Monday, January 28, 2013

Nuclear Energy Plants Raise Concern for Safety in Iran

Nuclear power plant stokes worries

This article I found covers a number of topics we discussed last week in class. First and foremost is local, and global, concern about safety precautions being carried out to prevent contamination. Several residents live within 6 meters from the nuclear plant, but the recommended distance is one kilometer.

There is also a notable lack of communication being shared with the public, and this is increasing the concern of local residents.

"Iran has repeatedly maintained there are no grounds for concern, a position backed up by Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom, whose subsidiary Atomstroyexport built the plant and plans its formal handover to Iran this year."

I question the authority with which this corporation Rosatom states there are no grounds for concern without any hard proof. The fact that they are selling the plant to Iran doesn't help settle my suspicions either. I would like to see what empirical proof they can offer to attest to the plants safety.

Near the end of the article the topic of communicating the risks to the public is raised again. The public has no idea what is happening most of the time, and concerns that something may be, or will, mess(ed) up, even if from an emergency official, are removed from public view and denied to ever exist.

While the people in Bushehr may want to leave as soon as possible, many do not have the necessary funds to do so. There is talk of moving everyone, but the government is not applying the required funds to do so. Only about ten percent of the people of Bushehr have left so far. 

3 comments:

  1. It was brought up in class that some of us have the luxury/inconvenience of being able to re-locate when nuclear plants are built in our backyards. In which case there is a choice to stay or move.

    But it seems like in situations such as the example you provide here; it is not simply a matter of choice. To me it seems more a matter of opportunity and condition.

    For some the choice to move is based on maintaining a comfortable quality of life, for others not moving is a matter of maintaining some life.

    Like you mentioned , the people of Bushehr want to leave as soon as possible, but how can they leave if they can't afford to, or set up at a new destination? I don't know what I would do.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I also question the authority of Rosatom. Why would the recommended distance be 1 km if there were no risks? The point Madeline brings up is also very good. Most nuclear power plants, like almost all industrial corporations, are located in lower-class neighborhoods where the people have no way of opposing a plant or going against big business in order to get safety inspections, etc. to ensure their well-being. Your point about informing the public is something that I fully agree with. Most times when a company moves to an area, they just start building and then into production. I believe that a company should go into the community and get to know the people that they will probably be hiring and get their input as well as give them information about how this new business will effect them. Public outreach should be the next step for US businesses and hopefully this will give the rest of the world an example to lead by.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, to say most nuclear power plants are located in lower-class neighborhoods isn't quite true. I agree, in underdeveloped countries such as Iran have poor regulations and standards for these such issues. But in other countries such as the United States, nuclear plants are only allowed to be built in specifically industrial zoned areas. While many plants in the past had fewer regulations as the where they can be built, there are now-days many regulations on where these types of plants can be built.

    ReplyDelete