|
Introduction介绍
2011年3月11日，日本东北部福岛第一核电站发生爆炸，引发了一场核灾难。国际原子能机构（IAEA）已将这起事故的规模定为4级，其规模高、影响范围广，破坏力更大，被称为另一种“切尔诺贝利”。人类利用核能解决能源问题。工业时代的GY危机，为人类的生存和可持续发展创造了新的可能性和机遇，但自20世纪50年代以来核泄漏事故不断发生并造成了严重后果。不由得以为这是人类文明在地球上的进步，或是人类文明开始毁灭，一个人是这项新技术的主人或奴隶。一方面，为了人类的幸福空前、无限的能力和美好的前景，另一方面，可能破坏人类的生存环境，给人类发展的未来蒙上一层阴影，增加人类发展方向的不确定性（韦伯和海厄，2017页）。随着经济的增长、社会的进步和人口的增加，人类对自然的控制和驾驭能力逐渐增强，随后人类活动对自然环境的严重破坏、对地表的破坏，如果不加以控制，它将继续威胁到地球。的生物圈。这种破坏往往是不可逆转的，进而影响人类和社会的发展。
后工业时代也是历史发展和特定阶段的产物，自然继承了前两步文明的全部成果，也受到了种种不利因素的影响。因此，危机除了具有上述两个时代的特征外，还表现出以下独特的特征：一是全球性的，是指危机的对象和范围，其后果超出了以往地方和地区的范围，具有显著的综合性。例如关于气候变暖的危险性，臭氧洞是一个国家范围之外的，而且涉及到高科技的空气、海洋和外层空间，可以是危机后的源头，而危机一旦发生，可能会超出人类解决能力的范围，其破坏程度是严重的。（Wright&Nyberg，2017年）。二是综合性，是指导致危机的因素的多样性和综合性，往往会引起连锁反应。例如，金融危机的影响不仅在商业层面，也在社会生活层面。有一种高科技，是指后工业危机主要是由于高科技工具使用不当造成的，如空气污染造成的废弃物、外层空间辐射污染造成的电子废弃物、核事故造成的生态破坏等，长期存在。
An explosion at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plant in the northeast of Japan on March 11, 2011, triggered a nuclear meltdown. The scale of the accident has been set by the international atomic energy agency (IAEA) at level 4, with a high level of magnitude, broad scope of influence and a more considerable destructive force, which is known as another "Chernobyl." Human use of nuclear energy to solve the problem of the energy crisis of the industrial age, create new possibilities for human survival and sustainable development and opportunities, but since the 1950 s ongoing nuclear leakage accident and caused severe consequences. It can't help thinking it is the progress of human civilization on earth, or the beginning of the destruction of human civilization, a human is the master of this new technology or a slave. It on the one hand, for the happiness of humanity unprecedented, unlimited capacity and good prospects, on the other side, may destroy the human survival environment, to cast a pall over the future of the human development, increase human development direction of more uncertainty (Webb & Hayhoe, 2017). With economic growth, social progress and the increase of population, human control and the ability to harness natural gradually increase, followed by human activities on the natural environment of the severe damage, damage to surface damage, if uncontrolled it will continue even threaten the earth's biosphere. Such destruction is often irreversible and, in turn, affects human and social development.
The post-industrial age is also a product of historical development and a particular stage, which naturally inherits all the achievements of civilization in the first two steps, and also receives all the disadvantages. So it appears crisis besides has the characteristics of the above two times all, also showed the following unique features: one is global, refers to the object and scope of the crisis and the consequences are beyond the scope of previous local and regional, has noticeable comprehensive. For example about the dangers of climate warming, the ozone hole is beyond the scope of a country, and involving high-tech air, sea, and outer space, can be after the crisis source, and the crisis once produces probably beyond the scope of the human ability to solve, the damage is severe to measure (WRIGHT & NYBERG, 2017). The second is comprehensive, which refers to the diversification and synthesis of the factors causing the crisis, which often cause a chain reaction. The impact of the financial crisis, for example, is not only on the commercial level but also on the social life level. There is a high-tech, refers to the post-industrial crisis are mostly caused by the improper use of high-tech tools, such as air waste caused by pollution, e-waste from outer space radiation pollution, ecological destruction brought by the nuclear accident, for a long time, and so on.
The consequence of the climate change and nuclear power development 气候变化和核能发展的后果
Legal issue
Now the nuclear materials, nuclear fuel and reactors lass and nuclear emergency special disposal act, are two basic laws in the development of the Japanese nuclear power. Although seemingly the nuclear program, the content of examination and approval, supervision rules are all the responsibilities of the roles involved in the nuclear emergency (Yorucu & Katircioğlu, 2014). For example, the structure of the emergency headquarters, daily check of examination and approval rules, where the cooperation with the cabinet, the qualification standards of the person in charge of nuclear enterprise but leak a lot. According to the current Japanese law, for example, the safety status of nuclear power plant mainly relies on enterprise checklist, and according to the relevant situation analysis, Japan's nuclear safety agency at the plant in advance has felt something was amiss, but still can only handle affairs by the chapter, TEPCO checklist, confirm whether has been fully checking the plant facilities. On February 28th TEPCO submitted a report to the nuclear safety court admitting that it had not checked 33 parts of the plant's six units. In its report, TEPCO also acknowledged that a distribution plant had not inspected for 11 years (Wiwanitkit & Pandey, 2012). The device is used to distribute current to the temperature control system of a reactor. Also, the cooling pump motor, diesel generators, and other cooling system components also lack regular inspection. It is clear that the "inspection report" can be reported on time without regular checks, which means that inspectors from TEPCO are still forging "inspection records." But the two sides are "tacit cooperation," it is just because of the so-called examination, only enterprise "checklist," I made a report, you don't, I'll recognize some accounts, as to whether the rectification, that is my job. Regulators and regulators, in the friendly atmosphere of neoliberal "deregulation," are so aware of this "cat and mouse" game. Sure enough, after receiving the report from TEPCO, Japan's nuclear safety institute asked TEPCO to submit a correction plan by June 2 (De Ausen, et. Al., 2013). Just bad weather, this time did not wait until June, the plant's March 11 earthquake and tsunami, the cooling system is damaged, TEPCO bungle fighter, eventually led to the nuclear leak. Over the years, it has been a matter of time before Japan's nuclear power plants have been in trouble.
Major international environmental law instruments were dealing with public participation. The parties must ensure that the environmental impact assessment (EIA) is engaged in public participation before the approval of the proposed activities that could result in significant adverse trans boundary impacts (Chung & Yeung, 2013). The EIA is a program that ensures that the environmental impact of decisions is taken into account before making a decision. The process includes analysis of the project may impact on the environment, to record these effects in a report, for public consultation report, due to consider the opinions and report on the final decision, then inform the decision to the public. They are increasingly being used as a major tool for stakeholders in the field of nuclear energy, and they have become a basic tool for preventing adverse environmental impacts from the implementation of nuclear projects. In principle, the EIA will focus on the physical impact of the environment, but it is also used as a tool to identify and address social issues such as nuclear safety. Each party that may be affected by the proposed project may be affected by the proposed project and have the right to negotiate with the originator on potentially adverse transboundary environmental issues (Wiwanitkit, 011). Suggested activities and measures to reduce or eliminate such effects. Members of the public in areas likely to be affected by the proposed project must also have the opportunity to participate in the relevant EIA process, which is equivalent to the relevant era procedures provided to the party's public. Legislation on public participation in nuclear decision-making tends to focus on the project level. In many countries, however, there is now a tendency for the public to participate in earlier stages of decision-making. Especially in the process of formulating new policies and laws and regulations, Greenpeace has been awarded the Supreme Court's ruling in the consultation process of its nuclear power policy in the UK government. In 2003, an energy white paper released by the government indicated that there would be the fullest public consultation before any decision to build more nuclear plants. In 2006,#p#分页标题#e#
In a report, the government decided that "nuclear energy plays an important role in future UK production portfolios." Greenpeace argued in court that the government had failed to meet its commitments and denied their reasonable expectation that appropriate consultations would be conducted before deciding to support the new nuclear construction. The high court agreed and approved a revocation of the government's decision (Kessides, I. 2010).
Political issue
In a crisis, the Japanese government has insufficient control over companies. After the earthquake and tsunami, the first impression to the outside world, it seems that the Japanese government's response is not slow. In fact, the Japanese government disposal of the nuclear crisis in addition to the occasional "furious" in front of the press and the public, but it's hard to really "integration," decided the situation to the protagonist is always the enterprise. As the crisis intensified, TEPCO data released by the mixed and contradictory situation more and more, also made a direct discharge into the sea of thousands of tons of nuclear waste water pollution low concentration of serious, caused the international community and the Japanese people's strong dissatisfaction. But the Japanese government often just after Tepco decided, at a press conference, the way he has repeatedly expressed "deep regret," and to the enterprise did never take any effective measures of "hard." On April 10th, such as Japan's domestic and foreign media questioned how kan was directly facing its neighbors to Japan "sewage into the sea," protested, although Naoto kan stressed to play a "leading role" of the Japanese government in crisis management. However, the answer is just "to better communicate with relevant countries and to more fully explain," the key problem of "the large nuclear pollution wastewater discharged into the sea" is happening (Komiya,,et al., i2008). On the same day, TEPCO announced that nearly 10,000 tons of nuclear waste water had been "discharged" as planned.
In Japan, between enterprise and government, bureaucratic cut continuously, the relation between the reason also disorderly goes back to ancient times, was vividly called "political officer wealth iron triangle," TEPCO is typical of this system spawned a geek. Recently, many Japanese media have cited a journalist who has studied TEPCO for years saying that there is an unfathomable "interest link" between the chaebol family, government officials and nuclear power companies. Tepco is a private company, but it has been linked to the government from the start. East electric company for a long time are important source of political contributions, the liberal Democratic Party (LDP) regime according to public information of the company's website, as of September 2010, the company in the top ten shareholders, "the Tokyo metropolitan government" impressively in the column. And there has been the government involved in Japan's nuclear energy development areas, Japan's finance ministry is wholly owned holding the policy Banks, development bank of Japan has long been Tepco and nuclear power generation enterprises. One of the largest source of loans by the end of last fiscal year, to provide long-term loans amounted to 351 billion yen ($4.4 billion). Tepco and specific bureaucratic always has an unwritten "job swap" relationship, such as one of the company's executive vice President, has always been in charge of electric power resources by the government energy office director of "Avatar" as "descent" (Japanese or retirement) (von Roten, Cl´emence & Thevenet, 2017). As for financial circles, it is each other exchange, March 23, according to Reuters said, citing unnamed sources Sumitomo Mitsui banking is expected to Tokyo electric power more than 500 billion yen ($6.2 billion) loan, as TEPCO post-disaster emergency financing's biggest lenders. Mitsubishi and Mizuho are also looking at providing y200bn ($2.5bn) to y500bn ($6.2 billion) in loans to Tepco. Large trusts such as Sumitomo trust may also lend to Tepco. The nearly 2 trillion yen loan financing still comes from a consortium of shareholders which is a highly controversial mix of Japanese and other developed capitalist countries that have experienced such a catastrophe that not only is it impossible to brake but to become more popular. While calls are for years in Japan about the safety of nuclear power, such as in 2006, the communist party of Japan lawmakers in Congress has raised at TEPCO alleged fraud, covering up security hidden danger (Suzuki, 2011). However, long-term suffer TEPCO immediately stand for the "goodness" of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) regime, make such accountability at all are come, from the results. The nuclear crisis broke out, many people called for Japan's economic circle that should take advantage of the central bank injected liquidity, the Tepco nationalization and the future of nuclear energy strategy implementation, but with the "iron triangle", this kind of change the current pattern of "government bureaucrats and triangle" interest calls again soon be behind the dominant interest group with the usual skirt around for his efforts.
Technological issue
From the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, we can see that humankind is not mature enough to master atomic technology. Because of the "nuclear" phenomenon which caused by the earthquake, although a certain chance, it's another reminder. Science and technology in a sense is also a "double-edged sword," can not only improve the efficiency of human resources, will bring significant disaster to human beings. It should respect the laws of nature and scientific laws, on the premise of respecting the rule of ecological requirements and scientific development of science and technology (Nakamura & Kikuchi, 2011).
Japan's Fukushima nuclear crisis further highlight and contributed to the country's economic development and the population of energy especially the massive demand for peaceful use of atomic energy, rely on and ensure the nuclear technology is matured, ensure the safety of nuclear facilities to overcome the contradiction. Since the emergence of human society, the demand for energy has been rising and accelerating from the quantity, quality and type required. Ordinary fuels, coal, oil, electricity and nuclear power are the primary sources of energy that humans still rely on. In particular, since world war ii, with the independence and industrialization of a large number of third world countries and the acceleration of urbanization, traditional energy has not been able to meet the demand of industrial urbanization for energy. Peaceful use of nuclear energy has become a new energy alternative. According to statistics, in 1985, there were 374 nuclear power stations in 26 countries and regions, with total installed capacity of 24,9754mw (MW), accounting for about 15% of the total installed capacity of the world power station. According to the latest statistics from the nuclear energy research institute (NEI), in January 2011, 442 nuclear power units were operating in 29 countries and regions around the world, and 65 more were under construction. With the change of over ten years, the development of nuclear energy had become a significant trend in world energy. But will the peaceful USES of nuclear power make it safe? In the path of peaceful use of nuclear energy, there are many thorns, and the tragedy repeated. From the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in the United States to the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the former Soviet Union to the Fukushima nuclear crisis in Japan, it stands as a monument to the three tragedies in the history of humankind's peaceful use of atomic energy. Japan on March 31, the Yomiuri Shimbun reported that the nuclear accident at a three-mile island in America in 1979, the "cold shutdown" process cost for a month, 6 to 7 years to remove the already melted nuclear fuel, the U.S. government announced abandoned work completed after 14 years (Kawasaki, 2011). There is still no fuel to be taken out of the reactors at a three-mile island. The Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded in the former Soviet Union of Ukraine on April 26, 1986. Nearly 10,000 people died in the accident, and hundreds of thousands of people exposed to radiation. Direct economic losses of billions and indirect economic losses are hundreds of billions of dollars. Japan short-term problem faced: how to use the enclosed is not a plant, a long-term task is how to perform the reactors scrapped, an expert of the nuclear safety commission said: " it takes 20 to 30 years can complete finally abandoned." All landowners to the environment, personnel, economic losses, there is no make an estimate of Japan, meter, but even the most conservative estimate, the Fukushima crisis caused by the failure will be considerably more than the previous all previous nuclear accident. Whether such an atomic crisis is artificial, or force majeure, or nuclear technology itself factors, but the disaster could not prevent the urgent demand for energy, human and not because of its nuclear facilities safety out of the use of atomic energy. Advances in technology and rapid development have also enhanced personal confidence in ensuring and security. The state must make a balanced and appropriate arrangement between security and development.
Economic issue
The spread of nuclear pollutants will lead to widespread panic in Japanese society, which will severely affect the average production and disaster reconstruction in Japan, and Japan's GDP will shrink dramatically. Also, nuclear pollution will seriously affect the quality of Japanese products, bear the brunt of Japan's agricultural and tourism industries. Also, it may even spread to industrial goods; this will constitute a severe blow to Japan's product competitiveness, the consequences could lead to Japan's economy out of a "U" shaped trajectory, will experience a more extended recession and stagnation (Takubo, 2011). JPMorgan cut its forecast for Japan's first-quarter growth to 1.7% from 2.2% and its second-quarter forecast to 0.5% from 2.2%. The World Bank expected in the first half of 2011, Japan many factories due to power shortages and road damage and difficult to resume production efficiently, the Japanese economy will shrink, GDP growth will decline by 0.25-0.5%. #p#分页标题#e#
Japan's debt now accounts for around 200% of GDP, making it one of the worst-performing countries in the rich world's history. After the earthquake, the Japanese government added a budget, and a supplementary budget for fiscal 2011 will provide an additional 6 trillion yen for reconstruction in the affected areas, which will undoubtedly worsen Japan's economic position. Given Japan's debt risk, the s&p downgraded Japan's long-term debt rating in January, and another last month, Moody's, a rating giant will Japan's sovereign credit rating outlook to negative.
The nuclear crisis has hit Japan hardest, and the nuclear crisis has alarmed Japan and the world's nuclear-power generation. Currently, about 30% of Japan's electricity supply is dependent on nuclear power, as one of the export-oriented economy, Japan's manufacturing dependence on electricity is significant also, if a third of the power supply is affected, so in the short-term impact on the manufacturing industry is also very serious (Yuriko,, et al., 2016). The two nuclear plants, which account for 6% of Japan's total electricity generation, would be a severe drag on Japan's production capacity, such as a delay in electricity supply. Topco estimates that the electricity shortage will continue until the end of April, with electricity shortages for a month. Japan's growth will fall by 0.1 to 0.2 percentage points (Takubo, 2011).
Nuclear crisis disaster, as Japan's auto industry has hit, one of the leading sectors, some factories appeared damaged, Nissan motor company plant in Fukushima atomic pollution is still in crisis, factory personnel to evacuate. Automakers such as Nissan and Honda have also announced production cuts following the company's announcement. The second is the more significant impact of the electronics industry. In the electronics industry, from the critical raw materials (such as semiconductor silicon wafers) to manufacturing equipment, has an essential position in Japan, a succession of aftershocks, damaged infrastructure, nuclear power station accident caused a power failure of panic and radiation. It can make the Japanese electronics industry, such as the advanced manufacturing process more significant impact, enterprise production pause, product prices to rise (Takubo, 2011).
Conclusion
In summary, according to the general international law and international treaties such as the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea, the Japanese have a duty to protect and preserve the Marine environment, take all necessary measures to prevent, reduce and control of Marine environment pollution. Activities that may have a significant impact on the marine environment should be evaluated in advance and observed, measured, estimated, and analyzed. If the Marine environment is in urgent danger of pollution damage or has contaminated, it should immediately notify other countries and other competent international organizations that may be affected. Compared with the pollution caused by natural disasters, Japan should actively discharge its nuclear waste and should be more active in fulfilling these obligations. The crisis has had an impact on the international community, and people have begun to reassess the ability of people to use technology. It can say that Japan's nuclear crisis is a turning point in the history of science and technology. People's misgivings about technology and their abilities represent the prudence and wisdom of human beings, suggesting that human beings are capable of reflection. Nuclear power plant is an achievement of human science and technology development and the result of human rationality. Humans also have another reason, which is to reflect on purpose, which is a higher rational reason. Human ability to transform nature depends on two things: first, whether it is sufficient or not, and whether it is economically feasible. Humans can get nuclear plants to withstand an earthquake of 10 magnitudes, but it may not be cost-effective. Financially cost-effective solutions leave time and space for surprises. In the face of uncertainty, we should not give up; Instead, we must become more cautious, avoid overconfidence and lead to impetuosity, and trigger the wild revenge of nature against humanity. Instead of wearing the world's safest hats, scientists are now calling for greater humility. The transformation of character, of course, comes at a price, but at some cost, we must avoid it, and we must pay the price.
Referneces
Chung, W., & Yeung, I. M. (2013). Attitudes of Hong Kong residents toward the Daya Bay nuclear power plant. Energy Policy, 621172-1186. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.081
De Ausen, L., Defreitas, E. F., Littleton, L., & Lustik, M. (2013). Leakage from closed-system transfer devices as detected by a radioactive tracer. American Journal Of Health-System Pharmacy, 70(7), 619-623. doi:10.2146/ajhp110678
Kawasaki, C., Omori, J., Ono, W., Konishi, E., & Asahara, K. (2016). Public Health Nurses' Experiences in Caring for the Fukushima Community in the Wake of the 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Accident. Public Health Nursing, 33(4), 335-342. doi:10.1111/phn.12227
Kessides, I. N. (2010). Nuclear Power and Sustainable Energy Policy: Promises and Perils. World Bank Research Observer, 25(2), 323-362. doi:10.1093/wbro/lkp010
Komiya, I., Torii, H., Fujii, Y., & Hayashizaki, N. (2008). Relationship between students' interests in science and attitudes toward nuclear power generation. Progress In Nuclear Energy, 50(2-6), 719-727. doi:10.1016/j.pnucene.2007.11.068
Nakamura, A., & Kikuchi, M. (2011). What We Know, and What We Have Not Yet Learned: Triple Disasters and the Fukushima Nuclear Fiasco in Japan. Public Administration Review, 71(6), 893-899. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02437.x
Suzuki, T. (2011). Deconstructing the zero-risk mindset: The lessons and future responsibilities for a post-Fukushima nuclear Japan. Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists, 67(5), 9-18. doi:10.1177/0096340211421477
Takubo, M. (2011). Nuclear or not? The complex and uncertain politics of Japan’s post-Fukushima energy policy. Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists, 67(5), 19.
von Roten, F. C., Cl´emence, A., & Thevenet, A. (2017). Understanding Attitudes Toward Nuclear Energy After the Fukushima Accident: Differences Between Asserted and Ambivalent Positions. Social Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell), 98(2), 659-671. doi:10.1111/ssqu.12320
Webb, B. S., & Hayhoe, D. (2017). Assessing the Influence of an Educational Presentation on Climate Change Beliefs at an Evangelical Christian College. Journal Of Geoscience Education, 65(3), 272-282. doi:10.5408/16-220.1
Wiwanitkit, V. (2011). Nuclear leakage and hypertension: Is there any relationship?. Anatolian Journal Of Cardiology / Anadolu Kardiyoloji Dergisi, 11(6), 566. doi:10.5152/akd.2011.149
Wiwanitkit, V., & Pandey, A. N. (2012). Yoga as a protective lifestyle in the present post nuclear leakage crisis. International Journal Of Yoga, 5(1), 75-77. doi:10.4103/0973-6131.91720
WRIGHT, C., & NYBERG, D. (2017). AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH: HOW ORGANIZATIONS TRANSLATE CLIMATE CHANGE INTO BUSINESS AS USUAL. Academy Of Management Journal, 60(5), 1633-1661. doi:10.5465/amj.2015.0718
Yorucu, V., & Katircioğlu, S. T. (2014). Radioactive convergence of nuclear leakage in Fukushima: Economic impact analysis of triple tragic events. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 35400-409. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.021
Yuriko, S., Hirooki, Y., Seiji, Y., Tetsuya, O., Shin-Ichi, N., Akira, O., & ... Masafumi, A. (2015). Psychological distress and the perception of radiation risks: the Fukushima health management survey. Bulletin Of The World Health Organization, 93(9), 598-605. doi:10.2471/BLT.14.146498
|
 |
|||
| 网站地图 |
