Risk assessment vs precautionary principle

Basic risk assessments question, “How much harm is allowable?”

The precautionary approach asks, “How little harm is possible?”

The precautionary principle, generated during the late 1980s as a unifying principle for regulating discharge of hazardous material into the North Sea, has been broadened to include a shifting of the burden of proof to the proponent of a proposed activity, adoption of a more holistic assessment process, and encompassing all environmental management decisions, not just pollution prevention activities. The precautionary principle remains a management philosophy, not a substitute for risk assessment. As the principle has been elaborated recently, it nearly always implies three additional ideas, beyond “harm” and “scientific uncertainty”:

-       The notion of seeking alternatives to harmful technologies,

-       The idea of shifting to proponents of a technology the responsibility for demonstrating its safety, and

-       The goal of transparency and democracy in making decisions about technologies

Taken together, these concepts provide what we believe is a sound overarching approach to assessing and making decisions on products and technologies and other human activities that may impact health or the environment. The precautionary principle represents a paradigm shift in decision-making. It allows for five key elements that can prevent irreversible damage to people and nature:

1.     Anticipatory Action: there is a duty to take anticipatory action to prevent harm. Government, business, and community groups, as well as the general public, share this responsibility.

2.     Right to Know: the community has a right to know complete and accurate information on potential human health and environmental impacts associated with the selection of products, services, operations, or plans. The burden to supply this information lies with the proponent, not with the general public.

3.     Alternatives Assessment: an obligation exists to examine a full range of alternatives and select the alternative with the least potential impact on human health and the environment, including the alternative of doing nothing.

4.     Full Cost Accounting: when evaluating potential alternatives, there is a duty to consider all the reasonably foreseeable costs, including raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, use, cleanup, eventual disposal, and health costs even if such costs are not reflected in the initial price. Short and long-term benefits and time thresholds should be considered when making decisions.

5.     Participatory Decision Process: decisions applying the Precautionary Principle must be transparent, participatory, and informed by the best available science and other relevant information.

Risk assessment is a process to identify potential hazards and analyze what could happen if a hazard occurs. Risk = chance of harmful effects to human health or to ecological systems resulting from exposure to an environmental stressor. Environmental stressor = any physical, chemical, or biological entity that can induce an adverse response. Risk assessment = provides information on potential health or ecological risks. There are many “assets” at risk from hazards. First and foremost, injuries to people should be the first consideration of the risk assessment. Hazard scenarios that could cause significant injuries should be highlighted to ensure that appropriate emergency plans are in place. As you conduct the risk assessment, look for vulnerabilities – weaknesses – that would make as asset more susceptible to damage from a hazard. Vulnerabilities include deficiencies in building construction, process systems, security, protection systems, and loss prevention programs. They contribute to the severity of damage when an incident occurs. 

References:

1. 

2. 

3. 

Blogging: an effective instructional tool

A class consists of lectures and taking notes. Students then study that material and take an exam to prove how much they paid attention in class. Are those exams really the best way to test one's knowledge? Students zone out during lectures and often forget the information after an exam is taken. Exams and lecturing are not entirely ineffective; however, it is important to consider other methods such as discussion and blogging. Teachers should work to discover what it really in their student's minds, to see what all they know or don't know. Blogging can give students the power to choose their grades, decrease their stress, and give them a number of benefits.  Short for web log, a blog is actually a web page that allows visitors to read and reply to content on varied topics. Blogs work well for students because they can be worked on at virtually any time and in any place with a computer. In addition to providing teachers with an excellent tool for communicating with students, blogs are:

-       Excellent opportunities for students to read and write.

-       Highly motivating to students, especially those who might not become participants in classrooms

-       Effective forums for collaboration and discussion

-       Powerful tools to enable learning or mentoring to occur

Blogs opens the opportunity for students to discuss topics outside of the classroom. Students can post on such topics as journal/diary entries, reflections on their writing process, details on their research projects, commentary on recent events or readings, and drafts for other writing they are doing. With a blog, people have an equal opportunity to share their thoughts and opinions. In a job, your employer is not going to give you a multiple choice test on the meeting this week, but they might ask you to type up meeting minutes or send out a summary email. This is where the practice of blogging becomes very effective. Looking at a larger body of information and being able to produce a summary of that information is a great skill to have that standardized testing will not teach you. Blogging is really most effective with students who are interested in the class, have a willingness to learn, and understand the importance of the discussion of the topic given. Blogs also present, organize and protect student work as digital portfolios. As students realize their efforts will be published, they are typically more motivated to product better writing.  Overall, blogging is a good learning tool in it's own way. Students prefer to do these instead of exams due to the less stress, time consumption, and picking your grade easier. 

References:

1. 

2. 

Fukushima Radiation Affecting Americans

The Fukushima disaster in Japan was the world's worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in 1986, resulting from the release of radioactive isotopes from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant after the 2011 earthquake and tsunami. It has brought to the forefront the dangers of worldwide nuclear radiation. Since then, it is estimated that 330 tons of radiation-contaminated water has been leaking into the Pacific Ocean daily. That’s correct, over 300 tons of radiation-contaminated water has been seeping into our oceans every single day for over two years. That’s over 250,000 tons of contaminated water that has now entered the Pacific Ocean. The amount of radioactivity released from Fukushima from other points of comparison yields cause for concern. The release of radioactivity from Fukushima is estimated to be the equivalent of 168 of the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima, Japan during World War II. More troubling still is the fact that the Fukushima plant continues to spew out radiation across the northern hemisphere every single day because the reactors have not stabilized. Continuously, leaks in the reactors are being reported, , fish have been found to be contaminated with radiation, U.S. water supply samples are testing positive for radioactive components Iodine-131, Cesium-134 and Cesium -137, and Fukushima children are being diagnosed with thyroid cancer. What prevails is a well-organized camouflage. The public health disaster in Japan, the contamination of water, agricultural land and the food chain, not to mention the broader economic and social implications, have neither been fully acknowledged nor addressed in a comprehensive and meaningful fashion by the Japanese authorities. 

The Japanese government took charge of the Fukushima situation only in August, when Abe finally ordered an intervention. Japan has offered but a few solutions for the persistent radiation leaks, including protective barriers to prevent the flow of contaminated water into the ocean. Japanese government approved a plan to bury refrigeration pipes 100 feet below sea level for about a mile around the radioactive site to essentially freeze the ground to prevent water flow; the job is expected to take 18 months and cost hundreds of millions of dollars. But while Chernobyl and Fukushima were the only two nuclear disasters to measure Level 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale, Chernobyl only contained 180 tons of nuclear material prior to the catastrophe while Fukushima contained 1,760 tons of nuclear material. Nuclear radiation – which threatens life on planet earth – is not front page news in comparison to the most insignificant issues of public concern, including the tabloid gossip reports on Hollywood celebrities or the local level crime scene. This was an urgent matter two and a half years ago when the leaking first started. And now it’s too late. The world and the entire human race will be greatly affected – and no one is saying anything. We know that Chernobyl did tremendous damage to people in Belarus and Ukraine and now we are seeing it again in Fukushima. Our government hasn’t addressed the topic whatsoever. Obviously, money and keeping face are more important than the lives and wellbeing of millions.

References:
1.
2.
3.
4.