Fukushima Power Plant Disaster: What caused this Environmental Catastrophe?

As I was reading about the health status of Japan's environment, almost all news reports are discussing about the Fukushima Power Plant Disaster which happened on 11 March 2011. Till today, the nuclear power plant disaster is making headlines all over the world because its imapcts will last for centuries to come. In this post, I will investigate the causes that led to this environmental catastrophe.

Background

At 2.46pm on March 11, The Great East Japan Earthquake, or Tohoku-Taiheiyou-Oki Earthquake, with magnitude 9.0 hit Japan for 3 minutes (World Nuclear Association, 2015). The earthquake’s epicentre was at the east of Sendai and northeast of Tokyo, which was the main part of Japan (refer to Image 1 below). Following this earthquake was a 14 metre high tsunami that resulted in more than 20,000 death toll islandwide (Kuhn, 2014). Amongst much damage was the breakdown of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Four of eleven nuclear reactors owned by TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company) shut down automatically when the quake hit (refer to Image 2) but the lack of diesel and fuel generators failed to draw away residual heat (Aldrch, 2012). Consequently, the nuclear reactors reached a peak of 2000 Degree Farenheit and melted down. Hydrogen gas was released with the heat and upon contact with oxygen, 3 reactor buildings were ignited. Massive amounts of radioactive materials such as caesium has been released following the ractors collapse. I will elaborate more about the impacts in my next blog post.

Image1: Map depicting imapct of Thoku Earthquake (Source: Japanese Culture Club, 2012)

Image 2: Map depicting 4 affected nuclear reactors by Tohoku Earthquake (Source: Ludger, 2011)

It is undeniable that the nuclear power plant explosion has led to water and land pollution. But what caused such a huge environmental disaster?

Cause 1: Bias Site Selection

Most nuclear power plants are located along the coasts of Japan, which makes it more vulnerable to environmental perturbations. Site selection is done by the government and private utility companies, where places with little public resistance are shortlisted (Aldrich, 2012). This corresponds to villages or towns where fishing cooperatives were declining, thus local residents have little defense against the power plant construction (ibid.). With poorer communities, the locals will view the project as benefitting to them as it can provide them employment. Such public resentment was measured using a civil society approach (refer to Figure 1). This method estimate localities that are moe likely to support siting plans and avoids society groups that might mobilize a fight against it. 

Figure 1: Various approaches to Site Selection of Nuclear Plant (Source: Aldrich, 2012)

A technocratic approach was also adopted for site selection. This involved trained experts that will determine the ‘ideal’ location beased on geological conditions (eg groundwater, bedrock type, distance to existing electricity grid, etc). Local concerns of residents are thus ignored.

In addition, tsunami warnings which dates back to historical times were ignored. Stones engraved by ancestors regarding tsunami warnings (refer to Image 3), stating not to build below a particular point, could be seen but was ignored after more than 3 generations (Ing, 2011).

Image 3: Stones engraved with Tsunami Warning (Source: Ing, 2011)

Cause 2: Lack of Government Action

For Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant, it was constructed in the coastal villages of Okuma and Futaba, which were low-lying areas. Since the plant was constructed more than 4 decades ago, seawalls were designed at 10 meters to fight a tsuami height of 3.1 meters. Though this is acceptable according to 1960s tsunami simulation model, it is not acceptable in present time. In the last century, there were 8 tsunamis with height exceeding 10 meters (World Nuclear Association, 2015). With new scientific knowledge, a tsunami of 15.7 meters was predicted prior to Fukushima accident. However, little countermeasures were taken by TEPCO and the government, especially the Nuclear and Idustrial Safety Agency (ibid.). Experts warnings went on deaf ears to TEPCO and they downplayed the effects of Fukushima disaster. This could be attributed to the power plant secret system that operated under a motto that “atomic power is always safe” (Kim, 2013). Hence, government officials gave TEPCO their support and there were little transparency to risk assessments reports. 

As a result, the seawalls could not cope with the 38 meter tsunami that happened on March 11, and the nuclear power plant was left exposed to nature’s destructive force (refer to Image 4).

Image 4: Side View of Tsunami height and Daiichi Power Plant (Source: Ing, 2011)

Cause 3: Feed and Bleed Process

After the nuclear plant meltdown, engineers had to constantly pump seawater into vessels to cool it by boiling. As it boils, pressure is built till a point where the vessel has to be vented to the atmosphere (E. Sanger and Wald, 2011). This ‘feed and bleed’ process of pumping water resulted in more than 100,000 tons of contaminated water (Aldrich, 2012). In addition, the venting process released hydrogen gas into the atmosphere, which ignited the roof of 3 reactors. The steam also contained a considerable amount of radioactive material, which is of public concern.

Conclusion

The Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant disaster was a concoction of errors that led to its demise. Site selection was specific and there voices of affected communities were negated. Also, misplaced confidence by government agencies undermined the impact of the tsunami. When the actual tsunami struck, backup diesel generators were destroyed and there were no backup plans except the activation of a ‘feed and bleed’ process. This resulted in water and air pollution, which will ultimately pollute neighbouring land as radioactive air plume lands on pastures. Thus, this catastrophic event hasn’t ended but instead signalled the start of a series of environmental pollution. 

References

Aldrich, D. P. (2012). Networks of power: institutions and local residents in post-Tōhoku Japan. na.

E. Sanger, David, and Matt Wald. 'Radioactive Releases At Fukushima Could Last Months'. Nytimes.com. N.p., 2011. Web. Mar. 2015.

Ing, Ludger Mohrbach. (2011). Web. Mar. 2015.

Kim, Jin-hyun. 'Lessons From Fukushima'. koreatimes. N.p., 2013. Web. Mar. 2015.

Parungao, Beverly. 'Post-Tsunami Deaths Due To Stress, Illness Outnumber Disaster Toll In Fukushima ‹ Japan Today: Japan News And Discussion'. Japantoday.com. N.p., 2014. Web. Mar. 2015.

The Japanese Culture Club. (2012). 'The Tohoku Earthquake Rears Its Ugly Head, And This Time It's Personal.'. Web. Mar. 2015.

World Nuclear Association. (2015). World-nuclear.org,. 'Fukushima Accident'. Web. Mar. 2015.