Reflection on Fukushima crisis

Dear editor

Everybody remembers the terrifying accident which happened at the Chernobyl plant on April 26, 1986. Recently a research institute examined more than 12,500 people from the area who were under 18 at the time.

Researchers found no evidence to indicate that the increased cancer risk to those who lived in the area at the time of the accident is decreasing over time. The risk of thyroid cancer has not declined nearly 25 years after the disaster.

Japan is engaging in a “state of maximum alert” over the crisis at the earthquake-stricken Fukushima nuclear plant. It seems that a collapse of public accountability exacerbated the damage caused by governmental mistake at the initial stage.

The Japanese government depended too heavily on the Tokyo Electric Power Company in its initial response to the crisis. A privatized company, needless to say, gives its utmost concern to economic reckoning.

The public can be exposed to danger in an unpredictable accident and the cost is paid by all society even with a rare accident. The amount of cost goes beyond the ability of a privatized company. We cannot calculate the sacrifice of human lives within the terms of cost.

Now traces of radioactive iodine have been detected in Seoul. Radioactive elements were also detected in China, Southeast Asia, Europe and 15 states in the U.S. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says internal exposure to plutonium poses an extremely serious health hazard. All people in the world are worried about radiation.

Paradoxically enough, radiation worries make us be aware of the fact that we are in a community bound together. We have been awakened that human beings are sailing in the same boat ultimately, after paying a high price.

The tragic accident leaves me with various questions. Is the use of nuclear power economically sufficient to counterbalance unexpected tragedies? Why is our government busy only justifying the safety of current nuclear power systems, omitting the most fundamental issues?

Is our government's belief in the safety system believable? Are we ready to accept an alternative way of living which includes less use of electricity? These are questions that need solving in mine and our future studies.

Lee Hwi-young

Seoul