Here is a cautionary tale about the risk of downplaying the importance
of environmental health.
A year ago, Fukushima City was a bustling city with a
population of 290,000. Its people were
going about their business the day the earthquake and tsunami hit northern
Japan, triggering the biggest environmental disaster most will ever experience.
At first, the trains stopped running because of damage to
the railways, and most of the city’s water stopped running because of ruptures
in water mains.
Over the next several days, a silent toxin began to spread
along with word of the natural disaster.
The Fukushima nuclear power plants, 39 miles southeast of the city, began
melting down, releasing radioactive particles into the air and water.
Although Fukushima remained outside the quarantined evacuation
zone stretching twelve miles out from the nuclear facility, waves of radioactive
cesium dust escaped the zone, flying on the winds toward the city. As it rained and snowed, the cesium dust fell
to the ground, infiltrating homes and businesses, hospitals and markets,
roadways and parks.
A year later, the Fukushima
government is still trying to save people’s homes by cleaning up a deadly
environmental mess.
If you have ever experienced a home construction or
renovation project, you have an idea of what environmental health officials are
facing. When you tear down a wall, sheetrock
dust collects everywhere and sticks to everything – furniture and floors, wall
hangings, clothes, and even inside cupboards and cabinets. To clean it, you have to wipe down everything
individually. And what you don’t catch
goes back into the air, eventually needing to be cleaned up again.
Now imagine that this dust were completely invisible and
radioactive, and both indoors and outdoors.
That’s
what the people of Fukushima have to clean.
Building by building and property by property, they go about their task. They can’t just wash the cesium down the
drain. They have to dig out the top two
inches of their landscapes, and cart away the vegetation and dirt as radioactive
waste, or create mini nuclear waste dumps by burying everything contaminated in
deep holes in their own backyards.
If just one property owner refuses, then as it rains again, the
entire neighborhood can be re-contaminated.
We should all know by
now that Fukushima’s story today could be Hartford’s, Miami’s, or West Palm
Beach’s tomorrow. Hartford is just 40
miles from the Millstone nuclear plants, Miami is 25 miles from the Turkey
Point nuclear plants, and West Palm Beach is 40 miles from the Jensen Beach
nuclear plants.
If a Fukushima-level event hit near me or my family, I’d
want a strong Health Department with a clear environmental health mandate ready
to respond.
But that’s not what people in Florida are getting.
Last week, Florida’s
State Legislature passed a law eliminating the Division of Environmental Health from the State Health
Department. It also eliminated the
Community Environmental Health and Healthy Communities, Healthy People programs. The Florida Public Health Association and
others fought valiantly against these changes.
Not only did the legislature eliminate the Division of Environmental
Health, it removed from the Health Department’s duties in section 381.0011 of
the Florida statutes the power to quarantine “premises as the circumstances
indicate for… providing protection from unsafe conditions that pose a threat to
public health.”
Faced with a Fukushima-level event, radioactive or
otherwise, the Florida Health Department will no longer have the independent power
to create an evacuation zone to protect the public health.
The legislature did give some quarantine responsibility back
to the Department as an amendment to section 381.00315 of the Florida
Statutes. But in that section, the Department’s
authority is severely restricted. It
must consult with any agency that might be affected, its quarantine order is
limited to sixty days, and violations of the order are punishable by as little
as a $500 fine.
In other words, if the
Fukushima meltdown had happened in South Florida, any general quarantine orders
related to Miami would have expired ten months ago, and the only penalty for
repeated re-contamination of a neighbor’s property might be a $500 fine.
Political leaders often embrace nuclear energy and many
other industrial contaminants, in spite of the risks and costs. These risks may not bother them, but at the
very least they could give the rest of us a modicum of protection.
Otherwise, the biggest environment disaster of the decade
may not be the one we witnessed in Japan.
It could be the one that just played out in the Florida legislature.
If you have questions about this column or wish to receive an email notifying you when new Our Health Policy Matters columns are published, please email gionfriddopaul@gmail.com.
If you have questions about this column or wish to receive an email notifying you when new Our Health Policy Matters columns are published, please email gionfriddopaul@gmail.com.
Wow what a nice post.I fell glad after read this post.Can you more share with me.I will come as soon.
ReplyDeleteThanks for more sharing.......
Laith Salma New York
Thanks for sharing. Environmental disasters, as opposed to natural disasters, are those that are caused by some form of human intervention, but, the question arise when we debate which one is main fact? Economic bonanza or environmental disaster?
ReplyDelete---------------------------------------
chiropractors nj