Perceived environmental and health risks of nuclear energy in Taiwan after Fukushima nuclear disaster

Abstract

After the nuclear disaster in Fukushima in Japan in 2011, a nation-wide survey using a standardized self-administered questionnaire was conducted in Taiwan, with a sample size of 2,742 individuals including the residents who live within and beyond 30 km from a nuclear power plant (NPP), to evaluate the participants' perceived nuclear risk in comparison with their perceived risks from selected environmental hazards and human behaviors. The three leading concerns of nuclear energy were "nuclear accidents (82.2%)," "radioactive nuclear waste disposal (76.9%)" and "potential health effects (73.3%)." Respondents (77.6%) perceived a higher relative risk of cancer incidence for those who live within 30 km from an NPP than those who live outside 30 km from an NPP. All the participants had a higher risk perception of death related to "nuclear power operation and nuclear waste" than cigarette smoking, motorcycling, food poisoning, plasticizer poisoning and traveling by air. Moreover, the residents in Gongliao where the planned fourth NPP is located had a significantly higher perceived risk ratio (PRR) of cancer incidence (adjusted odd ratio (aOR)=1.84, p value=0.017) and perceived risk of death (aOR=4.03, p value<0.001) related to nuclear energy. The other factors such as female gender (aOR/p value, 1.25/0.026 and 1.34/0.001 respectively), lower education levels (aOR/p value: 1.31/0.032; 2.03/<0.001) and the participants' concerns about nuclear accidents (aOR/p value: 1.33/0.022; 1.51/<0.001) and potential health effects (aOR/ p value: 2.95/ <0.001; 2.56/<0.001) were found to be commonly associated with the PRRs of "cancer incidence" and "perceived risk of death" related to nuclear energy, respectively. In addition, the respondents' concerns about nuclear waste disposal and possible eco-environmental damage made significant contributions (aOR/ p value: 1.39/ 0.001; 1.40/<0.001) to predict their perceived risk of death related to nuclear power. These factors are considered as important indicators and they can be used for suggesting future policy amendments and public referendum on the decision of the operation of the planned NPP.

Where there’s smoke, there’s fire: focal points for risk communication

“…Also, negative outcomes of a human-made hazard are evaluated more negatively than a natural hazard with the same outcomes (Siegrist and Sütterlin 2014). Concerns about chemical fires are likely to be focused on the unknown health risk associated with the composition of the smoke and the presence of chemicals with the predicate toxic, hazardous or carcinogenic (see for example: Ho et al (Ho et al 2014)). Furthermore, if a person has no perspective for action and no possibilities to control the outcomes, he will more likely be afraid.…”

More than ever, comment on ‘Chernobyl and Fukushima—Where are we now?’

“…A number of studies were conducted to investigate public risk perception after the Fukushima accident in Japan and its neighboring countries such as Taiwan, South Korea and China [1][2][3][4][5][6][7].…”

“…while the general public in Taiwan and South Korea were concerned more about the safety of nuclear operation, potential large-scaled harm to the public, and other negative social consequences associated with nuclear accidents [3][4][5][6]. Most importantly, these studies showed a reverse association between risk perception and the public acceptance for nuclear facilities.…”

“…A large proportion of the participants, 66% in Taiwan and 41% in South Korea, expressed distrust against their government's nuclear safety management and thus strongly advocated the closure or phasing out the existing nuclear power plants in their countries [3,6]. Another serial studies in Taiwan demonstrated that nuclear power operation was associated with the highest risk when compared with the perceived risks of five common technologies or human activities concerning mortality [5]. With regard to the opinions against nuclear energy, 'potential catastrophic nuclear accident' (82%), 'disposal of radioactive nuclear waste' (76.9%) and 'potential health effects (73%)' were the major concerns [5].…”

“…Another serial studies in Taiwan demonstrated that nuclear power operation was associated with the highest risk when compared with the perceived risks of five common technologies or human activities concerning mortality [5]. With regard to the opinions against nuclear energy, 'potential catastrophic nuclear accident' (82%), 'disposal of radioactive nuclear waste' (76.9%) and 'potential health effects (73%)' were the major concerns [5]. Other studies were conducted in Japan, China and Switzerland [2,7,8].…”