In the name of God

»And God blessed them, and God said to them, Bring forth fruit, and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heaven, and over every beast that moveth upon the earth« (The first book of Moses).

THE SEARCH OF PARADISE 

The word »paradise« origins from the Zoroastrian idea of the closed garden, pairidaeza. It is composed of two Persian words: pairi (eng.: around) and diz (eng.: to melt or to shape), which indicate the ability of paradise to deform itself, on its tendency to constant changing and re-imagining. It highlights its potential of strict hierarchy with all the limits and closings that include and exclude (Deckard 2010). So paradise, etymological speaking, differs itself from Eden, which is a Hebrew notion for delight and pleasure, although those two terms will later combine and will represent future heaven, the holy city of Jerusalem, Champs Elysees, …

From its beginning as enclosed garden, hortus conclusus, paradise had experienced constant religious transformations and secular mutations. It had been located in Asia, and then in America, and also in Africa. It had meant garden of love and a labyrinth of passion. It had been a land of cocaine, a colony. Later it has become a tourist attraction, pharmacology hallucinations …

Still today some of Mediterranean isles suffer because of neverending desire to accomplish perfect picture of paradise. Abundant with forests, they have become models on which they tried to create a perfect image of mystical Sacred Isle. Once these places were spoiled by the establishment of cities and towns, the retrospective nostalgia and anxiety of conquerors had persuaded the people that paradise they were looking for is somewhere in the west where endless sea spreads. But the mystical landscapes weren’t only set up in the west. Especially after conquests of Aleksandar the Great when trade routes between Europe and Asia were forever set.

In the sixth century, before Christ was born, as a respond to the Babylonian captivity, paradise had, influenced by Persian culture, moved, in Hebrew imagining, from the nebulous reality to somewhere out of space and time, representing the garden of delights and award for all obedient believers. In the Middle Ages, both of paradises started to exist: heavenly, which remained out of space and time, and the one present on the Earth. The Earthly paradise represented inaccessible promised lands (Deckard 2010).

America had been, before the arrival of Europeans, developing quite independently from the rest of the world. When first conquistadors had arrived they found all sorts of social life: from the primitive hunters and gatherers to a gigantic, urban, rich, class societies. But the arrival of Europeans changed it all. They have drastically changed the ecology of the continent.  Before Columbus set his foot on the new land, a primary source of food for most of the people was agriculture. They didn’t know about steel, they only used wooden tools. There had been more than 40 cultivated crops: corn, potato, tomato, peanuts, tobacco, … Besides the agriculture, hunting played a significant role in the life of native Americans. Not only because of the meat, but also because of products they were able to make out of a dead animal. In less than a century after Columbus arrived, there were around 118.000 colonists fighting for a piece of their paradise. Soon they dominated over the Southern and Central America. Besides complete deformation and transformation, they did on a landscape, colonialists also caused a demographic catastrophe. People of America have never experienced diseases that Europeans had brought with themselves, therefore his bodies didn’t have any defense mechanism developed. Consequently, a vast majority of them was helpless in a fight against smallpox epidemic which took place in the year of 1531, and against typhoid which spread among people in 1564 and 1567. Diseases were fatal for three-quarters of the population. That was a huge disappointment for Spaniards who were looking forward in enslaving them – they were left with no other choice but to eventually import slaves from Africa.

The same way they took over the people, they did with nature. Although Columbus was dreaming of gold, he returned home with a jar of sugar. And he was surprised by the reaction. In Europe, sugar was so valued, that soon, they had to transform certain regions of Southern America in huge plantations of sugar cane. It meant a conscious converting of land due to European interest (Empson 2014).

Corps, wars, diseases, the irreversible transformation of the environment, extermination, deforestation, the plundering of the earth and its resources – all this, for the sake of those who came in the name of God, seeking for paradise (Deckard 2010).

BIRTH OF THE CONSUMERS’ PARADISE

As the money that was earned by selling other people’s fortune was constantly pouring in the cult of extravagance gradually started to take place. Paradise was more and more defined in secular terms of exceptionality and luxury. Consumer paradise which can be reached through the accumulation of money and social status was born. The pleasure of Eden wasn’t anymore just some feature of life after death or a comfort available only to aristocracy and settlers. With the arrival of Renaissance ever increasing middle-class could participate heaven on the Earth. Transformation of imaginary paradise that was placed somewhere far away back to the state and home happened about the same period in which the last heavenly places were discovered (and plundered) (Deckard 2010). People started to realize that their invasion to glorious lands had robbed these angelic places of their charm. It destroyed a mind of “innocent” indigenous people. That enhanced an image that Europeans have had about non-European people. They have thought about them as noble savages in South Pacific and so created a picture of the new paradise of erotic primitivism. And as Orient ceased to represent any military or economic threat mentioned imagination was carried to those places also. Men were allowed freely to dream of the sensual exotic land of harems and seraglios. Religious model of paradise had converted itself into men’s sexual perversion. After the acquisition and devastation of endemic places, Europeans started to create their own heavens in their own homes. The French revolution had just encouraged the process under the eschatological slogan: “the old, corrupted order, shall be cleared with violence, and a new era will be born. The era that will bring a secular heaven on the Eart”. (Deckard 2010).

“The Angel would like to stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing from a Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such violence that the Angel can no longer close them. This storm irresistibly propels him into the future from which his back is turned, while the pile of debris before him goes skyward. This storm is what we call progress” (Walter in Deckard 2010).

The storm from the paradise, that prevents angel from coming back, indicates that myths of paradise interfere with the reconstruction and that partially are responsible for historical nightmares. Loss of ability to obtain what has been destroyed contains a myth of progress, an illusion of capitalists power to restore ruined. Blind faith in that myth, however, block any other way of changing the world (Deckard 2010).

There was and still is a constant raping of our minds with something that can not be reached, with something we must yearn for. Once upon a time, they desired for untouched nature which represented to them the landscaped of heavens. They lust for exotic women and men, whose figures arouse in our fantasies … Our effort to reach heavens remain, it just changed shape. Likewise, the devastation of the environment continues as we search for our paradise.

 

Sources

  1. Deckard, S. (2010). Paradise Discourse, Imperialism, and Globalization. Exploiting Eden. New York.
  2. Epson, M (2014). Land and Labour: Marxism, Ecology, and Human History. London

 

The Mill Of Production

Hereby I represent a chapter of my work, originally written in Slovene, which I am slowly but surely translating, entitled: Capitalism as the main polluter of our environment, created in the year of 2014. 

The Mill of Production is a complex self-driven mechanism, that feeds itself with natural resources, consequently it grows and expands. Bigger The Mill gets more natural resources it needs for its existence. Nature goes through Mills metabolism and is, after the Mill absorbs all the capital nutrients from it, eliminated as nothing more useful than feces. (Gould et. al., 2007).

Alan Schneiberg, the professor from the University of Northwestern, Illinois, USA, interweaved Marx’s political economy and neo-Weber sociology, thus created a theory called the Mill of production through which he highlights the meaning of nature and the development of contradictory relations between economic blossoming and environmental destruction (Hanningan, 2007).

Theory recognizes that the nature of capitalistic investing leads to even greater commands for natural resources in order to be able to achieve the determined level of social wellbeing.

Every new wave of investing:

  1. a) weakens employment conditions of production workers,
  2. b) worsens the state of the environment,

but

  1. c) increases profits.

The ecosystem is, during this process, changed into a new profit and new investment, which accelerates demands for elements of the ecosystem (Gould et. al. 2007).

Until 70s years of the previous century, most of the analysis about environmental problems were done by researchers from the field of Natural Science. It was then when first researchers done by the scientists from the sociological field were made. Schneiberg, as one of them, concentrates on the political economy of production and its relationship with environmental problems, and he sees the problem, not as people wouldn’t want to save the environment, but in that that people don’t actually know from whom the environment should be saved (Schneiberg, 2002).

Without proper awareness, people make some decisions that can, in the long run, lead to loss of some elementary human rights. And public will do it voluntarily, by them itself.

For example, private use of bottled water. People, where the state had set this regulation, have accepted it, without being aware that supply with drinking water is a basic right of every human being and that the government’s job is to enable that to every single of its citizen. Instead, the citizen is now responsible for supplying himself with drinking water by buying a bottled water, from which only the Mill of Production profits (Gould et. al. 2007).

mill of production

The Illustration of The Treadmill of Production. Curry 1981; Source: Gould et. al. The Treadmill of Production, 2007

The theory was set as an answer to the question: Why has the degradation of the environment enlarged itself since the World War II?

It states that by the growing degree of Capital that was available for investing and by the change of the distribution of investments, need for natural resources has gradually risen. The theory differs itself from others while it recognizes that the most of the profit accumulates in the Western Countries and that human force is being replaced by ever more efficient technology in order to accumulate wanted profit. In economic boom that followed after WWII, the most of the money was mobilized in the development of newer and more efficient technology, the creation of which demanded far more energy and/or chemicals to be able to replace former, labor-intensive processes and thus resulted in degradation. With the use of new technologies profit increased. The profit that was later used for researchers and development of yet newer and better technologies. Consequently, production had to expand, in order to authorize both fix and operative costs of new technologies. And not only that production had expanded the demand for natural resources, it also extends the amount of toxic waste and waste in general (Gould et. al. 2007).

The theory stands on few hypothesis.

  1. Nature is committed to production. The ecological system has production function, that consists of creating organic matter – biomass – through the birth, grow, and death (Stretesky et at., 2014).
  2. Nature’s production follows rules of nature, such as laws of thermodynamics. First, the Law on Conserving Energy states that Energy cannot be created or destroyed. And the Second, the law of entropy states, that energy that is used in a process of production takes less organized form. For example: when we burn a tree, the energy, previously stored in the tree, is released into the environment and it heats up the surrounding. Energy is transferred into a heat and the ashes, that is to say, becomes reorganized and disorganized. When used in irreversible processes energy loses itself more and more in the environment and moves towards the equilibrium. Following this, production has to, at some point stop, namely, when the equilibrium is reached. Then, the transition from one form to another will not be possible anymore.
  3. Capitalism, by its constant spread of production and use of energy in order to accumulate, as many profits as possible,  accelerates the increase of the entropy. Human economic system interferes into the organization of ecological system (Stretsky et al 2014).

Schneiberg states, that the dynamics of capitalism and its constant tendency for expansion of the Mill of Production the main reason for the ecological disorder.

In the capitalistic system, the access to ownership, namely to the means of production, is distributed unfairly. But to be able to use those means of production capitalists need workers who are able to manage the means. In favor of the owners, must workers and non-owners, for their survival, sell their working power, which is then used by capitalists in order to change raw material into products. If they are to make the profit out of this system, owners must manipulate with the process of production –  intensify work and thus make it more productive. And in order to do that, they strengthen the production with additional use and employment of machines in the chemical industry, which replaces human labor. On the long run, that causes the marginalization of working places and leads to increase of unemployment or the employment under human capability (Stretesky et. al. 2014).

*Featured photograph: Professor Allan Schnaiberg, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA, 14 July 2007. Photograph by Alan Thomas http://www.alan-thomas.com

Sources:

  1. Gould, K., A., Pellow, D., N., Schnaiberg, A. (2007). The Treadmill of Production. Boulder. Chicago.
  2. Hannigan, J. (2007). Environmental Sociology. New York
  3. Schnaiberg, A., Gould, K. (2002). Environment and Society. The Enduring Conflict. The Blackburn Press. New Jersey.
  4. Stretesky, B., P., Long, M., A., Lynch, M., J, (2013): The Treadmill of Crime: Political Economy and Green Criminology. ROUTLEDGE. New York.

Fukushima, mon amour

“just as the illusion exists in love, the illusion you can never forget, so I was under illusion I would never forget Hiroshima (…) I saw survivors too, and those who were in the wombs of the women of Hiroshima. I saw patience, the innocence, the appart meekness, with which temporary survivors of Hiroshima adapted to a fate so unjust that the imagination, usually so fertile, is silent before it (…) women risk giving birht to deformed children, to monsters, but it goes on. Men risk becoming sterile, but it goes on … ”
Resnais, A. (Director and Producer) (1958) Hiroshima mon amour. Motion Picture. France and Japan.

Photography: Celmins, V., (1968) Bikini  (pencil on paper)

Nuclear energy represents the most attractive alternative solution, and it equals progress and proud of the state. However, the progress of nuclear sector comes with huge technological, economic, environmental, political and social costs.

Besides all the benefits and known costs, nuclear energyincludesncudes hidden expenses, for which producers won’t pay. These were, are and will be charged by taxpayers (Sovacool, 2011):

  • risk due to the possibility of reactor meltdown or accident;
  • increased chance for military conflict due to rapid extraction of uranium, increase and break-down in companies that extract uranium, etc.;
  • health risks due to chronical exposure to radiation;
  • direct use of land for plants, uranium mines, enrichment stations, storage spaces:
  • destruction of land due to uranium mining and leaching;- excessive use of water;
  • excessive use of water;
  • the constant supply of warehouses for storage of waste nuclear fuel;
  • changes in local and regional economic structure due to labor loss, relocation of wealth, reduction of gross domestic products;
  • noise and reducement of comfort, reduced value of nearby land

In short, US$ 223.7 of additional costs were created in USA that were never predicted in the traditional determination of nuclear power’s price. Many of those additional costs are “hidden” and are shifted not to consumer or producer, but to society at large (Sovacool, 2011). Not having to deal with mentioned expenses, gives nuclear industry both time and money for it’s what seems to be favourite activity: lobbying. Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University found that in the US, the nuclear industry spent more than US$ 600 million on lobbying and US$ 63 million on campaign contributions from 1999 to 2009 (Pasternak, 2010)

What is known even less than mentioned are nuclear accidents. Almost every country that owes nuclear power plant had already experienced minor or major nuclear disaster (Sovacool, 2011).

HOW POLITICAL LEADERS REACT IN CASE OF NUCLEAR DISASTER?

11th of March 2011, Fukushima. Citizens of Fukushima face triple shock: earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster. Forced to leave homes and leave corpses of their beloved ones were and are still completely ignored by the Japanese government. Authorities took months of delay for decontamination of homes, gardens, and parks. Instead, they have spent their time doing public speeches, passionatly defending nuclear energy. Also, it didn’t take them long to nationalize Tokio Electric Power Company (TEPCO) therefore transfering all the costs of the accident on the shoulders of Japanese taxpayers (Haverkamp, 2012). It took three months for TEPCO to confess that there were meltdowns (Ryall, 2011). Five years later company admits that it failed to follow damage assessment guidelines and that they should have reported meltdowns almost imeediately (Yoshida, 2016).

The earthquake that happened in 2011 had destroyed a cooling system of Nuclear Power plant in Fukushima. That caused hydrogen explosions and reactor meltdowns. Three nuclear reactors and four fuel cores remained exposed, and as fission product like Uranium still continue to generate heat, cooling is much needed. Problem is, by the words of former nuclear industry senior vice president Arnold Gunderson, there are no means to cool them effectively (Jamail, 2016). TEPCO is pouring large amounts of water to cool reactor and fuel cores down, consequently creating hundred of thousands, if not millions of tons of highly radioactive water that has to be dealt with somehow (Jamail, 2016). So, on the September the 14th 2015, TEPCO, pumped more than 850 tons of groundwater from the power plant into the Pacific Ocean (retrieved from http://www.ecowatch.com/850-tons-of-treated-fukushima-water-dumped-into-the-pacific-1882095937.html). As there is, by the words of Dr. Helen Caldicott, and aouthor, and anti – nuclear advocate, no way to prevent the radioactive water from reaching the western shores of the North American continent (Jamail, 2016), public health of people of United Stated faces also the risk.

In 2011 US Environmental Protecting Agency EPA told the public that radiation from the disaster would not reach the US at levels high enough to pose a public health concern. And while all the eyes were, at that moment, set on Japan’s struggle with its major nuclear crisis, EPA quietly stopped running extra tests for radiation (Ludwig 2011).

And while samples of cow’s milk, rain, and drinking water from across the country tested positive for radiation from the Fukushima plant (for radiation fell in rain across the Northern America and was absorbed by plants and dairy cows) (Ludwig 2011), EPA still continued to insist that the radiation levels were too low to cause any public health concern. However Dr. Calcidott disagrees. She claims that there are no safe levels of radiation for biological systems. She further declares that that kind of terminology is only used by the nuclear industry to cover their inevitable radioactive releases (Jamail, 2016). What also should be mentioned is a problem of of bioaccumulation – meaning that radiation’s impact expands while it moves across the food chain.

As we continue ignoring the subject called Fukushima, from the day one that it happened, catastrophe is taking new and wider dimensions.

On February 2nd, TEPCO released a statement, revealing a discovery of a hole with the diameter of 2 meters. The hole is located within metal grating underneath the pressure vessel in the plant reactor Number 2 (retrieved from http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20170202/p2g/00m/0dm/087000c).

What is even more shocking than the hole itself is the level of radiation detected in the area. In January TEPCO conducted an inspection inside the containment vessel, using a remote-controlled camera. An analysis of the images found that the radiation level inside the vessel was up to 530 sieverts per hour (retrieved from https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20170203_09/).  Note that exposure to 1 sievert can already cause radiation sickness, including nausea. Exposure to single dose of 5 sieverts would cause a death of half of those that were exposed and exposure to single dose of 10 sieverts is fatal and exposed person will die within a week (retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/mar/15/radiation-exposure-levels-guide).  Official speculate that strong radiation inside the vessel is due to a mixture of nuclear fuel and melted parts of the reactor’s facility.

At first, TEPCO believed that the most of the reactor’s nuclear fuel had been contained in the pressure vessel, but company spokesman for nuclear power Yuichi Okamura has been quoted saying that “it’s highly possible that melted fuel leaked through” (retrieved from http://asia.nikkei.com/Japan-Update/Nuclear-fuel-likely-melted-through-Fukushima-reactor-vessel)

On the base of the possibility that fuel would leak outside of the reactor, TEPCO reached the conclusion to send a robot into the area to make deeper examinations.

However, the first robot that was deployed on February the 16th, was unable to conduct any meaningful measurements. The reason for that were the extreme conditions within the reactor, disregarding the fact that the robot’s ability to withstand high levels of radiation. The probe, even though it is designed to withstand up to 1,000 sieverts of radiation in total, would not sustain severe damage because it was unlikely to remain for too long at a single point, a TEPCO spokesman Shinichi Nakakuki said.  (retrieved from https://phys.org/news/2017-02-scorpion-robot-mission-fukushima-reactor.html). When a second robot was sent to investigate, it also failed (Webb, 2016).

AND WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE?

Radiation is difficult to understand and its low impact of the catastrophe of nuclear disaster dislocates it from the disaster itself. All the world was focused on Fukushima in the moment when plants have exploded. As time went by media stopped reporting about it, but disaster kept spreading and causing tragedies (Jacobs, 2016).

Meanwhile, the government is urging Japanese citizens to return their homes in the nuclear wasteland. On March 31st, government officials are planning on cutting housing support for the thousands of people that had been evacuated. Supposedly cleaning of the area of Ilitate, which is 24 miles away from nuclear power plant, is finished, therefore people can come back home. Even though the government is claiming that level of radiation is safe for human life, many disagree, saying that it is simply not wise to send thousands of people back to the area that is surrounded by highly radiated levels (Batts, 2017).

Since the August of 2011, about 45,000 workers have been involved in cleanup work at the Fukushima plant. Four years after the accident, Japan confirmed the first case of cancer caused by catastrophe. The unnamed man in his 30s worked at the plant from October 2012 to December 2013 and was exposed to high levels of radiation. (Wakatsuki, 2015). The other victim, to whom the government confirmed that his disease is a consequence of the exposure to radiation in the power plant, is a man, in his 40s. He worked at several nuclear power plant between 1992 and 2012 as a TEPCO’s employee. He was present at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant during the March 11, 2011, meltdown. Three years later he was diagnosed with thyroid gland cancer, which was confirmed to be a consequence of exposure to radiation. As of March, 174 people who worked at the plant had been exposed to over 100 millisieverts of radiation. And there is also an estimate that more than 2,000 workers have radiation doses exceeding 100 millisieverts in their thyroid gland (retrieved from https://www.rt.com/news/370650-thyroid-cancer-fukushima-plant-radiation/). It should be noted that these are merely the cases that government of Japan have recognized as work-related.

Furthermore, as part of regular government screening of around 300,000 children under 18 in the Fukushima region, rates of Thyroid Cancer among children have been detected to be higher than normal. In 2016 total 116 children were confirmed and 50 suspected of having a disease. These figures are reportedly in stark contrast to elsewhere. Disease typically occurs in as few as one or two in every million children per year, making rates of suffered in Japan as much as 20 to 50 times higher than average (Demetriou, 2016). Previously, in the year of 2012, it was stated in the Survey of Fukushima Prefecture Health Management that 35.8 % of children have lumps or cysts and that real effects of radiation exposure will only be seen after four or five years after a catastrophe (Ryall, 2012). Nevertheless, the main problem is that it is not often scientifically possible to directly connect an individual cancer case to radiation exposure (Demetriou, 2016).

In the meantime, in should be noticed that not only physiological impacts are devastating. Nuclear disaster that took place in Fukushima brings with it load of psychological and emotional struggles that should not be unmentioned. Families have been “temporarily” split, children are taught to avoid contact with nature, marriages are being dissolved while one of the parents is forced to leave a family in order to earn money, and the other stays with children away from radiological hazards. Lives of people that survived are forever embraced with uncertainty and fear whenever any kind of illness appears nearby. If one is exposed or was exposed the whole family, community and individual is disrupted (Jacobs, 2016).

It seems like catastrophic consequences of the devastating catastrophe that took place in March 2011, is yet to show its real dimensions. While we ignore it, it will reveal itself through continuous deaths and diseases of not only humans but also other creatures of this planet.

SOURCES:

850 Tons of Treated Fukushima Water Dumped Into the Pacific (2015, Sep. 15th) EcoWatch: For the Love of Earth. Retrieved from http://www.ecowatch.com/850-tons-of-treated-fukushima-water-dumped-into-the-pacific-1882095937.html

Batts, V. (2017, Feb 24) Fukushima Residents Being Forced To Move Back To Radioactive Wasteland. Twisted News. Retrieved from http://www.twisted.news/2017-02-24-fukushima-residents-being-forced-to-move-back-to-radioactive-wasteland.html

Demetriou, D. (2017, Feb 17) Fukushima disaster: Children cancer rates rise with 16 new cases. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/12160794/Fukushima-disaster-Children-cancer-rates-rise-with-16-new-cases.html

First thyroid cancer case in Japan recognized as Fukushima-related & compensated by govt (2016, Dec 18) Russia Today. Retrieved from https://www.rt.com/news/370650-thyroid-cancer-fukushima-plant-radiation/

Haverkamp, J. (2012, May) Fukushima nuclear disaster: Who profits and who pays?  Greenpeace. Retrieved from http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/makingwaves/fukushima-who-profits-who-pays/blog/40463/

Jacobs, R. (2016, March 1st) “On Forgetting Fukushima”, The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 14, Issue 5, No. 1.

Jamail, D. (2016) Radioactive Water From Fukushima Is Leaking Into the Pacific. Truthout. Retrieved from http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/34565-radioactive-water-from-fukushima-is-leaking-into-the-pacific

Ludwig, M. (2011, Jun 23rd) EPA Halted Extra Testing for Radiation From Japan Weeks Ago. Truthout. Retrieved from: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/1796:epa-halted-extra-testing-for-radiation-from-japan-weeks-ago

Nuclear fuel likely melted through Fukushima reactor vessel (2017, Feb 3rd) Nikkei Asian Review. Retrieved from http://asia.nikkei.com/Japan-Update/Nuclear-fuel-likely-melted-through-Fukushima-reactor-vessel

Pasternak, J. (2010, January) Nuclear Energy Lobby Working Hard to Win Support. Investigative Reporting Workshop, retrieved from http://investigativereportingworkshop.org/investigations/nuclear-energy-lobbying-push/story/nuclear-energy-working-hard-win-support/

Radiation exposure: a quick guide to what each level means (2011, Mar. 15th) Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/mar/15/radiation-exposure-levels-guide

Radiation Level at Fukushima reactor highest since 2011 disaster; grating hole found (2017, Feb 2nd) The Mainichi Japan. Retrieved from http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20170202/p2g/00m/0dm/087000c

Ryall, J. (2011, May 12th) Nuclear meltdown at Fukushima plant. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8509502/Nuclear-meltdown-at-Fukushima-plant.html

Ryall, J. (2012, Jul 19) Nearly 36pc of Fukushima children diagnosed with thyroid growths. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/9410702/Nearly-36pc-of-Fukushima-children-diagnosed-with-thyroid-growths.html

»Scorpion« robot mission inside Fukushima reactor aborted (2017, Feb 16th) Phys Org. Retrieved from https://phys.org/news/2017-02-scorpion-robot-mission-fukushima-reactor.html

Sovacool, B. K. (2011, December) The »Self – limiting« future of Nuclear Energy. Nuclear Monitor, 738, 1 – 12. Retrieved from https://www.nirs.org/wp-content/uploads/mononline/nm738.pdf

TEPCO mulls deploying robot into damaged reactor (2017, Feb. 3rd) NHK WORLD. Retrieved from https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20170203_09/

Yoshida, R. (2016, Feb 24th) Tepco admits it should have declared meltdowns at Fukushima plant much earlier. The Japan Times. Retrieved from http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/02/24/national/tepco-admits-initial-assessments-fukushima-meltdowns-wrong/#.WLrAC9LhDIW

Wakatsuki (2015, Oct 21) First case of cancer linked to Fukushima cleanup work diagnosed. CNN. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/20/asia/japan-fukushima-radiation-cancer/index.html

Webb, W. (2017, Feb 24th) Concern Over Fukushima Increases As Radiation Cripples Two Robots. True Activist. Retrieved from  http://www.trueactivist.com/concern-over-fukushima-increases-as-radiation-cripples-two-robots/#.WLFMGkkdpn0.facebook