyo 2020 Olympics/Paralympics Mascots

What We Can Do

Culturally, Japanese problem solving strategies revolve primarily around panels of experts, commissions, and committees. In the presence of a big issue such as this one, finding permanent solutions has been unsuccessful so far. In addition to plans guided by informed experts, there must be a greater engagement with the broader public and government officials.

Journalist, host, and former announcer for NHK, Jun Hori:

“Nothing about news will change if only the media changes. Open journalism. Public access. Achieving these goals won’t necessarily solve the problems facing our society. However, if the people who help to make information available, if all those people work together and use their own power to try to make a difference in their society, if those people begin to make their voices heard, we can definitely make a change in our world.”

In the past years, interest in nuclear energy policy has been on the rise. The Anti-Nuclear movement has proven to be a major push towards nuclear awareness and change. Activists and mass demonstrations have communicated the impact of the public voice to call for stronger communities and self-expression. Effective disaster response requires a further refined definition of responsibility in the interest of providing an ethical guideline for environmental issues and opposition. It is crucial for society to work in cooperation to create global change.

Widespread engagement, participation, and a proactive mindset must play a fundamental role in defining how we respond to major disaster — Fukushima and beyond.

As a global society, we must be proactive rather than reactive. After all, simply expressing disapproval will not completely iron out issues of nuclear power, but it can open the door to new ways of critical thinking. Not only for Japan, this issue is incredibly important because it is constantly bringing awareness to countries around the world of the risks of nuclear weapons, war, and radiation exposure. The implications of this environmental discourse brings hope for more inclusive and global communication. With all being said, solely expressing dissatisfaction will not completely solve problems, but it can create a start to real change to take place. If new initiative is not taken, the aftermath of disasters to come will inevitably look the same.