Analyze

The Sampson County landfill can be smelled before seen. This olfactory indicator points toward the sensory scale of these pungent emissions but also toward the geographic scope: this landfill receives waste from as far away as Orange County (the state's most expensive property/tax base), among dozens of other distant counties, making this "hazardous site" a lesson in realizing impact beyond the immediate locale. So when we answer the question, "What is this hazard?" we must think not only about the landfill as a thing in itself but as a set of economic and political relations of capital and the transit of other peoples' trash, into this lower-income, rural, predominantly African-American neighborhood. In this way, 'thinking with a landfill' (like this one in Sampson County) enables us to analyze wider sets of relationships, NIMBY-ist policymaking, consumerism, waste management, and the racialized spatial politics that enable Sampson County to be the recipient of trash from all over the state. At the same time we think spatially and in transit, we can think historically to (a) inquire about the DEQ policies that enable this kind of waste management system; and (b) the emergent "solutions" in the green energy sector that propose to capture the landfill's methane in order to render the stench productive for the future -- that is, to enable more consumption, by turning garbage into gas. As such, the idea of "hazard" can expand beyond the site itself - impactful and affective as that site might be - to examine the uneven relations of exchange and capitalist-driven values of productivity that further entrench infrastructures such as these. [This offers a conceptual corrollary to thinking, as well, about the entrenchment of CAFOs for "green" biogas development, as we address elsewhere in the platform].

Danielle Koonce in an Opinion piece in the Fayetteville Observer, states...

"And it’s not just household garbage coming in — chemical waste and coal ash has also been disposed of in the Sampson County landfill."

"We listened to community members share how they can no longer garden or enjoy the outdoors due to the thick odor and fumes from the landfill."

"We learned that the landfill receives trash from around the state, from as far away as New York City, and even trash that comes in on ship-barges through Wilmington."

While Bryan Wuester, manager for the Sampson County Landfill states in the Sampson Independent...

"The Sampson landfill accepts waste from North Carolina only, about 5,450 tons from 16 different counties a day."

"The landfill accepts three kinds of waste: construction and demolition materials, solid waste and special waste, which are byproducts of industry. No coal ash comes into the Sampson facility..."

These are two different stories of the landfill coming from two different stakeholders, one in which needs the landfill to be in operation for a job and the other a concerned citizen worried about the disproportional impacts her community faces. While Danielle Koonce listens to the realities of the community members located around the landfill who express concern and worry, the landfill manager denies these realities and insists they are not true. This is not only invaliding to the community members who are fighting to get their voices heard but further embeds environmental injustice into the community.  

The report encompasses reports on the proceedings of the UN Scientific Comittee during its 60th session, May 2013. The UN report presents an unbiased plethora of data surmising Fukushima radiation exposure to both human an biological life. It primarily focuses on 2 reports detailing aspects of radiation exposure during the 2011 nuclear accident. The first report gives estimated levels of radiation experienced by individuals and non-human biota. Human individuals estimates are based on age and ongoing proximity to the accident. Evacuated adult citizens had an estimated exposure <10 mSv, while workers experienced doses >10mSv, with the highest exposure  an estimated 100 mSv. It places these values within the context of lifelong anticipated exposure and international expected exposures. This first report also briefly discusses effects beyond radiation, including the adverse outcomes thousands faced by evacuating. The second report concentrates on radiation exposure of children during the accident. While it concludes longer epidemological studies are needed to accurately assess the prevailing biolgogical effects, several important facts are highlighted. At a given radiation dose, children are more at risk of tumor induction than adults. In addition to this increased radiosensitivity (partially due to physical factors such as size), children also demonstrate increased prevalence of several cancers. These include leaukemia, brain, and thyroid cancers, all of which show radiosensitivity. The report also suggests narrowing the scope of inquiry, as radiation-induced cancers can be influenced by factors such as age and gender.

The report was published by United Nations Publication in 2014.

The report was written on the behalf of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation as a summary of their sixtieth session. The summary was written to be read to the United Nations General Assembly. The scientific data reported was collected by independent teams working on behalf of the Committee.

The 2011 Fukushima nuclear plant meltdown following an earthquake and tsunami led to the study of radiation levels and effects discussed at the sixtieth session of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, whose opinions and decisions are recorded in this report.

This report is comprised of several parts, beginning with an introduction. The report describes radiation exposure and effects that have been linked to the Fukushima disaster. Then it outlines future goals of increased awareness of the risks of nuclear disasters and the effects of radiation exposure as well as the need for a network of experts capable of sharing knowledge and expertise when needed. Finally the report mentions further studies being completed concerning the effect of radiation on children.

The data collected in the scientific studies included in the report began in March 2011 shortly after the nuclear disaster at Fukushima and continued for periods spanning months and years depending on the tests being done.

This report addresses the long term effects of a nuclear disaster and the potential health risks of radiation. The findings presented in this report are important when considering the long term effects of a disaster and the clean-up aspects of responding to a disaster that may continue for months or even years following the initial event. The Committee’s plan for the 2014-2019 period includes consideration of a network of experts to share information amongst the scientific community as a method of increasing awareness of and preparation for potential nuclear industry disasters. 

The Committee proposed expert groups to assess the practices used within the nuclear industry of its member states as well as evaluate and monitor potential issues. This increased level of oversight of the nuclear industry may lead to tension within the industry as technical professionals must balance the international oversight with the national security aspects of any nuclear program.