Nuclear
Pollution in the light of Fukushima and Koodumkulam
By Nisa Fasil
The Disaster at Fukushima Nuclear Plant on Japan after the earth quake and
Tsunami caused much concern among the humanity. The accident was assessed as
level 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), the maximum scale
value. The measures taken by the Japanese government 3-50 kilometer from the
plant showed radioactive cesium levels high enough to cause concern, leading
the government to ban the scale of food grain grown in that area. The officials
even recommended that tap water should not be used to prepare food for infants.
There were no immediate deaths due to direct radio active exposures. Fear of
future cancer and ionizing radiation could have long term psychological effects
on a large portion of population in the contaminated areas.
The Fukushima Disaster was an eye opener, citing the risk of
associated with the nuclear plants ongoing accidents. There has been a
significant re-evaluation of existing nuclear power programmes in many
countries. Events at Fukushima cast doubt on the idea that even an advanced
economy can master nuclear safety. Increased art-nuclear sentiment has been
evident in india, Italy, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan and USA.
 |
Protesters hold signs reading: "Against the restart of Oi
nuclear power plant" in front of the official residence
of the Japanese prime minister Yoshihiko Noda. He has
said that two idle nuclear reactors in Oi should be
restarted to protect jobs and avoid damage to
the economy. Photograph: Reuters/Yuriko Nakao
|
This nuclear sentiment worked against the Koodamkulam Nuclear Power Project
(KKNPP) in the Tirunalveli District of Tamil Nadu. The devastating and
uncontrollable melting down in Fukushima has rightly triggered a wave of
concern among the thinking people of India. The protest against nuclear plant
is not isolated to Koodamkulam, people are protesting in Jaitapur, Maharashtra
and Gorakhpur, Haryana. But the government did not learn from the disaster all
over the world and still sticking on to nucleocracy and wants to play death
game. The fears of Fukushima and the
fears about continued electricity shortage have raised doubts in people’s
minds. This article aims to give a picture of the history of nuclear accidents
and causes of nuclear and the role played by International organizations in
curbing nuclear pollution.
Nuclear Pollution
The development of science and technology is both a boon and
bane. The various scientific discoveries astonished the world. New gadgets and
machines made the process of life very easy. But the Second world war showed
the ugly face of science, The world humanity is not yet recovered from the bomb
explosion at Nagasaki and Hiroshima during the second world war.
Man has always been exposed to ionizing radiation from
various sources. Radiation induced excess of cancer in workers at Atomic energy
plants. Nuclear reactor accidents such as Brown’s Ferry (Alabama) and Three
Miles Island, Pennsylvania caused disaster to man. The Three Mile Island
accident has had far reaching effect. It increased the sensitivity of the
public and policy makers about the risk of nuclear power. As the Chernobyl
reactor accident in 1986 has shown, modern nuclear technology creates
unavoidable risk for all states whether or not they choose to use nuclear energy.
The 1979 accident at the Three Miles Island Nuclear Plant in Pennysylvania
reminded the world community about leaks and lack of proven means of safety
disposing of nuclear wastes. Chernobyl accident in Soviet Union showed how
serious were the risk of health, agriculture and the environment posed by
nuclear power.
The popularity of nuclear power ultimately brought long term
health and environmental consequences to the forefront of international
concern. The Stockholm conference in 1972 had called for a registery of
emissions of nuclear waste disposal and reprocessing. The conference recognized
that radioactive emissions was a growing problem caused by increasing use of
nuclear power but offered no clear policy.
Oceanic dumping of nuclear waste was partially banned in 1972 and
suspended altogether in 1983 pending further assessment of health and
environment hazards, leaving disposal on land or reprocessing as the only
viable options.
In 1977, the UN General Assembly reaffirmed the importance
of nuclear energy for economic and social development and proclaimed the rights
of all states to use it and to have access to the technology. As a result of
this resolution nuclear power plants were established in many countries.
 |
Checks: Officials carry out radiation tests on children
who were evacuated from the area near Fukushima. Photo: Reuters
|
The IAEA ensure that nuclear power was used for peaceful
purposes only. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 strengthened the
policy of non-proliferation. The existence of a threat to health and
environment was recognized in the 1968 treaty, which banned nuclear weapon
tests in the atmosphere, outer space, under water or in any circumstances where
radioactive debris spreads beyond the territory of the testing state. Its
effect is that test must be conducted underground and cause no escape of
pollution.
In Nuclear test cases the International Court of Justice
denied to decide whether atmospheric tests carried out by France violated
customary International Law, but it did not hold that France had by its public
statements unilaterally committed itself to conduct no more tests of this kind.
Subsequent tests have in practice complied with the 1963 Treaty. The peaceful
nuclear explosions are not forbidden by Law.
The Nuclear Test cases raised the questions of whether the
deposit of radio active particles on the territory of another state, or on the
high seas constitutes serious harm or an interference with high seas freedom.
The peculiar difficulty which radio active fall out poses is that injury may
not be immediate or apparent. The IAEA, WHO and FAO in their respective fields
issued common guidelines in this regard.
The Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident,
Vienna, 1986 adopted after the Chernobyl accident imposes on parties a duty to
notify states likely to be affected by transboundry releases of ‘radiological
safety significance’ so as to enable them to take all possible precautionary
measures. This convention aimed at strengthening further International
co-operation in the safe development and use of nuclear energy.
The Convention on Nuclear Safety 1994 held at Vienna emphasized
the importance of promoting an effective nuclear safety culture. The preamble
of the Convention stressed the importance of ensuring that the nuclear energy
is safe, well regulated and environmentally sound. The main objectives of the
convention are to achieve and maintain high level of nuclear safety world wide
through enhancement of national and international co-operation and to establish
effective defences in nuclear installations against potential radiological
hazards inorde to protect individuals, society and the enviorment from harmful
effects of ionizing radiation.
The Principal 21 of Stockholm Declaration and other
authoritative statements of the obligation to control sources of enviormental
harm are applicable to nuclear risks. States do have an International
responsibility based in customary law for the safe conduct of their nuclear
activities.
The Role of International Organisations in Curbing
Nuclear Pollution
International bodies like IAEA, OECD and ILO formulated
international standards of health and safety regulation. Even though these
organizations is working to reduce the holocaust caused by nuclear energy, it
fails to achieve the assurance of minimum standards of environmental
protection.
(1)
IAEA
The International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) was established in 1956. Its main tasks were to encourage and facilitate
the development and distribution of nuclear power and to ensure through
non-proliferation safeguards that it was used for peaceful purposes only. The
statue requires IAEA to establish standards for protecting health and
minimizing danger to life and property.
 |
| Photo: ASAHI SHIMBUN/epa/Corbis
|
IAEA standards, regulations, codes of practice, guides and other related
instruments cover such subjects as radiation protection, transport and handling
of radio active waste, radio active waste disposal. The important point is that
the Agency has competence over a wide range of safety and health issues
relating to all aspects of the use of nuclear energy. Nevertheless, it lacks
the ability to give these standards obligatory force. Despite their non-binding
character IAEA health and safety standards are a significant contribution to
controlling the risks of nuclear energy.
(2)
OECD
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) has been involved in nuclear safety matters through its
Nuclear Energy Agency. The aims of this organisation are similar to that of
IAEA, without its safeguard role. They include encouraging the adoption of
common stands of national nuclear legislation dealing with public health and
the prevention of accidents.
(3)
ILO
ILO has sponsored a widely supported
convention on protecting workers against radiation and its issues and various
non binding recommendations on the subject.
Conclusion
The 21st century appears to be a
century of new hope for man. A keen awareness is on for man to comprehend his
total relations with the environment. People became aware of the detrimental
effects of environmental degradation on their local communities and they will
demand changes in states environmental policies and practices. Large amounts of
chemical pollutions could be released into the atmosphere after a nuclear
explosion. The nuclear explosion cause biological consequences also. Both
natural and agricultural systems are extremely vulnerable to climatic abd other
stresses that could result from nuclear explosion. The lack of binding international
regulation of nuclear energy. What is required in this respect is a much stronger
scheme of inspection and monitoring and compliance with IAEA minimum safety
standards.
(Nisa Fasil is an LL.M Gold Medalist from
University of Kerala. She is now a very successful lawyer, an academician and a
columnist for leading publications. She has also co-authored a book titled
‘Ultimate Guide to CLAT’ published by Lexis Nexis)
