シンポジウム“復興の人間科学2021”『福島原発事故10年の経験から学ぶ』～当時小学生だった若者達との対話から via 早稲田大学人間総合研究センター+ ある避難者による感想と報告

Posted on 2021/12/20 by nfield

原発事故による避難生活という過酷な人生体験を小学生の時期に経験した被災者は、今年で17歳〜22歳となります。 現在大学生となった被災当事者は、あの震災をどう受けとめ，またこの10年間をどのような社会経済状況におかれ、どのような心理状態で、どのように思考を重ね、どのように生き抜いてきたのでしょうか。 […]

［第１部．被災当事者学生による講演］ 被災当事者学生５名（双葉町・福島市・郡山市・いわき市出身）による講演：「原発事故10年の経験/いま考えること」

【第２・３部】金菱清「現在大学生になる被災当事者との対話から私たちは何が学べるか」・パネルディスカッション

【第４・５部】萩原裕子「被災当事者の語りに耳を傾け学ぶことの意義」・シンポジウムのまとめ

会場で一部始終を見届けた一避難者のレポートと感想です。

8時間に及ぶシンポジウム。
中でも避難大学生の講演とパネルディスカッションは圧巻でした

①Kくん：19歳、避難元は福島県いわき市、避難先は都内。
都内に避難後、「福島からの避難者」というだけでいじめを受けた。

避難者はスクールカーストの底辺であるという表現にショックを受けた。
特筆すべきは、その避難者の中ですらいじめが起こっていたという話。

そうした経験から不登校になり、救いを求めローマ教皇に手紙を出したところ、謁見が実現。
手紙を出すという自身の小さな行動が、ローマ教皇との謁見に繋がった事実から、「発信する事」の大事さを学び、福島の原発事故のリアルと自身へのいじめの体験を発信し、二度と同じ悲劇を繰り返さない社会にしていきたいと講演活動を始めたそうです。

②Aさん：20歳、避難元は福島県福島市。
原発事故後、山形、北海道、福島県喜多方市、沖縄を経て京都へ避難後、現在は都内の大学に在学中。

AさんはもまたKくん同様、避難先の学校でいじめに遭う。
そのため必死で関西弁を習得しつつ、みんなに馴染もうと努力。

また、福島のことや避難について発信したところ、発言内容についてのバッシングを受けたことから、発信する際の言葉の選び方などについて「誰も傷つけないよりよい伝え方」を探しているそうです。

③Uさん：20歳、避難元は福島県双葉郡双葉町。
原発事故後、栃木を経由し、埼玉へ避難。

Uさんもまた避難先でいじめに遭い、担任に相談するも向き合ってもらえず人間不信に。
その後不登校になり、通信高校へ。

そうした中、仏教に出会い、仏教が学べる大学へ進学。
少しずつ心の傷と向き合いつつも、まだまだ心は完治しておらず、現在も休学中。

④Tくん：19歳、避難元は福島県郡山市。
原発事故後、神奈川に避難し、現在は都内の大学に通う。

多くの避難者が孤独に避難している中、Tくんは仲の良かったご近所さんともども避難していることから孤立感を感じることなく、スムーズに避難先にもなじめた。

母親が立ち上げた避難者同志のカタリバに関わる中、学習支援を受けていたことから、自身もまた同じ境遇の子どもたちに寄り添いたいと学習支援をしている。

⑤Kさん：21歳、避難元は福島県福島市。
原発事故後、大阪を経て京都に避難し、京都の大学に通う。

放射能汚染から「みんな」ではなく、「自分たちだけ」が避難をすること、また、避難先では、「福島からの避難を隠さなければならなかったこと」に疑問を持つ。
高校生の時、日韓高校生交流での体験から国を越えた交流に関心を寄せる。

大学生になってからも日韓青少年交流キャンプに参加をし、そこで原発事故避難者としてのスピーチをした際、韓国の若者が関心と心を寄せてくれたことに感動するとともに「発信すること」の大事さを実感。

しかし原発事故当時の混乱と理不尽さはトラウマとなっており、当時の話をすると感情が乱れてしまう。
今回の参加も当初はZOOM参加を考えていたが、現地で生の声を伝えたいと参加を決めた。

５人の大学生の発言内容のレベルの高さが半端なく高いことに驚きを隠せませんでした。
その理由を私なりに分析をすると、彼らの10年は、同年代が20-30年でゆっくりと経験することを多感期な10年でぎゅっと経験をしてしまったからではないか？

そこには当然歪みが発生する。
見た目は子どもでも、知識や思考は大人。

そうしたギャップや、避難先の保護者の不勉強さ、無関心さが複雑に絡み合うことで彼らへのイジメが発生したのではないか？
そんなことが想像されるような彼らの冷静かつ的確な分析に、驚くとともに、胸が締め付けられ、そして、勇気をもって発信したことを称賛したいと思いました。

それと同時に、彼らが名前を出して発言していることから、こうした発信が「再び彼らを追い詰めないよう」、私たちは細心の注意を払い、きちんとフォローしていくこともまた次世代を育てていく上で最も大切なことだと感じました。

最後に、主催者のおひとりである早稲田大学辻内先生からのメッセージです。

「様々な意見をお持ちの方がいらっしゃると思いますが、話し合いや議論のキッカケになることを望んでいます。誹謗中傷など、人を傷つける心ない対応のなきようお願いいたします。」

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , | Comments Off on シンポジウム“復興の人間科学2021”『福島原発事故10年の経験から学ぶ』～当時小学生だった若者達との対話から via 早稲田大学人間総合研究センター+ ある避難者による感想と報告

Hundreds of Scientists Ask Biden to Cut the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal via New York Times

Posted on 2021/12/20 by nfield

In a letter, the scientists also urged President Biden to declare that the United States would never be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict.

By David E. Sanger

[…]

The letter to Mr. Biden also urged him to change, for the first time since President Harry S. Truman ordered the dropping of the atomic bomb over Hiroshima, the American practice that gives the commander in chief sole authority to order the use of nuclear weapons. The issue gained prominence during the Trump administration, and the authors of the letter urged Mr. Biden to make the change as “an important safeguard against a possible future president who is unstable or who orders a reckless attack.”

But while Mr. Biden has often declared that he will be guided by scientific advice alone when it comes to managing the Covid-19 pandemic, he has made no such pledge in the nuclear arena, where strategists, allies protected by the American nuclear umbrella and members of Congress all have views — many of them diametrically opposed to the ones described by scientists.

Among the authors of the letter are numerous members of the National Academy of Sciences and the Union of Concerned Scientists. They include Barry Barish of the University of California, Riverside; Jerome I. Friedman of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; John C. Mather of the University of Maryland; and Sheldon L. Glashow of Harvard, who have all been awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics; and Richard L. Garwin, a nuclear expert and recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom who has advised a series of presidents.

They were motivated by the coming publication of the Nuclear Posture Review, a document each new president usually issues in the first year or two of his term. Mr. Biden’s is expected early next year, though the internal debate over its contents has been very closely held.

The letter noted Mr. Biden’s own words in 2017, as he was considering his run for president, when he said that “it’s hard to envision a plausible scenario in which the first use of nuclear weapons by the United States would be necessary or make sense.” During the campaign, he said the “sole purpose” of the American arsenal “should be deterring — and if necessary, retaliating against — a nuclear attack.”

The letter argued that “by making clear that the United States will never start a nuclear war, it reduces the likelihood that a conflict or crisis will escalate to nuclear war.” And it would demonstrate, they argued, that the United States was committed to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, which obliges the nuclear-armed states to move toward reducing their arsenals.

President Obama balked at making the commitment, even while he declared that nuclear weapons would no longer be at the center of American defense policy. And in recent months American allies — including Japan, the target of that first attack — have argued quietly against a “no first use” declaration, saying that it would make them more vulnerable to a crippling, non-nuclear attack, including a cyberattack or conventional attack that could take out their electrical grids and their water and fuel lines.

While the administration has not said how the new nuclear weapons strategy will be different from that of former President Donald J. Trump, some language echoing Mr. Biden’s carefully chosen term about the “sole purpose” of nuclear weapons seems likely. But that stops short of committing never to use a weapon first.

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | 11 Comments

REFERENDUMS 2021/4th Nuclear Power Plant referendum defeated via Focus Taiwan

Posted on 2021/12/20 by nfield

Taipei, Dec. 18 (CNA) A referendum seeking to unseal and restart work on Taiwan’s Fourth Nuclear Power Plant failed to pass Saturday, the first time people have been allowed to directly vote on the facility that has been debated and under construction for more than two decades.

A total of 4,262,451 people (52.3 percent) voted “no” in the referendum that asked if they agreed that the power plant should be unsealed and operated commercially to generate electricity, while 3,804,755 people (46.7 percent) voted “yes.”

But even if the totals had been reversed, the referendum still would not have passed because it did not meet the turnout threshold.

Under Taiwan’s Referendum Act, the referendum question would have needed at least 4,956,367 “yes” votes to pass, or at least one-quarter of all eligible voters, and the “yes” votes to exceed the “no” votes.

Among the four referendum questions, which also covered trade, algae reef conservation and future referendums, that were rejected in Saturday’s vote, the 5.7 percent margin by which “no” votes outnumbered “yes” votes (52.84-47.16 percent) was the highest.

The government has argued that unsealing the power plant would be unfeasible due to cost and safety issues and require years before it could actually generate power.

Pro-nuclear activists argued that the country’s energy shortage and the need to keep greenhouse gas emissions in check made reopening the plant a necessity.

Rejection of the referendum, initiated by nuclear advocate Huang Shih-hsiu (黃士修), means that the same referendum question cannot be proposed again for another two years.

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on REFERENDUMS 2021/4th Nuclear Power Plant referendum defeated via Focus Taiwan

India has long suppressed antinuclear activism. Still, activists persist. via Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Posted on 2021/12/18 by nfield

By Urvashi Sarkar | December 17, 2021

In Southeast India, in the dense interior of the Nallamala Hills, deciduous trees, shrubs, and brambles sprawl over the undulating land of the Amrabad Tiger sanctuary. Here, 14 tigers  prowl the jungle with boars, sloth bears, and panthers as company. Insects buzz, waterfalls gush, and wild animals grunt, but the heavy machines once scheduled to drill 4,000 boreholes into the earth in search of uranium are absent and silent—at least for now.

In 2019, the Indian government approved prospecting for uranium mining in the tiger sanctuary as it considered the resource “a critical and immediately needed commodity to generate nuclear power.” Meanwhile, a site inspection report noted the environmental impact of the mining project would include “erosion, formation of sinkholes, loss of biodiversity, and contamination of soil, groundwater, and surface water by chemicals.” Also, the project would have displaced the Chenchu hunter gatherer community. Human rights activists, tribal communities, environmental groups, scientists, and film celebrities mounted strong resistance, prompting the government to withdraw the proposal in September 2021. Still, many worry that the success will be fleeting as the government still plans to build new nuclear reactors.

“The opposition was so widespread that even political parties were forced to side with the protesters,” K. Babu Rao, a former senior scientist with the Indian Institute of Chemical Technology, said. Given the Indian government’s long history of antinuclear suppression, many citizens remain concerned about the uranium-mining plan—and other nuclear developments the government is pressing.

Kudankulam: India’s longest antinuclear struggle. Two years after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster, India and the erstwhile Soviet Union entered into an agreement to build a nuclear power plant in Southern India, at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu’s Tirunelveli district. Ever since, thousands of farmers, fish workers, environmental groups, students, and concerned citizens have periodically protested the reactors. In one mass rally in 1989, more than 10,000 people demonstrated against the project.

Protesters opposed and still oppose the Kudankulam reactors for many reasons, including concerns about the release of radioactive contaminants into the environment, threats to marine life and human health, loss of fishing livelihoods, and fears that the reactors may serve as a conduit for building nuclear weapons. Also, the reactors are located in an earthquake zone. Finally, the devastating 2004 Indian ocean earthquake and tsunami affected parts of Tamil Nadu state, and the memory lives on in the area.

Work on the first two Kudankulam reactors gained momentum between 2001 and 2002. Later, when the Fukushima nuclear reactor melted down in 2011, simmering Indian antinuclear opposition spiraled into full-blown opposition. Residents in the vicinity of the project and concerned citizens did not want a nuclear power plant. The Indian nuclear establishment, including the Department of Atomic Energy and the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited, responded with indifference, which added to discontent.

When protests broke out, the police and paramilitary forces fired shots and tear gas. They also lathi charged into the protesters and beat them with sticks. At least two people were killed in 2012 and several others were injured. Kudankulam protesters have also faced false legal cases. A 2012 report commissioned by a coalition of anti-nuclear groups and individuals on suppression of democratic rights in Kudankulam found numerous instances of arbitrary implementation of tough laws:

By filing cases of sedition, waging war against the Government of India, and promoting disaffection between groups of persons, people are being unnecessarily harassed by the misuse of criminal law, and their constitutional rights are being violated… Persons who are protesting cannot be branded as anti-national and unpatriotic, and peaceful protests cannot be equated to sedition or waging war against the state.

India’s sedition law dates back to 1870, when the British ruled. It was used against freedom fighters, including Mahatma Gandhi, in the struggle for Indian independence. Despite urgent calls to repeal the law, it is still used today to harass dissenting individuals. Nearly 9,000 people have been charged with sedition for protesting against the Kudankulam nuclear power plant. Some cases persist today, even though the Supreme Court ordered the dismissal of all criminal cases against the protesters.

“The Kudankulam protests were unprecedented, both in terms of the scale of the movement and its repression. It brought to center-stage the question of inter-generational justice and the planet that future generations will inherit,” Sonali Huria, a 2020 research fellow with the Takagi Fund for Citizen Science, said. Farmers, fishermen, scientists, lawyers, NGO workers, professors, and religious preachers banded together in their opposition to the reactors. In 2011, the People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy formed as part of the opposition to the Kudankulam reactors.

“The threat of displacement, radiation, and the safety question brought these otherwise different groups together,” Patibandla Srikant, a researcher, wrote.

Indian citizens mounted robust resistance against west coast reactors. Another antinuclear resistance movement emerged in 2006 near Jaitapur in the state of Maharashtra, on India’s West Coast south of Mumbai. Protesters organized against the proposed construction of six European pressurized reactors to be imported from France. The location was again in a seismically active, fertile, agricultural, and fishing region, which left some 40,000 people in five villages concerned for their livelihoods.

Residents labeled the 2010 public hearing on the project a farce. The flawed environmental impact assessment report marked cropland and orchards as wasteland. Angry residents and their supporters demonstrated in large numbers. In at least one demonstration, the police opened fire, killing a local resident. Agitators, many of whom were poor farmers and fisherfolk, were arrested for arbitrary reasons. The police issued notices that barred activists from entering the district of the proposed reactors.

Activists also challenged the Jaitapur plant on persistent safety and cost concerns about European pressurized reactors. Activists Vivek Monteiro and Mangesh Chavan filed public interest litigation in 2013, challenging the project on technical and environmental grounds. The petition has yet to be heard.

Government response to past antinuclear resistance may foretell the future. In 2017, the Indian government canceled a proposal from the American corporation Westinghouse to build AP1000 reactors in Mithivirdi village of the western state of Gujarat. But there was a catch. The project, which had been located in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s home state of Gujarat, where there was public opposition, was shifted to Kovvada in the state of Andhra Pradesh. This state had become “a dumping ground for polluting industries and unsafe technologies,” according to former senior government bureaucrat EAS Sarma.

The Modi government has since announced that it would build 21 new reactors by 2031—heedless of opposition, economics, and risks to health and safety.

This is a “story of [a] sustained peoples’ movement,” journalist Damayantee Dhar wrote, adding that Indian antinuclear protesters have “braved psychological pressure, administrative intimidation, and various other tactics and continued to protest for their land.” The “tactics” have included offers of social responsibility projects and jobs sponsored by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India.

[…]

“The people … have increasingly questioned the need for nuclear power. They haven’t budged,” Krishnakant Chauhan, an antinuclear activist said. “[Indian] citizens will oppose nuclear power, whether in Mithivirdi or elsewhere.”

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on India has long suppressed antinuclear activism. Still, activists persist. via Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Concerns linger as completion date for Coldwater Creek cleanup pushed to 2038 via St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Posted on 2021/12/18 by yukimiyamotodepaul

Jesse Bogan

FLORISSANT — Enoch Cole and his wife moved here from Kirkwood a few years ago because their hard-earned money went farther. They bought a nice, spacious house at the end of a cul-de-sac perched above Coldwater Creek.

The waterway snakes 19 miles through north St. Louis County, from around St. Louis Lambert International Airport to the Missouri River. In 1806, Capt. William Clark mentioned the confluence in journals as a final stop in an epic journey.

[…]

That’s why he was surprised one day in 2019 to see a white van and truck parked by the creek, in a low-lying grassy area that he doesn’t own. Five people in bright orange vests had a table set up.

“I thought it was a class or something,” said Cole, 67.

Or a body.

The team told Cole they were doing “some testing.” They gave him a “Dear Neighbor” letter from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers St. Louis District that was so specific it didn’t make sense. The letter said the sampling was part of the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, or FUSRAP, “to further characterize Coldwater Creek and associated flood plain properties.”

After he read it, Cole went to his computer. He concluded it had something to do with World War II and an issue of contamination getting into the creek. He wondered what the results of the testing were and eventually forgot about it until a reporter recently knocked on the door.

[…]

In the past 30 years, North County has gone through a significant population shift, with older white residents moving out and African Americans moving in. As the neighborhoods shift, many people don’t know about the ongoing cleanup of Coldwater Creek from radioactive contaminants left from the development of the nation’s first atomic weapons.

In 2021, the Army Corps of Engineers budget for the project was $34.55 million, up from $20 million in 2019. So far, more than 29,000 dirt samples have been taken to pinpoint remediation of the creek that is expected to ramp up in the next couple years.

[…]

Though funding has increased, and about 100 people are working on the project each day, the completion date has been pushed back to 2038. Several recommendations from federal public health officials aren’t being followed.

[…]

Making a mess

The St. Louis region played an enormous role supplying U.S. forces with firepower during World War II. In St. Charles County, 17,000 acres of farmland were snapped up by eminent domain to make TNT for torpedoes and other bombs. A plant in the 4800 block of Goodfellow Boulevard in St. Louis produced ammunition and artillery projectiles.

And on the Mississippi riverfront, north of Downtown St. Louis, Mallinckrodt Chemical Co. processed massive amounts of uranium ore for the development of atomic weapons from 1942 to 1957. Tons of byproduct with residual radioactive material were shipped to a location on the northern border of the airport, next to Coldwater Creek, to be stored.

For years, the toxic waste sat there, mainly in barrels, in the 100 block of James S. McDonnell Boulevard. By the mid-1960s, Continental Mining and Milling Co. purchased much of the material. They trucked it about a mile away, to an industrial area in the 9200 block of Latty Avenue, which also borders Coldwater Creek. The material was dried there before it was shipped to Canon City, Colorado. Some of it was also eventually buried at West Lake Landfill in Bridgeton.

[…]

Unbeknownst to the new residents, many of them had followed the path of the radioactive waste trucked from north St. Louis to North County, before President Richard Nixon created the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The residents were drawn by brand-new homes, in new school districts and neighborhoods, some with views of the countryside.

[…]

Considering 1996 to 2011, the state found cases of leukemia were “statistically significantly higher” than the rate for the rest of Missouri, as were cases of breast, colon, prostrate, kidney and bladder cancers, according to the report. Among children, 17 and younger, cases of brain and other nervous system cancers were “significantly” higher than expected in the 63043 ZIP code. Oddly, thyroid cancer, which is more easily linked to ionizing radiation exposure, was significantly lower in the region.

There was enough concern in 2019 that the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, or ATSDR, weighed in with a 252-page report.

ATSDR, which addresses community public health concerns nationwide, concluded that people like Farrell who lived or played “in and around” Coldwater Creek between the 1960s and 1990s could have increased risk of getting lung cancer, bone cancer or leukemia from radiological contamination that was around prior to remediation of the original storage areas beside the airport and on Latty Avenue.

[…]

Moser said they are designing the plan to remediate the rest of the creek. If there aren’t delays from other road and bridge projects, he said, they want to start cleaning up the creek within the next two years. They will begin near the airport, work their way downstream toward the confluence, removing contamination identified by testing. The original storage location beside the airport will continue to be used as a load-out facility for shipping the contaminated dirt out of the area by covered rail cars. It’s currently being sent to a waste management company in Idaho.

[…]

“There were no records,” said Behlmann. “Nobody talked about or knew about any kind of contamination at that time.”

One supplier he named has since died. In hindsight, Behlmann said, nobody is going to put an ad in the paper that says: “Anybody who has bought topsoil from North County since 1960, please notify us.”

[…]

In 2016, Nasalroad said he was diagnosed with thyroid cancer. He’d awakened one morning with a knot on his neck. Within a week, he said, it had grown to the size of an orange. The growth and half his thyroid were removed. He continues to monitor it.

He said he didn’t tell his doctor that he lived next to Coldwater Creek, though ASTDR recommends doing so. Nasalroad, who said he also grew up playing in the creek, doesn’t think the location of his home puts him at risk for cancer. As far as he understood it, the main contamination was way up stream, by the airport.

[…]

Christi Oster Evans grew up on the other side of the creek, surrounded by what is now Florissant Golf Club. As a kid, she said, she would hop over the creek to see friends who lived on the other side, sometimes to get to school. Now she’s 58 and lives in Eureka. She’s a vegan. Until recently, she said, she was walking 3 to 5 miles a day, and managing a salon. Then a large mass popped up on her abdomen. She was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and is undergoing chemotherapy.

She said she told her doctor about spending much of her childhood near Coldwater Creek, from 1965 to 1983. The main storage sites of radioactive waste beside the airport and around Latty Avenue hadn’t been remediated by then. Contamination in and around the creek could have been on the surface. She said her doctor was not familiar with the environmental saga.

Read more at Concerns linger as completion date for Coldwater Creek cleanup pushed to 2038

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | 10 Comments

“No Dumping of Contaminated Water into the Pacific Ocean! Rally to Protect the Ocean and Life!”　via Manhattan Project for a Nuclear-Free World

Posted on 2021/12/18 by nfield
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Og3RjnNpmVE

Posted in *English, *日本語 | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on “No Dumping of Contaminated Water into the Pacific Ocean! Rally to Protect the Ocean and Life!”　via Manhattan Project for a Nuclear-Free World

東日本大震災や原発事故の体験「おらもしゃべってみっが」　つらい思いも安心して語れる場を via 東京新聞

Posted on 2021/12/18 by nfield

2021年11月1日 15時37分

震災よりもその後の１０年のほうが生きるのがつらかった－。東日本大震災や原発事故後、つらい体験を誰にも話せないまま、ストレスやトラウマ（心的外傷）を抱え、今も苦しんでいる人は多い。それは福島に残った人も避難した人も同じ。もっと地域全体で、震災や原発事故のことを語り合える社会になれば。そんな願いを込めた集まりが福島県南相馬市で開かれた。　（片山夏子）

◆「大丈夫だよ」全力で娘と自分についたうそ

「２０１１年３月１２日土曜の夜。突然のごどさ、あでもなぐ逃げた。２歳と４歳の子、車さ乗せで。このまま家さいだら、ちびら、あぶねえっつって」　１０月２３日、震災や原発事故やその後の記憶を語り合う「おらもしゃべってみっが～市民が語る３・１１」が開かれた南相馬市の会場に、同市から京都府綾部市に避難している井上美和子さん（５２）の声が響いた。　あの日、井上さんは家族で車で逃げる途中、北か南か西かと地図を見ていた時、長女から「お母ちゃんどこに行くの」と聞かれ、どきっとした。どこ行くのかわからないと泣きたい気持ちを喉の奥にのみ込み、自分を「おめえ、お母ちゃんだべよ」と叱咤しったし「大丈夫だよ。もうすぐだから。寝てていいかんね」と全力で娘と自分にうそをついた。

◆つらくて体験を語れなくても、聞くことで

　井上さんは避難後、体験談を語りながら、原発事故が当事者だけの問題のように感じられているのではと違和感を感じてきた。どうしたらわが事として考えてもらえるかと悩み、２年前から自分や家族の震災体験や福島の日常を描いた話を生まれ故郷の浪江町の方言で朗読する「ほんじもよぉ（そうは言ってもよう）語り」を始めた。　井上さんは「今回、福島で初めて朗読できた。苦しみは人の数だけある。自分の体験がつらくて語れない人でも、話しているのを聞いて自分も同じだって思ってもらえたら」と、会場とオンラインの計１３０人の参加者に語りかけた。

◆「話せば家族に影響するかも」声が出なくなる

　南相馬市原町区でクリーニング店を営む高橋美加子さん（７３）は「この１０年はたくさんの人の苦しみや死が積み重なった１０年だった」と言う。原発から３０キロ圏内の原町区は震災直後、屋内退避に。新聞も郵便も届かなくなり、見えないバリアーが張られたように感じた。　高橋さんは震災から２年後に妹が書いた７編の詩「震災日記」を紹介。「死んでも故郷へ戻りたいという、この強い思い　これは一体何なんだろう」「私の生きる場所はどこなのか？　私の生きているところが故郷なのか？」など複雑な気持ちが書かれていた。　「たくさんの疑問を抱えながら、地域を消さないため、地域や子どもたちを守るために何をすればいいか、地元の若者らとグループを立ち上げ議論した」と高橋さん。１６年には市民が地域を学ぶ場「まなびあい南相馬」を設立した。　「震災のことはふたをしようとしても消えない。今も原発事故の影響を不安に思う人たちもいる。現実に起きたことを知ってほしい。でも私が話すことで家族に影響するかもと考えると声が出なくなる。みんな体験は違う。違いがあっても責められない、安心してしゃべれる場を作りたい」と場所作りの計画があることを明かした。

◆周囲に避難者と明かせない人も

　全村避難となった飯舘村の兼業農家だった北原康子さん（６８）は事故後、多い時で村民４００人が避難した相馬市の仮設住宅の管理人を７年務めた。「高齢者の１人暮らしも多く、班長を決め、毎朝安否確認をした」　北原さんは、体調が悪くなった人のために救急車を呼んだり、高齢者を狙った訪問販売への注意喚起をしたりした。そんな中、ともに奔走した前自治会長が脳卒中で亡くなった。　これまでなかなか話せなかったという。「避難者の中には、避難先や職場で避難者と言えない人もいる。分かっている人に話せても他では話せない。１０年たっても原発事故は終わらない」と北原さんは言った。

◆「話すことで孤立感が緩和されたら」

第２部は、会場の３０人余が円陣になって語り合った。滋賀県に避難した男性は「自分の事を誰かに聞いてもらえる場は大事。でも仲間内でもなかなかはき出せない」と発言。３年前に南相馬市に会社をつくり滋賀県と行き来する井上昌宏さん（６１）は「どこまで津波が来たかは聞けるが、被災者の思いは聞きにくい。語れる場を作りたい」。同市の会社員伏見香代さん（５０）は「避難した人や福島にいる人がどう思っているのかは、話し合わないと分からない。今回のように安心して話せる場が必要」とした。　福島原発被害者支援かながわ弁護団の姜きょう文江弁護士は「裁判所でも原告の被災者の思いを十分聞く場になっていない」と発言。その上で「避難者の中には、避難できてよかったねと言われて、福島に戻りたくても戻れないという人もいる。福島にいる人たちもまた原発事故で傷ついている。話すことでお互いのつらさが分かり、孤立感が緩和されたら。１０年たっても本心や苦しいと言えず、傷が癒えないままの人もいる。語れる場が広がっていけば」と望んだ。

◆事故後10年で精神的な問題はより深く

　「自分の体験を語るのがつらければ、聞くだけでもいい」。今回の会を主催した「震災ストレス研究会」代表で精神科医の蟻塚ありつか亮二さん（７４）は、２０１３年から相馬市のクリニックで、震災や原発事故後、心的外傷後ストレス障害（ＰＴＳＤ）や鬱うつに苦しむ患者や、原発事故後変わってしまった地域の人間関係に悩む住民らを診察してきた。　「震災の記憶、特にトラウマ（心的外傷）やつらい体験はそれぞれが心の中に閉じ込めてしまう。それは大人だけではなく、子どもにも影響する。１０年がたったが精神的な問題はむしろ潜伏していっている」と蟻塚さん。１３年ごろには不眠やパニック障害や鬱症状を訴える人が多かったが、月日がたつにつれ「何のために生きているか分からない」「死にたい」「震災時より今の方がつらい」との訴えが多くなり、疲れ果てた人が増えたのを感じる。

◆PTSDの発症割合、戦争にも匹敵

　蟻塚さんは１９年、帰還困難区域である浪江町津島地区の住民を調査。約５００人のうち、約半数もの人がＰＴＳＤの症状を訴えたことに驚愕きょうがくした。戦争によるＰＴＳＤに匹敵するような非常に高い割合だ。「原発事故が起きた福島では、震災や原発事故後のつらい体験を周囲の人に語れないということがある。避難者だと明かすと、あの人は賠償金をもらっていると言われたり、放射能が不安だと言うと、まだそんなことを言っているのかと言われることも。『原発事故のことは語れない。墓場まで持っていく』と言った人もいる」　蟻塚さんは福島に来る前、沖縄戦のＰＴＳＤの患者を診てきた。「沖縄でも以前は沖縄戦の話はタブーだったが、語り始めた体験者の話をみんなが共有し、今では沖縄戦の体験を語れば、社会が受け止められるようになった」と説明する。自分の体験を語り、受け止めてくれる人がいることで傷が癒えてくるという。　「震災や原発事故のつらい体験を生き抜いてきたこと自体がすごいこと。福島でも震災体験を語ってもいいんだと思え、語ったら受け止められる、今回がそんな社会への第１歩となれば」

[…]

全文

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

Nuclear Reactor Radiation, Kids and Cancer: Joseph Mangano, NH #547 via Nuclear Hotseat

Posted on 2021/12/15 by nfield

Listen Here:

Audio Player00:0000:00Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume.

Podcast: Download

This Week’s Featured Interview:

  • Nuclear reactor radiation and its impact on public health – especially that of children – is the focus of the work of Joseph Mangano.  He is a health researcher and epidemiologist who has served as a director of Radiation and Public Health Project since 1989.  Mangano is author or co-author of 33 medical journal articles on radiation health, and is the author of the books Low Level Radiation and Immune System Damage: An Atomic Era Legacy (1998) and Radioactive Baby Teeth: The Cancer Link (2008). He managed the study of Strontium-90 in baby teeth, and now manages the citizen-based radiation monitoring programs near the Indian Point NY and Oyster Creek NJ nuclear plants.  We spoke for Nuclear Hotseat #418 from June 26, 2019.
  • […]

Read and listen

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Nuclear Reactor Radiation, Kids and Cancer: Joseph Mangano, NH #547 via Nuclear Hotseat

Nuclear power’s economic failure via The Ecologist

Posted on 2021/12/14 by nfield

Dr Jim Green 

| 13th December 2021 

A new report from Friends of the Earth Australia details the catastrophic cost overruns with nuclear power projects.

Despite the abundance of evidence that nuclear power is economically uncompetitive compared to renewables, the nuclear industry and some of its supporters continue to claim otherwise.

Those claims are typically based on implausible cost projections for non-existent reactor concepts. Moreover, the nuclear lobby’s claims about the cost of renewables are just as ridiculous.

Claims about ‘cheap’ nuclear power certainly don’t consider the real-world nuclear construction projects detailed in a new report by Friends of the Earth Australia.

Every power reactor construction project in Western Europe and the US over the past decade has been a disaster.

The V.C. Summer project in South Carolina (two AP1000 reactors) was abandoned after the expenditure of at least US$9 billion leading Westinghouse to file for bankruptcy in 2017.

Criminal investigations

Criminal investigations and prosecutions related to the V.C. Summer project are ongoing ‒ and bailout programs to prolong operation of ageing reactors in the US are also mired in corruption.

The only remaining reactor construction project in the US is the Vogtle project in Georgia (two AP1000 reactors). The current cost estimate of US$27-30+ billion is twice the estimate when construction began (US$14-15.5 billion).

Costs continue to increase and the Vogtle project only survives because of multi-billion-dollar taxpayer bailouts. The project is six years behind schedule.

[…]

Western Europe

The only current reactor construction project in France is one EPR reactor under construction at Flamanville. The current cost estimate of €19.1 billion is 5.8 times greater than the original estimate.

The Flamanville reactor is 10 years behind schedule.

The only current reactor construction project in the UK comprises two EPR reactors under construction at Hinkley Point. In the late 2000s, the estimated construction cost for one EPR reactor in the UK was £2 billion.

The current cost estimate for two EPR reactors at Hinkley Point is £22-23 billion, over five times greater than the initial estimate.

In 2007, EDF boasted that Britons would be using electricity from an EPR reactor at Hinkley Point to cook their Christmas turkeys in 2017, but construction didn’t even begin until 2018.

Is China a shining light for nuclear power?

One EPR reactor (Olkiluoto-3) is under construction in Finland. The current cost estimate of about €11 billion is 3.7 times greater than the original estimate. Olkiluoto-3 is 13 years behind schedule.

Nuclear power is growing in a few countries, but only barely. China is said to be the industry’s shining light but nuclear growth is modest ‒ an average of 2.1 reactor construction starts per year over the past decade.

Moreover, nuclear growth in China is negligible compared to renewables ‒ 2 gigawatts (GW) of nuclear power capacity were added in 2020 compared to 135 GW of renewables.

There were only three power reactor construction starts in Russia in the decade from 2011 to 2020, and only four in India.

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | 16 Comments

Germany tells France: ‘nuclear is not green’ via euobserver

Posted on 2021/12/12 by nfield

By WESTER VAN GAAL

“Germany will oppose French efforts to label nuclear electricity as green energy,” Germany’s new foreign minister Annalena Baerbock said in Paris on Thursday.

It was her first full day of work and first official visit to a foreign capital since taking office this week.

Europe is “the heart of German foreign policy. A strong Europe needs strong Franco-German relations,” she said, amid Russian threats and a worsening crisis at the Ukrainian border.

Yet the debate about so-called taxonomy – the green labelling system for investors – currently being developed by the European Commission was one of the issues that took centre stage.

Baerbock, who also served as co-leader of the Greens since 2018, said that “no crisis poses more of a threat to humanity than the climate crisis.”

“It is well known that we have differing positions on the nuclear issue,” she added after meeting French foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian.

Along with a group of at least 12 EU member states, France aims to include nuclear and gas as ‘green’ investments, while Germany opposes atomic energy but is dependent on gas.

On 22 December, the European Commission is likely to unveil investment rules for nuclear and gas, which has become one of the hottest environmental debates in the EU.

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Germany tells France: ‘nuclear is not green’ via euobserver