Emerging Environmental Justice Issues in Nuclear Power and Radioactive Contamination

Abstract

Nuclear hazards, linked to both U.S. weapons programs and civilian nuclear power, pose substantial environment justice issues. Nuclear power plant (NPP) reactors produce low-level ionizing radiation, high level nuclear waste, and are subject to catastrophic contamination events. Justice concerns include plant locations and the large potentially exposed populations, as well as issues in siting, nuclear safety, and barriers to public participation. Other justice issues relate to extensive contamination in the U.S. nuclear weapons complex, and the mining and processing industries that have supported it. To approach the topic, first we discuss distributional justice issues of NPP sites in the U.S. and related procedural injustices in siting, operation, and emergency preparedness. Then we discuss justice concerns involving the U.S. nuclear weapons complex and the ways that uranium mining, processing, and weapons development have affected those living downwind, including a substantial American Indian population. Next we examine the problem of high-level nuclear waste and the risk implications of the lack of secure long-term storage. The handling and deposition of toxic nuclear wastes pose new transgenerational justice issues of unprecedented duration, in comparison to any other industry. Finally, we discuss the persistent risks of nuclear technologies and renewable energy alternatives.

Environmental Justice as Scalar Parity: Lessons From Nuclear Waste Management

“…Second, as a procedural injustice, Whitehaven and surrounding communities struggled to resist Nirex's largely technocratic (expert-led) authority or effectively engage with democratic mechanisms of community environmental protection, in part because of the legacy of secrecy that surrounds civilian nuclear engagements with communities (GreenPeace, 2005;Kyne & Bolin, 2016); but also because the technological stigmatisation of Sellafield as a "dirty" place (the extension of this is that the people living there are themselves somehow "dirty" or "contaminated") (Castán Broto et al, 2010;Gregory & Satterfield, 2002) has precluded other industries (such as coastal tourism) from becoming better established in the region. Thus, the threat of poverty from withdrawing nuclear industry activities from communities has a potentially coercive effect-the community surrounding Sellafield has been put in a position where it struggled to oppose an industry that sustains its local economy, despite the potentially negative health, and psycho-social effects it has had upon the residents (Blowers, 1999(Blowers, , 2016Blowers, Lowry, & Solomon, 1991;McSorley, 1990;Wynne, 1993).…”

Environmental Justice Research: Contemporary Issues and Emerging Topics

“…Several articles in this Special Issue break new ground by extending the EJ research framework to consider emerging issues such as energy [1,2], food [3], drinking water [4,5], flooding [6,7], sustainability initiatives [8,9], and gender dynamics [10], including EJ concerns in Canada [5,11], the UK [12], and Eastern Europe [13]. Finley-Brook and Holloman [1] explore the EJ implications of energy production in the U.S. Their study demonstrates how the transition from high carbon energy sources such as coal and oil contribute to environmental injustices, and proposes priorities for a new energy justice research agenda that combines advocacy, activism, and academics.…”

“…Finley-Brook and Holloman [1] explore the EJ implications of energy production in the U.S. Their study demonstrates how the transition from high carbon energy sources such as coal and oil contribute to environmental injustices, and proposes priorities for a new energy justice research agenda that combines advocacy, activism, and academics. Kyne and Bolin [2] focus on nuclear hazards associated with both the U.S. weapons programs and civilian nuclear power. Their article argues that nuclear power plants, uranium mining, and waste disposal raise a variety of EJ issues that encompass distributive, procedural, recognition, and intergenerational justice.…”

GIS‐Based Integration of Social Vulnerability and Level 3 Probabilistic Risk Assessment to Advance Emergency Preparedness, Planning, and Response for Severe Nuclear Power Plant Accidents

“…In the nuclear power domain, vulnerability can be categorized into two areas: (i) vulnerability as a measurement of “risk” (e.g., regional risk assessment (Baklanov & Mahura, ; Baklanov et al., ; Baklanov, Sørensen, & Mahura, ; Rigina & Baklanov, ) and postaccident mental health effect assessment (Kunii et al., ; Mashiko et al., ; Solomon & Bromet, )), or (ii) vulnerability compared with NPP risk assessments, where exposure to risk is viewed from the perspective of the local population (e.g., environmental justice, NPP siting) (Alldred & Shrader‐Frechette, ; Cousins, Karban, Li, & Zapanta, ; Kosmicki, ; Kyne, ; Kyne & Bolin, ; Satterfield, Mertz, & Slovic, ; Shrader‐Frechette, ). This article, however, adapts the concept of social vulnerability, developed by Cutter, Boruff, and Shirley () in the context of natural hazards (Bakkensen, Fox‐Lent, Read, & Linkov, ; Cutter et al., ), for the context of a severe nuclear accident.…”