Environmental abuse.
It is from this note that this paper intrinsically explores Chernobyl in Ukraine in relation to the occurrence of the nuclear disaster of 1986. Besides, the paper further examines Bhopal in India in relation to the great disaster that took place in 1984. With the notion of the two disasters being considered to have solidified the need for environmental integrity and anthropocentric centrality towards anchoring sustainable development outlook, this paper employs key environmental management principles in the analysis of the two disasters. In addition to examining the implicit dangers that face each one of them, the roles of key institutions as well as the society is evaluated. Finally, following the guidelines and provisions of key protocols and international conventions, the term danger is intrinsically reflected on and mechanism to address it provided for in the recommendations.
Justification of countries choices
In their review of environmental disasters implications, Boris and Ronald (7-10) indicated that the correct choice of case studies is critical as a target towards making correct recommendations. Therefore, the choice of the two countries is considered to be ideal in that they provide the following considerations. To begin with, both countries experienced major environmental abuse that had core implications. Therefore, by analyzing them, it becomes easier to dig deeper into the causes of their particularistic cases (Charles 503).
In India, the Bhopal disaster has up to date remained a key lesson to the globe while in Ukraine the Chernobyl disaster is equally fresh to the local and international communitys minds. Taking into consideration that the two disasters took place at strategic periods immediately after the United Nations Convention on Human Environment of 1972 in Stockholm and the Brundtland Commission, it is possible to assess the application of their recommendations at the global scale and localized levels. Besides, as Pidgeon and OLeary (16-17) indicate, the two countries established key mechanism for addressing the problems and therefore facilitate a better platform for further analysis of core institutions that responded towards the disasters management both locally and internationally.
Dangers facing the two countries
Some of the key agreeable facts about Ukraine and India are the major dangers facing them following the aftermath of the key environmental disasters reported in them. Lars, istein and Arnfinn (37) indicate that besides the magnitude of their disasters shocking the world, the implications are still felt up to date.
Ukraine The Chernobyl disaster
Baverstock and Dillwyn (1313-1315) report that environmental dangers facing Ukraine can be traced back to the fall of April 26th of 1986 when the nuclear plant at the Belarus boarder exploded. Baverstock and Dillwyn (1313-1317) continue to say that the plant continued to burn for days after the disaster occurred. Besides, as Abbott (117-121), indicates, the disaster was the worst in the history of the nuclear energy use and affected hundreds of thousand people who lived in the area. In addition, the disaster caused immediate evacuation of over 100, 000 more people to the sarcophagus. The immediate dangers included the highly concentrated radioactive dusts that United Nations (12-13) indicates was estimated at 50l tons and dispersed over an area of 140,000 sq miles.
According to the United Nations (16), major contamination was inevitable in the hydrosphere and the atmosphere in the region form the large amount of the radioactive particles in the region. Particularly, 131I and 137Cs nucleotides spread very fast due to atmospheric dynamics polluting the air while the rain water took them to the nearby Pripiat River that carried then downstream (Pidgeon and OLeary 16-17). Therefore, while this air contamination further led to more people suffering from the radiation, natural for and fauna that could not be shifted died. It was particularly critical for the aquatic organisms which perished from radiation in the water.
However, it is the heath effects that have been more pronounced compared to other dangers. Most of the people who got into contact with the high radiation experienced thyroid cancer, skins cancer, genetic disorders and other dangers related to high radiation exposure (Fortun 78-79). In just a few days, massive deaths of the workers and firemen were recorded from high radiation exposure.
Pidgeon and OLeary (16-17) indicates that the soil and vegetation further formed a major pool or the radioactive elements and therefore pointing to further uptake in about ten years after the disaster. Pidgeon and OLeary (18) add that through measures to address other problems were evident, the created pools would be hard to address and latter evidence would be from bio-magnification in the upper layers of the food-chains.
India The Bhopal disasters
As it happened in Ukraine, the Bhopal disaster was perhaps equaled in magnitude but on different setting. The explosion of the Bhopal Disaster led to an industrial catastrophe in the Bhopal Union Carbide plant that used highly lethal chemicals to make various pesticides that were in high demand throughout Asia (Fortun 57).
Eckerman (31-34) reports that in the night of the December 3rd the plant released about 390 tons of the highly reactive methyl isocyanite as well other toxic toxins that strongly polluted the highly populated neighborhood. About 3,787 deaths of the people who came into contact with the gas were recorded (Fortun 56-58). Though statistics vary some human rights activists reported that over 800,000 deaths were recorded from the disaster.
Other related dangers included the release of these toxins to the natural system and the bio-accumulative effects among the biota. Notably, chemicals used in Union Carbides are highly persistent when they get into the biological systems. Therefore, Eckerman 933-34) indicates that toxins in the region pants and in the region were recorded even after ten years.
The management and address to the problem in the country in terms of emphasis on the occupational health hazards further postulate key risks to the people (Boris 7-10). Though the country established an effective mechanism of addressing the problem, it was far from being adequate. Up to the onset of the new century, there were different cases in the legal system as people sought for justice from the government and the company (Abbott, 14-15).
Comparison and contrast of state institutional roles and civil society in addressing the dangers
Addressing the above dangers has been cited as a key facet in dictating how these countries and in deed the globe was prepared in addressing such disasters. Boris (97-10) indicates that in Chernobyl, the government sought to establish immediate crisis measures after the accident by evacuating all the people in the region to safer areas that were free of radiation. About 100,000 people were evacuated on an emergency basis to avoid excessive exposure to the radiation. Previously, Abbott (1123-115) indicates that fire fighters had arrived at the scene to put off the fire. However, they were equally affected by the high radiation. The Soviet Government also established a clear monitoring system for the radiation levels and frequently released the statistics of the problem to the country, Europe, and the rest of the world. This was particularly critical in that the magnitude of the problem could be known and addressed.
On the other hand, the civil society equally responded strongly by offering the necessary humanitarian support to the affected. Environmental Protection Agency of the United States came in to offer support in monitoring and reducing the radiation levels in the area of the disaster (Boris 7-10). Unlike the state institutions, health organizations further came in to establish the exact implications of the disaster and therefore anchor possible recovery measures. The G7 summit later in the year 1997 established the Chernobyl Shelter Fund that sought to restore the key integrity of the regional ecological orientation (Fortun 65-66). United Nations Environmental Program also established the Chernobyl Recovery and Development Program to address the human consequences in the region (United Nations 14).
As for the case with Chernobyl, the Bhopal Disaster attracted strong state reaction to the problem due to its magnitude. Therefore, Pidgeon and OLeary (21-23) indicate that special administrative machinery was created to establish the statistics and therefore update the country and the globe accordingly. Department of Bhopal Gas tragedy relief and rehabilitation was also established to address the problem. Therefore, these departments formed the key link between the victims and the government. Particularly, the affected people were compensated, relief provided and ex-gratia payments also given for deaths (Boris 7-10).
Lars et al (38-41) explain that the civil Society strongly came in to augment the governments initiatives in addressing the problem. Particularly, the affected people were educated on how to overcome the massive trauma. Institutions such as Medico Friends Circle and the NGO community sought to increase the relief and health care to the people in the affected area. Other community based groups such as the Bhopal Gas Affected Women Trade Union Emerged to address their problems through trade as they complained that the government was not doing enough to address the problem (Boris 7-10). In addition to that, the Environmental Protection Agency and the United Nations Environmental program also came in to facilitate further contamination level analysis and technical support for the clean up process.
Reflection of the dangers
As it came out in the discussion, the dangers involved in the two tragedies were very extensive. Apart from affecting the social sphere of environment, the atmosphere and the hydrosphere were also affected. Therefore, the dangers are highly intertwined and demand the central application of the correct policies in addressing them. Following the United Nations Rio Summit held in the year 1992, the need to balance the different developmental considerations with the environmental integrity was emphasized (Boris and Ronald 7-10). The Agenda 21 requires that for projects to be established key prior analysis of their affects should be established to determine the expected negative effects and therefore address them to prevent disasters. Ecologically, the regions remained highly contaminated and therefore totally abused ecologically. This would take centuries to stabilize them with others. Socially, the trauma of experiencing the problem resulting to lifetime deformities, key illnesses, death of relatives and living in evacuation areas is highly traumatizing (United Nations 14). It is from this consideration that the precautionary principle should be fully embraced in all projects globally to avoid such problems recurring.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment