Nature She pardons no mistakes. Her yea is yea, and her nay, nay. (Ralph Waldo Emerson)
Throughout the life and whole cycle of biological development, an individual is exposed to ionizing radiations both natural and manmade. However, the mankind discovered this fact just a little over one century ago, when in 1895 Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen revealed the X-rays and right after that their side effects, like skin burns, lesions, and finally cancer, were discovered. Provided that it took several decades until and after the World War II to unravel and control the radiation effects based on the studies of animal experiments and people exposed. Long series of experiments and surveys revealed the both delayed and immediate effects resulting in from increased cancer risk and genetic defects to imminent death . Hence, the radioactive contamination is among the most dangerous forms of physical environmental pollution. However, one may ask — is the Global Sea really under threat? Unfortunately, we have to say yes.
The problem of Global Sea pollution is one of the most important challenges faced by the humankind. The 20th Century Scientific and Technical Revolution, two world wars and arms race have turned the Global Sea into a giant “waste dump”. Regardless of the type of pollution, whether it is contamination of the soil, air or water, it all comes down to contamination of the Global Sea, which eventually absorbs all toxic substances and turns into a “mud bath” . Pollution of the seas and oceans with radioactive waste is indeed one of the most important problems of our time.
Radiation pollution may have different causes. For a proper understanding, one should distinguish between:
Natural background sources of radiation (cosmic radiation, thermal radiation, terrestrial radiation, etc.) .
Manmade sources of radiation (use of radioactive substances at nuclear power plants, in nuclear weapon development, and for medical, research and industrial purposes).
While we just have to embrace the fact of background radiation, the manmade radiation is something where each of us can make a difference. Whereas after the signing in 1963 of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty prohibiting test detonations of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, space and under water the danger of radioactive contamination of the Global Sea has decreased by several times, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty agreed in 1996 and prohibiting underground tests has not yet been put into force . It is accompanied with the development of the nuclear power industry aimed at covering the increasing energy demands and together with the issue of radioactive wastewater handling and safe disposal of nuclear waste only increases the concern of the water pollution by radioactive substances. Although since 1993, the ocean disposal of radioactive waste has been prohibited by several international treaties, until that date it was considered quite a viable option. There was a belief that the burial of radioactive substances in the deep waters of the seas and oceans guarantees the safety of storage for a period of several hundred years, i.e. a period during which they gradually dissolved in the water would be safe. Meanwhile, specifically in the view of expiration of the banning treaty in 2018, a number of factors like containers’ leakage, possible tectonic plate movements, and volcanic activity expose the enormous risk of potential catastrophe . Catastrophe like the one that unfolded on Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in 2011.
The Fukushima catastrophe shares the highest level rating on International Nuclear Event Scale with Chernobyl disaster — which will mark three decades anniversary this year — and evidences the vulnerability of the security system of one of the most developed countries. According to the research made by scientists of Woods Hole Oceanographic Society, the Fukushima catastrophe resulted in “the largest accidental release of radiation to the ocean in history” . According to scientists, it is impossible to predict how the radiation will affect the ecosystem in the next few decades, though it should be noted that Japan, unlike the USSR in the past, puts unrivalled efforts to revive contaminated area and reduce radiation levels . However, one should bear in mind that, although more or less mitigated after-effects and stopped leakage of contaminated water that continued for at least two years after the accident, the long-term perspective is still vague . Even if there is no imminent concern for the life of people, the radiation dumped into the ocean together with contaminated water can concentrate when travelling through the food chain and end up in the bottom-dwelling fish on someone’s table .
Numerous anti-nuclear power groups, like Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth, advocate nuclear-free future and stand against the use of nuclear power and construction of new nuclear reactors. “Atoms for Peace” programme has brought us a lot of good, but also — a lot of trouble. Obsolescence is the result of confluence, close interaction of all global problems, and the deeper we go into the current situation, the more clearly we understand how difficult it is to find a reasonable, real way out of the critical situation. Thus, no nuclear facility is immune to a major accident, and even accident-free nuclear power plant is a possible source of radioactive contamination since operating nuclear reactors produce vast amount of radioactive waste that the people yet do not know how to safely store and process. Hence, to control radioactive water pollution one should use all endeavours to stop the leakage of contaminated substances into the Global Sea, ensure safe disposal of radioactive waste to prevent its penetration into the ground water, take all necessary precautions to restrain the radiation level within predetermined limits, and enhance the security of nuclear power plants. It is crucial to remember that the impact of radioactive water pollution is not always immediate. It may take a year, two, or a dozen, but the payback is imminent. Being reckless today, we pass the problem of radioactive water pollution on to generations to come. But will they be able to solve it?
Works Cited
Featherstone, Steve. “Fukushima: Five Years Later.” Popular Science 23 Feb. 2016. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://www.popsci.com/fukushima-five-years-later>.
Grossman, Elizabeth. Radioactivity in the Ocean: Diluted, But Far from Harmless. Ed. Yale University. 7 Apr. 2011. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://e360.yale.edu/feature/radioactivity_in_the_ocean_diluted_but_far_from_harmless/2391/>.
Kaustubh, Sansare. “Early victims of X-rays: a tribute and current perception.” Dentomaxillofac Radiology Feb. 2011: 123-125. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3520298/>.
Kiger, Patrick J. “Fukushima's Radioactive Water Leak: What You Should Know.” National Geographic News 9 Aug. 2013. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/08/130807-fukushima-radioactive-water-leak/>.
Kozakiewicz, Patrick. The Disposal of Nuclear Waste Into the World’s Oceans. 27 Jan. 2014. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://www.cbrneportal.com/the-disposal-of-nuclear-waste-into-the-worlds-oceans/>.
Nuclear Science — A Guide to the Nuclear Science Wall Chart. Contemporary Physics Education Project. 3rd ed. 2003. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://www2.lbl.gov/abc/wallchart/teachersguide/contents.html>.
Swarup R., Mishra S. N., and V. P. Jauhari. Environmental Water Pollution And Its Control. New Delhi: Mittal Publications, 1992. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=uJhNB0RMq-8C&pg=PA298&lpg=PA298&dq=radioactive+water+pollution&source=bl&ots=EIrNItod0J&sig=Z4Z4ffmnYlfIePVN4zB0xj9LJTU&hl=ru&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj8iPi5k5HLAhUo1XIKHfGGBeY4FBDoAQg5MAQ#v=onepage&q=radioactive%20water%20poll>.
The Legacy of Nuclear Testing. n.d. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://www.icanw.org/the-facts/catastrophic-harm/the-legacy-of-nuclear-testing/>.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Sources of Radiation. 17 Oct. 2014. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources.html>.
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Fukushima Radiation. n.d. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <http://www.whoi.edu/main/topic/fukushima-radiation>.
Zimring A. Carl, and William L. Rathje. Encyclopedia of Consumption and Waste: The Social Science of Garbage. SAGE Publications, 2012. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=KyRzAwAAQBAJ&pg=PR9&lpg=PR9&dq=History+of+Consumption+and+Waste,+World,+1900s&source=bl&ots=e8NWHqeyfg&sig=BD0EaPQMCVPguPRHnXKNdiPNe6o&hl=ru&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwif0ZG23Z_LAhWGQJoKHY8iBv0Q6AEIKzAC#v=onepage&q=History%20of%2>.
