The Hanford nuclear waste facility is an important US environmental cleanup project which has made many steps towards its ultimate goal. However, leakage of the billions of liquid waste, which leak out of the tanks into the surrounding soil and water, pose serious environmental, social and health risks to the people and the environment, with the greatest concern being the wastes reaching the Columbia River, which could have an array of serious consequences. This write-up explores the facility, with regard to the environmental in/justice problems it poses, as well as the social and environmental risks associated with the nuclear facility, including communication of such potential threats.
The Hanford nuclear waste facility poses many environmental in/justice issues to the people and the environment. To start with, the use of the land by the US government to make plutonium nuclear weapons constituted an injustice, because it rendered the land unusable by the people, seeing as the manufacture of the weapons, which led to the accumulation of the wastes, affected the surrounding community disproportionately (Endres 2007). These disproportionate effects comprise an environmental injustice, since the extensive impacts associated with the far-reaching damage on the environment were borne mainly by the poor people, indigenous residents and the people of color, as stated by Endres (2007). The subsequent designation of the area as a nuclear waste cleanup location did not help the matter, but only added to the aforementioned environmental injustices, since the project has continued to render the surrounding land unusable, besides posing a serious of other health and environmental risks.
Secondly, the selection of the land to host the nuclear waste cleanup facility involved displacement of the people living there. As already implied in the foregoing paragraph, the people affected by this were mainly the poor, indigenous people and the colored residents (Endres 2007). While this does not mean that the rich and privileged people living in the area have not been affected by the setting up and the subsequent activities of the facility, it is worth noting that the poor people would have faced more difficulties acquiring new land and establishing themselves. It may also be argued that the health and environmental risks associated with the facility, such as cancers affect the local people disproportionately, comprising an environmental injustice (Endres 2007). Thirdly, the environmental damage, such as atmospheric, land and water contamination comprise an environmental injustice (Physicians for Social Responsibility 2009). This is so because the environmental harm directly or indirectly affects the people unequally.
Solving the Environmental Risks
It is imperative that stakeholders and the common people take relevant initiatives to minimize the problems associated with Hanford nuclear wastes cleanup facility. To solve the first problem of rendering the community land unusable, the government could develop plans to ensure that the local communities are compensated appropriately in line with law. Such compensation could be designed to ensure that any harm that has befallen the indigenous people as a result of the facility’s activities is minimized as much as possible. Although it has been several decades since the Hanford area was selected for production of the nuclear weapons and the subsequent waste cleanup project, the government and other stakeholders can minimize any losses and problems associated with the loss of land by putting up plans to ensure the people live within reasonable living and safety standards. Awareness creation about the possible dangers associated with the facility’s activities should be undertaken to enlighten the people living near and/or around the nuclear waste cleanup facility (Natural Resources Defense Council 2013).
As for the displacement problem, the government can address it by undertaking appropriate compensation programs to ensure that families of the displaced people do not suffer unnecessarily due to the displacement which occurred several decades ago. The third problem which relates to atmospheric, water and land contamination, which comprises an array of health and environmental risks, can be addressed by designing and implementing environmental awareness campaigns to inform the people about the said risks, and the best way to minimize their exposure (Physicians for Social Responsibility 2009). To this end, the Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility Hanford Task Force has done a lot to educate the community about the potential health and environmental health risks, as well as actions the people can take to prevent disasters at Hanford (Physicians for Social Responsibility 2009). Importantly, educating the local communities on radiations and their associated risks could go a long way in preventing the health risks that emanate from exposure to nuclear radiations. Awareness could for example encourage the people to undertake regular medical checks for earlier detection and management of radiation-related ailments such as cancers. Moreover, where necessary, the government may consider moving the people, if it is felt that continuing to live there increases their health risks (Physicians for Social Responsibility 2009).
Social and Environmental Risks Associated with the Site
The Hanford nuclear waste cleanup facility is associated with various social and environmental risks. To start with, there is the risk of atmospheric contamination. Possible explosions or collapsing of the nuclear storage tanks could release tons of harmful gases that could contaminate the atmosphere, making it unhealthy for the people and plants. Such an incident happened in Siberia in 1957, when a high-level waste taken exploded, releasing harmful gases, which necessitated relocation of the surrounding communities (Physicians for Social Responsibility 2009). Fire explosions and earthquakes that may occur as a result of the high-level waste tanks could lead to release of radioactive gases, contaminating the atmosphere and posing an array of health risks to the people.
Water contamination is another environmental risk which can occur as a result of leaking of the wastes from the high-level nuclear waste tanks. The fact that the tanks used in the facility are well beyond their design life increase the potential risks for leakages (Physicians for Social Responsibility 2009). Recently, there have been media reports of such leakages, with increasing fears that the leaked nuclear wastes could reach the Columbia River if it is not stopped. Water contamination poses serious health risks to both fauna and flora.
Furthermore, the Hanford nuclear waste site poses various health risks to the people. To this end, the radioactive gases and other compounds that may be found in the water consumed or air inhaled by the people could lead to wide ranging diseases, such as cancers and mental ailments. According to the National Resources Defense Council (2013), the local Yakama people are already attributing the increased cancer cases to the continued exposure to the contaminations emanating from the nuclear waste cleanup site. It is also worth noting that when the wastes leak into water, the seafood consumed by the people, such as fish, could contain the radioactive contaminants, which would pose a threat to the health of the people.
Lastly, the nuclear waste facility poses potential danger to the climate, since the radioactive gases and contaminants can lead to climate changes, contributing to such phenomena as global warming. It could also alter the ecological balance, because water contamination can lead to the death of marine life, which is also an important source of human food (National Resources Defense Council 2013).
Communication of the Social and Environmental Risks Posed by Hanford Nuclear Facility
It is noteworthy that there has been some effort by the mainstream and independent media, environmental activists, government agencies and other interest groups to communicate the potential risks that the aforesaid nuclear facility poses to the people and the environment. Nonetheless, a closer look at the media’s coverage of the Hanford facility and its associated risks leads the writer to conclude that the issues have not been well communicated. This is so because the media is supposed to be impartial and is, therefore, expected to effectively inform the people as much as possible. While there has been news about the health potential social and environmental risks posed by the facility, there has been a gap in communication of the issues (Physicians for Social Responsibility 2009). It is worth noting, however, that such interest organizations such as the Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility Hanford Task Force have been in the forefront in communicating the aforementioned issues to the people (Physicians for Social Responsibility 2009). The lack of effective communication may possibly be attributed to the fear of backlash from the people. However, it should be noted that there cannot be any justification for failure to effectively communicate such serious matters to the people.
Owing to the seriousness of the environmental and social risks posed by the Hanford nuclear waste cleanup facility, it is imperative that the government and other stakeholders take initiatives to ensure effective communication of the issues. To this end, the communication of the issues arising from the nuclear waste cleanup facility can be improved by embarking on awareness campaigns among the local communities. Such awareness campaigns should aim at communicating the health, social and environmental risks posed by the facility. Doing so would ensure that the communities are aware of such risks, which could go a long way in helping the people take precautionary measures against the potential risks. Moreover, the mainstream media should continuously and effectively publish informative articles and news pieces. Instead of waiting to report accidents and tragedies that occur as a result of the facility, the media should take deliberate initiatives to inform the public about the aforementioned issues. Non-governmental organizations and other interest groups should revitalize their communication of the aforementioned issue to the people as well.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Hanford nuclear waste cleanup site poses an array of health, environmental and social risks to the local communities. This is so especially due to the leakage of the liquid nuclear waste from the high-level waste tanks at the site. Some of the facility’s activities comprise environmental injustices. Owing to the seriousness of the risks that the site poses to the people and the environment, it is imperative that effective communication of the issues is done. Doing so will go a long way in minimizing the risks and/or problems associated with the facility.
Works Cited
Endres, Danielle. The State of Environmental Justice in High-Level Nuclear Waste Siting
Decisions. The State of Environmental Justice in America 2007 Conference. Ejconference.net, 2007. Web. 27 Nov. 2013.
National Resources Defense Council. Forcing Nuclear Waste Clean-up Washington State, 2002 -
Present Day. Nrdc.org, 2013. Web. 27 Nov. 2013.
Physicians for Social Responsibility. Hanford and Environmental Health. Psr.org, 2009. Web.
27 Nov. 2013.
