management of nuclear power paper
TRANSCRIPT
1
Chrystal Chase May 4, 2014
Management of Nuclear Power
Introduction
I went to get a drink of water when I noticed that something sticky was above it. I was
told that it was oil that came from the sky, but I was so thirsty, I drank it just as it was. This
phrase is posted in front of the Fountain of Peace in Nagasaki, Japan [view picture 1, 19]. This
high lights the repercussions of nuclear fallout. Nuclear power is a “form of energy produced by
an atomic reaction that is capable of producing an alternative source of electrical power to that
supplied by coal, gas, or oil” (TheFreeDictionary, 2014). This allows nuclear power to produce
clean energy. However, it is also utilized in nuclear weaponry. There are concerns of terrorists
groups acquiring nuclear power. While it is crucial to continue managing nuclear power, its
harsh nature recommends a thorough scientific approach. As described in Nuclear Physical
Methods in Radio ecological Investigations of Nuclear Test Sites, these scientific approaches
include “technical safety, management operations, regulatory measures, and the importance of
accurate communication” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, XV). It is necessary to maintain these
standards in order to protect people’s health and the environment. Therefore, nuclear power
should not be used until further research can confirm ways to prevent negative outcomes for both
present and future generations.
Literature Review
The primary reason that supporters have argued to continue to use nuclear power is being
able to provide an “abundant, clean, affordable, and almost inexhaustible source of energy”
(Hecker, etal, 2000, 4). Nuclear power is evaluated through the Nuclear Security Enterprise
(NSE), an agency that “ensures the Nation sustains a safe, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent
2
through the application of science, technology, engineering, and manufacturing” (US
Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration). Although the Nuclear
Enterprise has managed nuclear power, there are high consequences for not following the
procedures safely. Ideally, there would be consistent procedures to follow when managing
nuclear power. These procedures include “set the priorities in the proper order, being the best
available analytical tools, enforce rigorous discipline and accountability, and perform critical
review by independent technical experts” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 26). In addition to these safety
procedures, three guiding principles would also be maintained. According to Shultz and Drell
(2012, 5-7), the three guiding principles are, first, calculations that were used to assess nuclear
risks in both the military and the civil sectors. Second, the risks associated with nuclear power
would more likely grow substantially, as nuclear weapons and civilian nuclear energy production
technology spread in unstable regions. Finally, we need to understand that no nation is immune
from risks involving nuclear weapons and nuclear power within their borders.
By not maintaining these standards, nuclear fallout can easily occur. An example of this
fallout includes the destruction of Fukushima’s nuclear plant on March 11, 2011 [view picture 2,
19]. As described in the article, The Situation at Fukushima, the nuclear breakdown was caused by
lack of coolant storage for water being used in the reactors. Since the water was not cooling properly,
it caused the pods to overheat releasing large amounts of hydrogen. As a result, it developed an
explosion, which forced 160,000 civilians to be evacuated. In order to rebuild Fukushima, the
NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) has been working on improving the stabilization of
nuclear pods from overheating which would increase the ability to resist natural disasters, such
as tsunamis and earthquakes [view pictures 3 and 4 , 20]. As described in the hearing statement
made on May 4, 2011, these studies have led to persuasion on the importance of following
regulations and the development of the Safety Culture Policy Statement. This policy is designed
3
to “proactively engage the public and stakeholders at an early stage and by involving them in a
way that gives them a sense of ownership over the process and its ultimate decisions” (US
Congress, 2011, 30).
By not considering these guidelines, it leads to drawbacks of other factors. These factors
include how it affects people’s health, ways to recover from nuclear disasters, capabilities
countries have in order to properly manage nuclear power, and what people are learning about
nuclear power at an educational level. The past experience of the atomic bombs in Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, Japan support this analysis, which is described in the Atomic Bomb Museums and
by Hibakusha (Atomic Bomb survivors).
These negative effects have caused arguments as to whether nuclear power should
continue to be used in society. Nuclear power provides benefits to improving living conditions
based in economic terms. However, lack of knowledge on its side effects makes it unpredictable
on how to prepare and recover from multiple health problems. These health problems include
loss of hair, skin affection, leukemia, and cancer.
Relevant Background Information
These health problems are not only a hazard to the human body; it is also harmful to the
environment. This analysis is supported by multiple tests that were conducted in the Republic of
Marshall Islands and the Nevada Test Site (NTS) [view picture 5 and 6, 21]. For example, one of
the tests analyzed was that nuclear waste leads to “contamination by radio nuclides of surface
soil, contamination by radio nuclides of groundwater, and land disturbance” (Hecker, etal, 2000,
47). As a result, it forces Marshallese people to migrate from one island to another. This action
was conducted on Elugelab Island and the lagoons located near the island. Not only does nuclear
testing cause forced migration, it reduces the proper health growth for plants and animals and
4
humans. For instance, nuclear radiation creates soil disturbance, which has caused most common
food plants in the Republic of Marshall Islands to not grow properly. These food plants include
coconut and breadfruit, which are highly consumed by Marshallese people [view pictures 7 and
8, 22]. Because Marshallese people struggle at growing their own food products, they become
dependent on “surplus USDA food and financial compensation” (Hecker, etal, 2000, 87). It also
leads to severe health issues, such as shutting off biological systems that are related to calcium
and potassium. This is caused by “above-ground nuclear weapons tests, nuclear accidents, and
the improper disposal of waste from the processing of nuclear fuel rods” (Hecker, etal, 2000, 90).
Places that have already suffered this consequence include the Ukraine, Los Alamos National
Laboratory (LANL) in the United States, and the Kazakhstan Atoll.
Skin contamination is another possible side effect, which has occurred and spread to
family members living near the Nevada Test Site (NTS). These skin contaminations were
estimated based on “whole-body and skin dose due to y rays from material on the ground, skin
dose due to B particles from material deposited directly on the skin, and skin dose due to B
particles from material deposited on the ground” (Hecker, etal, 2000,191). Contamination from
nuclear radiation can lead to further health problems. One of these health problems includes
leukemia, “an acute or chronic disease that results in an abnormal increase in the number of white
blood cells” (Merriam Webster, 2014). Health issues, like the above examples, result in
questioning of economic development and challenges in people’s livelihoods.
One of the benefits nuclear power has toward society includes its increasing progress in
national security. For security, Jenkins argues that nations should maintain sufficiency in nuclear
power in case of advancement in future terrorism. An example of this included the attack on the
World Trade Center and 9/11. As a result, Americans worry about their sense of national
5
security. Along with questioning how advanced some terrorist groups are becoming and when
they might strike again. For example, Al Qaeda has become the first terrorist group with nuclear
advancement. After years of research on nuclear weapons, Jenkins analyzes that Al Qaeda has
the capability to use nuclear power, as a way to “create a climate of fear and alarm through
dramatic attacks” (Jenkins, 2008, 242). The primary target is the United States based on the
theory that “America is the reason for all oppression, injustice, licentiousness, or suppression that
is the Muslim’s lot” (Jenkins, 2008, 255). If Al Qaeda attacks with nuclear force, it can lead to
massacres of innocent people. Not only can it lead to immoral attacks, Iran might consider
developing its own nuclear power [view picture 9, 23]. Therefore, some people find it necessary
to continue to use nuclear weapons. Iran is also considering developing its own nuclear power.
The idea of Iran developing nuclear power might later on suggest that “military action would
again be necessary” (Jenkins, 2008, 232). It may also suggest that Iran may develop allies with
other terrorist groups and provide them with nuclear support. In order to prevent countries, such
as Iran, from creating aggressive attacks it is encouraged to maintain security with nuclear
power.
Using nuclear power has also been a benefit to economic development. As described in
hearing statements made by the NRC on February 28, 2013, nuclear power is a way to provide
cleaner electric energy. The agency also argued that after the tragic destruction in Fukushima,
NRC is carrying “out the mission of ensuring safe and secure use of radioactive materials and
public health and safety and the environment” (US Congress, 2013, 8). NRC is achieving this
long-term goal based on scientific analysis that has been observed and recorded since May 4,
2011. Thus, by providing proper maintenance of nuclear plants, it can guarantee that it would
6
provide society with clean energy. As a result, better maintenance would allow people to not be
skeptical if whether or not a spill out would occur.
For places, such as Illinois it is crucial to be reliant on nuclear power as primary energy
source due to its economic vitality [view picture 10, 24]. Because of this, it is important that the
NRC helps ensure that nuclear power “meets current and future energy needs without sacrificing
safety or security” (US Congress, 2011, 3). Even though nuclear power can guarantee security
and clean energy, it does bring about difficult challenges.
These challenges include tragic destruction in Fukushima, which resulted in lack of
knowledge of setting up a proper command structure. As described in the article, The Situation at
Fukushima, developing a command structure is difficult to maintain. Especially if there is no
government support, which lacks consideration on preparation of natural disasters. This often
leads to unreasonable consideration to its development. In the case in Fukushima, the nuclear
plant was not managed with enough preparation, in case an incident was to occur. Part of this
had to do with “issues of cost, not only of up-front construction but also of insurance against
liabilities in the event of an accident” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 15). Although the NRC has been
making progress at improving these errors, it would take time before a nuclear regulatory system
is properly developed.
Argument and Analysis
When looking into the negative factors of nuclear power, it is also considerable to learn
how they are being influenced at an educational level. These educational analyses include the
atomic bomb museums in Japan, which views nuclear power as a burden to society.
On June 13, 2009, I personally visited Hiroshima’s Atomic Bomb Museum [view picture
11, 24]. Inside the museum, The Hall of Remembrance displayed stories of victims that were
7
affected by atomic radiation. Many of these victims were mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters-
mostly civilian. Each of these victims had their own story, which further described the tragic
consequences of nuclear power. All of these stories were recorded and presented in this section
of the museum.
Out of all the stories, the most memorable one was about a young mother, who lost her
first baby child. After the bomb (“little boy”) in Hiroshima was dropped, she and her baby
daughter were instantly affected with nuclear radiation. Due to lack of medical support and
supplies, it was difficult for the mother to receive proper treatment for the side effects of the
nuclear radiation. It was even harder for her baby girl to co-exist with this harsh lifestyle. Her
daughter eventually died before she could receive proper treatment for these side effects. Even
though the mother was able to survive this tragic event and start a new family, it was impossible
for her to get over the death of her first child. Stories like this one brings up the question of how
a person can be forgiven. Perhaps in cases like this one, it is impossible to do so despite the
actions taken for recovery.
It was not only the loss of her daughter, many other innocent children died due to nuclear
radiation. The memories of these young children are symbolically remembered by statues
displayed near the museum. These statues include ones that are shaped like human figures and
wrapped in small aprons. One of these statues was covered in a red yarn coat, appearing like
Little Red Riding Hood [view picture 12, 25]. In front of the statue was a clutter of paper cranes,
which are also displayed near the museums. These cranes are a national symbol for hope and
peace, which play a significant role in remembrance of this sorrow during the Post World War II.
The story begins with a small girl named Sadako Sasaki.
8
Sadako was a two year old girl, who lived in Hiroshima, when an atomic bomb was
dropped on August 6, 1945. Despite the devastation in Japanese population due to nuclear
radiation, Sadako significantly survived and was able to return to school once it restarted its
sessions. But at the age of ten, Sadako became severely ill with leukemia, which was caused by
the atomic bomb. Since then, she spent many months in the hospital hoping to recover quickly.
Since she was not able to attend school, Sadako missed her friends and was sad for missing all
the interesting lessons. One day, when one her friends came to visit her, Sadako was advised that
if she “folds 1,000 paper cranes, her wish would come true” (Satomi, 2010, 11). Excited by this
great news, Sadako immediately began to fold dozens of paper cranes. Her wish was to quickly
recover from her sickness and return to school with her friends. Unfortunately, the leukemia was
so severe, Sadako died before she could finish folding 1,000 paper cranes. She was 12 years old.
Depressed by the loss of their friend, Sadako’s school mates decided to influence end of eternal
suffrage. This was conducted by collecting donations in order to build a monument that
represented the children who died due to nuclear radiation. This goal was achieved when the
Children’s Peace Monument was constructed in 1958 [view picture 13, 25]. To this day, people
worldwide visit this monument and display cranes in remembrance of these lost children.
Within Sadako’s story, people learn about the value of hope, which was constantly
wished for during Post World War II. Folding paper cranes became an inspiration during this
disaster and are further influential to people worldwide. The cranes that are displayed near the
museums symbolically show this affection by influencing the end of war and to “build peace in
the world” (Satomi, 2010, 21). This goal is further motivated with the quote, “This is our cry.
This is our prayer. To build peace in the world” (Satomi, 2010, 21).This is the pray that is
displayed near the museums with the use of a simple, yet powerful symbolic figure.
9
The second Atomic Bomb Museum I visited was during my study abroad trip in Fall
2014 in Nagasaki. Nagasaki was the second city that was destroyed by the biggest atomic bomb,
“fat man”, which affected more citizens compared to the ones in Hiroshima. Even though this
museum also displayed tragic stories of victims, it also analyzed scientific facts about nuclear
radiation and how it affects the human body. These studies were based on the development and
of both bombs that were dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
According to the website of Nagasaki’s Atomic Bomb Museum, the bomb that was
dropped in Hiroshima, “little boy”, covered a deadly diameter of .7m with 15,000 tons of
radioactive force. The fissile material that was used for this bomb was uranium. “Fat man”,
which was dropped in Nagasaki almost doubled the diameter compare to “little boy”. The reason
why it doubled was due to its increased length and type of fissile material used. The fissile
materials used for “fat man” was plutonium. Based on these studies, atomic bombs can lead to
massive destruction and increased loss of lives, if it is managed without making thorough
decisions. Unfortunately, this convinced the United States to take offensive attacks on Japan
without having clear knowledge on the scientific effects of nuclear radiation.
Both Atomic Bomb Museums provide these resources as a way to promote worldwide
peace. In Japanese theory, worldwide peace cannot exist as long as nuclear radiation continues to
be used. Thus, due to these resources, visitors are influenced to view nuclear power as a negative
killing factor to society.
Not only do the Atomic Bomb Museums influence the negativity of using nuclear power,
Hibakusha’s personal experience further support this argument. One of these Hibakusha is
Sumiteru Taniguchi, who tells his story worldwide, in order to fight against the use of nuclear
10
weapons. During my study abroad trip in Nagasaki, Japan I personally heard his story at
Nagasaki Peace University on November 9, 2013.
Sumiteru Taniguchi was sixteen years old when the atomic bomb was dropped in
Nagasaki. He was riding his bicycle, delivering people’s mails as he normally does. He was 1.8
km away from the hypocenter when the atomic bomb landed. Once this happened, heat rays
struck Taniguchi’s back, causing him to fly off of his bicycle. After a few minutes of
unconsciousness, he woke up seeing the houses where he delivered mail completely perished.
His bicycle was tolled and dysfunctional, and he was unable to stand up. In order to find help,
Taniguchi had to crawl to a lonesome tree that was sitting on top of a hill. Despite his effort to
reach his destination, nobody knew that he was lying there. He spent the first couple of nights by
this tree, still unable to get up. On the third day, rescuers finally discovered Taniguchi and took
him to the nearest hospital. Because so many Japanese citizens were affected by nuclear
radiation, there were lack of medical supplies, doctors, and even food.
For almost two years, Taniguchi remained on a hospital bed, lying on his stomach.
During his stay at the hospital, the wounds on his back had to be continuously sanitized and
redressed. At this time, many remaining doctors and nurses were surprised that he was able to
live despite the conditions he was in physically. Shortly afterwards, Taniguchi received
appropriate surgery for his back. To this day, Taniguchi is able to stand and walk normal, and his
back somewhat healed properly.
Even though Taniguchi survived the nuclear bombing, it led to many consequences. One
of these consequences includes continuous visits to hospitals in order to treat nuclear radiation,
which still exists in his body. These visits focus on three primary concerns. The first concern is
being able to continuously provide medical treatment for his back. The second concern is
11
providing Chemotherapy in order to fight against cancer. Finally, the other concern is to further
inspect his torso to make sure that his rib cage is not shattering; he has to continue to lie on his
stomach. Not only does he need to arrange continuous visits to the hospital, Taniguchi
sometimes has to stay overnight, especially when he is not feeling well.
Not only has nuclear radiation affected him physically, Taniguchi mentioned that he was
often rejected from female acquaintances. The reason he has continuously been rejected because
they were disgusted by his perished body features. Not only has he received rejection from
society, some of his friends who were also Hibakusha, committed suicide because of the amount
of stress nuclear radiation has put on them. Based on these reasons, Taniguchi even mentioned
that there were times he wanted to kill himself.
Despite these struggles, Taniguchi continues to live, telling his experience in order to
support at abolishing nuclear weaponry. Taniguchi’s story has taught how easily life can be
broken when rational decisions are made. These rational decisions can lead to extreme
consequences. Based on his story, decision-making should be carefully evaluated, not only for
the interests of one nation, but to also be able to maintain cooperation with other countries during
war and peace time.
Even though there has been concern for people’s health due to the effects of nuclear
radiation, many societies continue to believe that nuclear power can bring satisfaction to society
when it is properly managed. For this next evidence, multiple countries will be evaluated on how
nuclear power is being managed based on their capabilities. Following along with their
capabilities, the benefits and challenges of nuclear power will also be evaluated.
The United States is one of the most nuclear producing countries. The first reason why
nuclear power continues to be used is in order to increase the nation’s security. According to
12
Jenkins, after 9/11 the government argues that the next time terrorists attack a nation they would
be armed with nuclear weapons. Based on this theory, many Americans fear that the United
States would experience future defeats caused by advance technological weapons. Thus, Jenkins
claims that unless national security increases its use of nuclear power, the next terrorist attack
would be more unmerciful than the 9/11. Ways in which it could be unmerciful include “military
defeat, imperial stretch, manufacturing decline, rising crime, moral decay, political corruption,
unconstrained materialism, unwillingness to sacrifice, government deficits, feckless leaders, and
the loss of community” (Jenkins, 2008, 215). In order to prevent further corruption, United States
continues to increase its security with nuclear weapons.
Not only is the United States considering ways to improve its security, the country has
also analyzed ways to safely manage nuclear plants. After the spill out in Fukushima, United
States has also assessed efforts made in Japan, in order to learn the mistakes made when this
nuclear plant fell into massive destruction. As described in the hearing statement made on May
4, 2011 it is argued that the Commission structure being made in Fukushima is under
“development of a highly professional technical staff and very stable long-term planning” (US
Congress, 2011, 34). This long-term planning would guarantee guidance on what responsibilities
and tasks need to be taken in order to continue to use nuclear power, without the fear of another
spill out. It is understandable that there is high concern of the conditions in Fukushima, but as
argued by the NRC, it is important to analyze these errors. By analyzing these errors, societies
can learn how to improve safety regulations and licensing a nuclear plant.
As mentioned in the first hearing statement, while the devastated nuclear plant in
Fukushima is continuously being rebuilt, its constructive development includes “an orderly
closure of the technical review and adjudicatory activities” (US Congress, 2011, 65). Also to
13
ensure that the construction in Fukushima does not cause financial debt, a draft budget request
would be used during this construction. That said, the United States pushed to provide Japan
with “continuing resolution and applicable guidance” (US Congress, 2011, 66) on managing
nuclear power and how to recover from future spill outs.
China on the other hand, continues to increase its nuclear power development within the
nation. Shultz and Drell (2012, 248-249) indicate that China currently has thirteen nuclear power
plants and is planning to develop twenty-six more plants across the nation. Although China
strives at being as powerful as the United States, its aggressive expansion plans introduce
unrealistic ideas on how to expand and managed their current and future nuclear plants.
As a result, many of China’s nuclear power plants are continuing to be managed without
approval from China’s National Nuclear Safety Agency (NNSA). This drawback causes many of
these plants to “not been designed with sufficient earthquake safety because of the substantial
increase in capital costs this would entail” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 249). Not following safety
regulations causes China to be at greater risk at having nuclear fallout. Fortunately, after hearing
about the spill out in Fukushima, China has made progress to stop construction of new nuclear
power plants. Instead, the country intends to “conduct safety checks on all existing plants both in
operation and, more importantly, under construction” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 250).
Even though China is considering reevaluation on all of its current nuclear power plants,
some countries believe that this would be a temporary project. Thus, China would eventually go
back to the idea of constructing more nuclear power plants.
Another concerning country is India, which shows little glimpse of hope that the country
can properly manage nuclear power. Shultz and Drell argue (2012, 236) that India has included
new safety procedures in order to ensure proper management of nuclear power plants. Even with
14
these new regulations, it has left a heavy burden because the Indian policymakers would not
provide liability coverage. As a result, India lacks appropriate resources to develop and manage
nuclear power plants. Despite lack of resources, India continues to push at being equipped with
nuclear power. For example, the US-India Nuclear Deal “has allowed India to access nuclear fuel
and technology, which was finally approved by the Indian Parliament and the US Congress in
August 2008” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 242). Even though India has had the approval to be
provided these materials, it is challenged with the lack of political responsiveness and to have
appropriate landscape to construct nuclear power plants. With these issues combined, it is almost
impossible for India to efficient plan and develops nuclear power plants. Therefore, the
construction of nuclear power plants are often slowed down and/or not properly developed.
China’s overactive planning and India’s mismanagement of nuclear planning results in
concern on the quality of their nuclear power plants [view picture 14, 26]. In order to resolve
these issues, Shultz and Drell argues that the United States need to engage at bolstering “the
safety and regulatory cultures of Chinese and Indian power stations” (Shultz and Drell, 2012,
253). Even though the United States is capable of providing support to China and India, it
remains uncertain if this procedure should be taken.
Although most developing countries, such as the United States, China, and India, intend
to use nuclear power in order to bring satisfaction to its citizens, there are increasing concerns
about other nations, such as Iran and North Korea, having nuclear capabilities.
In the article, The Next Arms Race, Soloski suspects that many countries in the Middle
East are pushing at receiving nuclear power. For many countries, like Iran, the ultimate goal for
having nuclear power is “to deter adversaries, compensate for conventional weapons shortcomings,
fight wars, garner domestic political power, and win international political power, especially to
leverage against the United States” (Soloski, 2012, 179). If any of these actions take place, it could
15
lead to great endangerment and further international threat to other countries, especially the United
States.
It is not just the Middle East to take in consideration. There are also high levels of tension
within Asia, especially North Korea. Despite the warfare relationship between North Korea and
South Korea, Russia willingly met with North Korea’s current leader, Kim Jong II in order to discuss
at improving the Russian-North Korean relations. According to Soloski, the improvement on the
Russian-North Korean relations leads into the possibility of providing North Korea with nuclear
capabilities. If this relationship occurs, it could lead to “armed conflict and inviting the intervention
of other powers, especially the United States” (Soloski, 2012, 68).
Not only would improved relationship between North Korea and Russia risk at starting an
intense war within Asian borders, it could also lead to negative impressions on Russia. These
impressions can cause Russia to be recognized as having “immediate periphery that is quite unstable,
fraught with local conflicts that can turn into local wars and lead to foreign military interventions
against the national interests, territorial integrity, and sovereignty of Russia” (Soloski, 2012, 70).
Providing nuclear power to countries, such as Iran and North Korea, can cause massive
destruction to others and can violate interests of international law and global peace. With said, it is
crucial to prevent providing nuclear power to countries that intend to use it in immoral aggressive
behavior.
One a broader scale, the development of nuclear power is increasingly expanding in various
parts of the world. However, based on the situation of each country, there is strong concern on the
ability to manage it. The primary question, as stated by Shultz and Drell (2012, 224), is how a
nuclear program can be safely secured and developed, even if the nation does not have all the
mandatory resources. This is a big concern because many of these countries are experiencing lack of
resources. Unfortunately, this can lead to “infrastructure, regulatory, knowledge, and safety/security
16
shortcomings” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 224). To better understand these situations, five countries
would have their regulatory system evaluated (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 224):
France: program has been successful due to its reprocessing system and
standardization. This nation intends to aggressively pursue in international sales.
UK: program has been successful and intends to expand it. Then nation also engages
in reprocessing.
Russia: the nation’s intention at entering international commercial market is
conducted in ways that are considered aggressive and questions the concerns of
safety, regulatory, and non-proliferation.
South Korea: the program is quickly growing with proficiency in safety, security, and
nonproliferation. The nation would like to engage in international commercial, but
this process remains questionable since the nuclear program was just recently
developed.
South Africa: even though this program is relatively small, the government is
strongly interested in international vendors. In order to accomplish this, the nation is
currently discussing with the United States about inter-governmental agreements.
All of these analytical studies show that nuclear power can be manageable, but the
capabilities of doing so remain questionable. As shown in these studies, further research on nuclear
power is required. This would provide better understanding on how to properly manage a powerful
element. To better understand these consequences, the spill out in Fukushima, Japan would be further
evaluated.
The spill out in Fukushima was a result of terrible management and inconsistent analysis on
how to resolve the solutions [view picture 13, 24]. Even though Japanese citizens have been able to
return to Fukushima, certain parts of the area are still off-limits due to increased levels of nuclear
17
radiation. Although the nuclear plant is currently being reconstructed and food storage is closely
monitored, it is predicted that it would take thirty to forty years of complete recovery. As a result,
learning how the nuclear plant was destroyed and the process for recovery has led to “serious
questions about the safety of reactor designs, emergency back-up system, on-site spent fuel storage,
and the regulatory systems governing nuclear power” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 209-210).
The reason why these questions are often brought up is due to the three factors of radioactive
fallout. Shultz and Drell (2012, 108) describe these three factors as first, technical difficulty in
underlying complex processes. Second, uncertainty in the results of nuclear power due to lack of
experience, and thirdly, fundamental unpredictability in most of the processes. Unfortunately, these
factors make it difficult for societies to plan, prepare, and to avoid other outcomes of nuclear
radiation. One of these outcomes is Black Rain, which creates radioactive fallout at ground level.
These fallout can lead to prompt radiation, which is developed by “particles and rays emitted directly
from, and experienced immediately after the explosion” (Shultz and Drell, 2012, 111).
It is understandable that nuclear power can guarantee efficient energy and security. However,
when nuclear power is not managed properly and leads to destruction, it often negatively affects
people’s existence due to increased radioactivity. The biggest factor is people’s health. Since current
medical studies are continuing to find solutions to recover from these health problems, it is
impossible to guarantee that people can continue to co-exist with nuclear power without the concern
of their health being affected. Therefore, the use of nuclear power should be shut down until further
studies can guarantee that nuclear power can be secured more efficiently. In order for this to be
effective, nations need to develop one consistent set of regulations on how to properly manage
nuclear power. These regulations should include what materials are required for storing nuclear
power, ways to prevent fallouts from occurring, and a public escape route in case nuclear fallout does
occur. By better managing this powerful element, it would least likely harm people’s livelihoods.
Until this can be developed, nuclear power should not be relied upon.
18
Conclusion
Information provided in this paper showed how nuclear power is intended to be managed.
Unfortunately, since regulations for developing and managing nuclear plants have not followed
consistently it has been difficult to ensure that future fallouts would not exist. Not only has there
been concern on these regulations, fear of advanced terrorism persuaded countries like the
United States to increase its security. On the bright side, nuclear power has effectively provided
clean energy without the reliance of old-fashioned fuel items, such as wood and coal. Despite the
efforts being made to manage nuclear power, multiple studies have shown that it continues to
affect people’s health. These health factors were influenced based on the bibliographies of
Sadako Sasaki, who suffered with leukemia and Sumiteru Taniguchi, who experiences multiple
stages of cancer. Nuclear power has also been harmful to the environment, which makes it
impossible to maintain efficient food supply. These environmental problems are shown in places,
such as the Republic of Marshall Islands. Based on this information, it is strongly arguable that
nuclear power should not be used.
19
1.
Chase, Chrystal. “Fountain of Peace”. November 9, 2013
2.
Colorado State University-Morgan Library. “Japan”-map PrEx3.10/4:J 27/5 (Barcode:
UL 84019233872). Accessed April 23, 2014
20
3.
World Nuclear Association. “The Situation at Fukushima”-reconstruction of nuclear
plant. 2014
4.
World Nuclear Association. The Situation at Fukushima.“Reconstruction of Nuclear
Plant. 2014
21
5.
Colorado State University-Morgan Library. “Marshall Islands”-map PrEx3.10/4:M35
(Barcode: UL84015550086). Accessed April 23, 2014
6.
H.J. DE BLIJ, Editor. Atlas of the United States. “Map of Nevada”. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2006. Accessed April 23, 2014 (Page 147)
22
7.
Chase, Chrystal. “Republic of Marshall Islands-Breadfruit Tree”. July 2012
8.
Chase, Chrystal. “Republic of Marshall Islands-Coconut Tree”. July 2012
23
9.
Colorado State University-Morgan Library. “Iraq/Iran”-map PrEx3.10/4:IR 1/46
(Barcode: UL84024455659). Accessed April 23, 2014
24
10.
H.J. DE BLIJ, Editor. Atlas of the United States. “Map of Illinois”. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2006. Accessed April 23, 2014 (Page 132)
11.
Chase, Chrystal. “Hiroshima Atomic Bomb Museum-Clock Tower”. June 13, 2009
25
12.
Chase, Chrystal. “Little Red Riding Hood Statue”. June 13, 2009
13.
GoJapanGo.com. Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. “Children’s Peace Monument”.
Mi Marketing Pty Ltd, 2001-2014. Accessed April 26, 2014.
http://www.gojapango.com/travel/hiroshima_peace_memorial_park.htm
26
14.
Colorado State University-Morgan Library. “China/India”-map PrEx3.10/4:IN 2/8
(Barcode: UL84027578359). Accessed April 23, 2014
27
1. US Congress. House. 2011. Subcommittee on Energy and Power and the Subcommittee on
Environment and the Economy of Committee on Energy and Commerce House of
Representatives. 112th Congress, 1st sess. Serial No. 112-43, US Government Printing Office (May
4).
This source is a hearing that took place in Washington on May 2, 2011. During this hearing,
representatives of Illinois explain to the court procedures that are being taken in order to improve
management of nuclear radiation. Examples of these procedures include improvement of safety,
support in recovery from the destruction of the Fukushima nuclear plant, and progress being made
on nuclear management. This hearing would help contribute into understanding what steps are
being taken in order to improve maintenance of nuclear radiation. Not only would these procedures
be beneficial at better understanding why people choose to continue to use nuclear radiation, it will
also help analyze how society is managing the importance of other factors, such as people’s health
and the environment.
2. US Congress. House. 2013. Subcommittee on Energy and Power and the Subcommittee on
Environment and the Economy of Committee on Energy and Commerce House of
Representatives. 113th Congress, 1st sess. Serial No. 113-11, US Government Printing Office
(February 28).
This source is a joint hearing that took place in Washington on February 28, 2013. This
hearing further analyzes progress being made from representatives of Illinois, on managing
nuclear radiation. As mentioned in the hearing that took place on May 4, 2011, these
representatives analyzed that they are working at improving things, such as safety procedures,
recovery from Fukushima nuclear plan, and benefits of continuing to use nuclear radiation. Just
like the first hearing, this one would benefit at better understanding why people choose to
28
continue to use nuclear radiation. Also, explain how society is managing the importance of other
factors, such as people’s health and the environment.
3. Jenkins, Brian M. Will Terrorists Go Nuclear? New York: Prometheus Books, 2008
This book looks into how terrorism is improving its offensive attacks by going
nuclear. According to the studies in this book, the author argues that nuclear radiation should
be used as primary weapons. The reason is so that countries, such as the United States, can
protect itself from possible terrorist attacks. However, the author also analyzes how terrorist
groups are considering and collecting biological weapons. This includes nuclear radiation.
Due to these activities, the author also argues that terrorism would eventually lead into
nuclear attacks. This book would be a good outlet at explaining why some countries, such as
the United States, decide to maintain use of nuclear radiation.
4. Shultz, George and Drell, Sidney. The Nuclear Enterprise. California: Board of Trustees of the
Leland Stanford Junior University, 2012
This book explains consequences for using nuclear radiation and what
approaches should be taken when managing this type of product. Not only do the
authors look into the United States, they also researched on how other countries, such
as China and India, are managing nuclear radiation. Based on these studies, the authors
explain both on how to manage nuclear radiation in a safe environment and why some
of these techniques are considered inappropriate for using nuclear radiation. This book
29
would be a benefit on why nuclear radiation should not be used, but also how societies
can improve on managing it.
5. Hecker, Siegfried and Mason, Caroline and Kadyrzhanov, Kairat and Kislitsin, Serge. Nuclear
Physical Methods in Radio Ecological Investigations of Nuclear Test Sites. The Netherlands:
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000
This book looks into experimental procedures that were analyzed during nuclear
testing in Kwajalein Atoll, Republic of Marshall Islands. Even though some of these tests
might analyze nuclear radiation as a positive protective weapon, for the most part it
shows negative effects it does to its existing environment. The effects include decrease in
agricultural products due to the conditions of soil that has been affected by nuclear
radiation. It also explains how neighboring citizens, such as the Marshallese, view
nuclear radiation due to the procedures taken near their islands. By further reading these
tests, this book would help support on why nuclear radiation should not be used.
6. Soloski, Henry D. The Next Arms Race. US Army War College: Pennsylvania July 2012.
This article analyzes how nuclear power has become an armed weapon for many
countries worldwide. These countries include Iran and North Korea. These
analyses explain how nuclear power is being used to increase military force and
the results of it. Not all of these studies are being used in positive ways.
7. Google. “Hiroshima Peace Site: Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum Website”. Last modified
2000-2011. Accessed March 29, 2014. http://www.pcf.city.hiroshima.jp/index_e2.html
30
This website shows Japan’s Atomic Bomb Museum and Peace Park in
Hiroshima. The purpose of this museum is to promote worldwide peace by
denying use of nuclear weapons. The website provides historical information
about the museum, as well as facts about nuclear weapons and the importance of
worldwide peace.
8. Google. “Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum”. Last modified 2009. Accessed March 29, 2014.
http://www.city.nagasaki.lg.jp/peace/english/abm/
This website shows Japan’s Atomic Bomb Museum and Peace Park in
Nagasaki. The purpose of this museum is to promote worldwide peace by denying
use of nuclear weapons. The website provides historical information about the
museum, as well as facts about nuclear weapons and the importance of worldwide
peace.
9. Taniguchi, Sumiteru. Nagasaki Peace University. November 9, 2013. Lecture.
On this day, I personally listened to a lecture that was given by Sumiteru
Taniguchi. Sumiteru Taniguchi is a Hibakusha (atomic bomb survivor), who originated
from Nagasaki, Japan. During his lecture, Sumiteru Taniguchi told his personal
experience after an atomic bomb was dropped in Nagasaki on August 9, 1945 at 11:02
AM.
10. Satomi, Nakamura. Trusting the Paper Crane: The Story of Sadako and her friends.
Japan, August 6, 2010.
31
This children’s book tells a story about Sadako, an atomic bomb survivor in
Hiroshima. She was 12 years old when she died due to advance stages of
leukemia. Before she died, Sadako tempted to make 1,000 paper cranes in order to
have her wish come true. Her wish was to recovery her illness so that she can live
like a normal child again. This story describes her life leading to having leukemia,
her efforts to recover, and her wish was later granted by her friends.
11. World Nuclear Association. “The Situation at Fukushima”. World Nuclear Association,
2014. Accessed April 9, 2014. http://world-nuclear.org/Features/Fukushima/Situation-at-
Fukushima/
This article explains how the nuclear plant in Fukushima, Japan led to massive
destruction. It also analyzes the results of this destruction and what current actions
are being taken in order to recover from this disaster.
12. TheFreeDictionary. 2014. “Nuclear Power”. http://legal-
dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Nuclear+Power
This website defines nuclear power.
13. National Nuclear Security Administration. “Nuclear Security Enterprise”.
http://nnsa.energy.gov/aboutus/ourprograms/defenseprograms/nuclearsecurityenterprise
This website defines Nuclear Security Enterprise.
14. Merriam Webster. “Leukemia”. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/leukemia
This website defines Leukemia.
32