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 21^st 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)