Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
to the company and the event, including international partners in the
joint venture. Local geographical seismic conditions were conducive
to the event occurring, but so too was the presence of the drilling
well. The event has been variously interpreted by overseas observers,
national leaders and local community residents - depending upon their
backgrounds and circumstances.
The second case relates to the question of radioactivity in Sellafield,
England and Fukushima, Japan. The issue here is whether the spread of
radioactivity should be seen as a 'natural disaster' or simply a moment
waiting to happen. Sellafield made the news recently when a report
by the Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority concluded that if
only 1 per cent of the liquid radioactive waste stored at the Sellafield
nuclear power plant in Britain was released to air, the radioactive
fallout in western Norway could be five times higher than in the
areas of Norway that were worst affected by the Chernobyl accident
(Norway Ministry of the Environment, 2011). The Norwegian concern
was not unfounded. Sellafield has been subject to much criticism over
the years due to discharges of radioactive material, some accidental
and some allegedly deliberate. Prevailing sea currents transport any
radioactive materials leaked into the sea at Sellafield along the entire
coast of Norway. The Norwegian concern is to prevent further potential
environmental harm, knowing the risks and likelihood of just such
harm occurring is high.
The explosion and melt down at the Daiichi nuclear power plant
in Fukushima has been described as the most significant radioactive
event since Chernobyl. The lead-up to the event saw a massive tsunami
devastate the northern Japanese coastline. Again, the question has been
posed as to how and why this major leak was able to happen, and
whether the cause was anthropogenic or natural. The short answer
is that the nuclear power industry in Japan has a terrible reputation
when it comes to health and safety provisions, for sharing of essential
knowledge about nuclear facilities, and for planning and responding
to nuclear power plant events (Takemura, 2012). In essence, this was
a nuclear disaster that was waiting to happen, as those who have long
objected to the placement of such plants near earthquake fault lines
have tirelessly pointed out. The local geography makes the construction
of such plants intrinsically dangerous; but it is local and international
politics (including the support of the United Nations International
Atomic Energy Agency) that ensured that Fukushima was, eventually,
to hit the world headlines.
Environmental victimisation thus ought to be examined within
the context of specific places and spaces. The precise nature of
Search WWH ::
Custom Search