Nuclear Failure
©Dianne Irene
Published in August, 2009
Introduction
Human behavior tends to follow patterns that can be used to predict behavior choices. One such pattern is seen in the “frog phenomenon”. In this instance, a frog is put into a pot of hot water and the response is that the frog immediately reacts and jumps out of the water. However, if you put the frog in warm water and then slowly raise the temperature of the water then the frog would remain there, slowly become complacent, and face his or her demise. This water represents an environment of exposure. The fight or flight response no longer applies and the frog senses are inactive. This illustration reveals that as the senses become less sensitive then the decision process is also affected. The frog’s survival threat was lowered and he failed to recognize those changes as a real concern (Renesch, 1999).
Strategic Management in Business
Strategic management involves the process of evaluating and structuring the decisions that are made for an organization to reach its goals (David, 2007). In the business world today, scenarios related to the frog phenomenon have impacted the world’s culture and decisions made by corporations. The frog phenomenon presents a consideration for moral principles in the strategic management process. The nuclear proliferation has been developed using the frog phenomenon. Instead of using trillions of dollars to encourage humanity to develop renewable energy consumption on an independent basis, energy companies have existed to build wealth and power rather than to create a solution to humanities’ needs.
Now, our planet is networked with a growing number of nuclear plants and countless barrels of toxic radiation. Many of these barrels have been buried in the ground since the 1970’s and are now breaking down. Since many types of radiation do not break down for thousands or millions of years, this poses a serious threat to humanity. The United States Government published a report about this concern and stated that these radioactive wastes have left a legacy that now poses a threat to our ecosystem (DOE, 2007). Nuclear plants are getting old and it becomes hard to trust containment systems that once confined the radioactive waste away from our ecosystem. These old barrels have now leaked into the ecosystem and are posing serious health concerns to all life. The Department of Energy has estimated that an attempt to address some of this was in excess of 1.6 billion dollars in 2006 alone (DOE, 2007). In fact, the DOE clarifies that these wastes are so toxic and have such strong radiating factors that they cannot be handled by humans (DOE, 2007).
One concern for humanity is how our government allowed energy corporations to get to this point. It began more than 50 years ago when energy corporations presented a solution to the growing population’s need for energy. It was presented as a clean energy source that produced massive amounts of energy. Since the government had participated in nuclear development around and after World War II, they were open to the commercialization of such technology (U.S. Department of Energy, n.d). The idea of using this powerful technology for peaceful means seemed appealing and the government and officials formed the Atomic Energy Commission in 1946 (U.S. Department of Energy, n.d.). The public was presented with a “clean” and “easy” energy source without being told the big picture. This trickled down information that was disseminated to the public allowed the proliferation of a large nuclear energy industry. The public is still not told of the great dangers that nuclear plants pose on the ecosystem. Now over 103 reactors are operational in the United States and the energy plants are providing more than 77.8 billion in taxes to the federal government (STPNOC, 2004). Now that the industry has reached such a power position it would be difficult to reverse its proliferation. The nuclear power 2010 program (DOA, 2009) will also bring about many more reactors and large amounts of additional nuclear waste in a partnership between private corporations and the government.
Since this proliferation serious radiation leaks have been reported from First Energy Corp and many others (Sternglass, 1992). In 1979, Three Mile Island experienced a meltdown of a nuclear plant owned by the Edison Company and built by Babcock & Wilcox. On March 28, there was equipment failure and an operator error. This led to a partial nuclear core meltdown. (Dickinson College, 2007). The radiation levels were even measured from the sky by helicopters and reached 1,200 millirems (The Washington Post, 1999). People were ordered to stay in their homes and recess was canceled at schools. Apparently, an official at the plant admitted that the company had released the radiation deliberately for 45 minutes from the plant after the meltdown (The Washington Post, 1999). The staff had concerns that a hydrogen bubble would explode and may have acted to release the radiation. The bubble could have caused the reactor itself to explode. The hydrogen bubble reached over 1,000 cubic feet and continued to grow. Residents panicked and orders were given to police to shoot looters (The Washington Post, 1999).
The FDA authorized the distribution of 240,000 vials of potassium iodide to saturate the citizen’s thyroid to stay off saturation from radiation (The Washington Post, 1999). This would be the only chance of survival for some citizens closest to the site. A shipment of lead bricks weighing over 70 tons was then shipped in to shield radiation. These initial measures were already in excess of 1.7 million dollars (The Washington Post, 1999). Then, there were measures to report that the damage was not that serious by staff members and company representatives. One official conferred with the president and reported that the White House was concerned that the public was not given the “hard, firm facts” (The Washington Post, 1999). This was a responsible move by President Carter and the first official in the incident to turn the tide in how the situation was handled. He ordered Harold Denton to act as a liaison and brought in experts to assess the situation in reactor safety and meteorology as well as those who would treat people who were exposed to radiation (Washington Post, 1999).
Conclusion
However, this radiation is still a cause for concern more than 30 years later. Still, strange deformities can be seen in plants and animals near the 3 Mile area. The leukemia rates soared and most of them died before they could fight the energy powerhouse that was responsible (Wasserman, 2009). The actions of officials, some representatives in the government, and the corporation were irresponsible and neglectful. The decision to commercialize such a harmful form of technology was based on money rather than long term safe solutions. Strategic research could have been exercised on energy options and long term risks. Those managing the Edison Company could have first made wiser decisions about what kind of plants to build and where to build them. Secondly, they could have had better training for emergency situations and evacuation plans. Third, the managers and company executives chose not to take responsibility for the failure of the plants. It cost people their lives, their health, and the damaging effects of our wildlife and plant life in a wide area around the site that will last longer than the generations of the citizen’s grandchildren. Energy corporations have provided a steady increase of energy production that the citizens have accepted to meet energy demand. It has led to the proliferation of poor energy choices and leaves consumers vulnerable to serious consequences due to complacency. Awareness, better management practices, and technological responsibility are essential aspects of strategic management.
To read more aobut this incident from a witness go here.
References:
David, Fred. (2007). Strategic management: concepts and cases (11th ed.). Pearson
Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Dickenson College. (2007). December 31, 1978. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.threemileisland.org/about.html
DOE. (2007). Nuclear Waste. Plans for Addressing most Buried Transuanic Wastes Are Not Final, and Preliminary Cost Estimates Will Likely Increase. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07761.pdf
DOE. (2009). Nuclear Power 2010. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.ne.doe.gov/np2010/nenp2010a.html
Sternglass, Earnest. (1992). Secret Fallout. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.ratical.org/radiation/SecretFallout/
Renesch, (1999). Aha! #12 The Parable of the Boiled Frog. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.renesch.com/newsletters/Aha12.html
STPNOC. (2004). Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.stpnoc.com/faqs.htm
The Washington Post. (1999). What Happened at Three Mile Island. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/tmi/stories/ch6.htm
U.S. Department of Energy. (n.d.). The History of Nuclear Energy. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/History.pdf
Wasserman, Harvey. (2009). People Died at Three Mile Island. Retrieved on August 29, 2009 from: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/03/24-3
