I was hesitant to join an Exclusion Zone tour but not because of radiation: I didn’t want to seem like an insensitive tourist gawking at a disaster. I ultimately went so I could speak with the people who lived there and share their stories. Here is what we heard from people who lived through it – it was both sadder and more hopeful than I expected.
Fukushima is absolutely safe for tourists. In fact, you will absorb far more radiation on the flight to Tokyo than on the ground in the exclusion zone. The image of danger comes from the fact that some places are still closed to the public because of contamination, but cleanup efforts continue (with an expected ¥30 trillion price tag over a 40-year initiative).
When I told friends we would be touring the Fukushima Exclusion Zone, some people were horrified and asked why we would expose ourselves to “that kind of radiation.” Years of misinformation in pop culture and news media have created a general public with such a skewed idea of what happened in Fukushima that many believe it was a second Chernobyl. It wasn’t.
In addition to little being known about nuclear energy in general, there is also little commonly known about the events that took place at Fukushima Daiichi in days following the March 2011 earthquake. A string of failures that seemingly never should have happened in conjunction with each other resulted in the evacuation of 160,000 people and radioactive contamination that is still being cleaned up today.
On March 11, 2011 a magnitude 9.0 earthquake hit 80 miles off the coast of Sendai, a city in northeast Japan. The earthquake and resulting tsunami caused major devastation along the coast and critically damaged a nuclear power plant, putting Fukushima on the map and changing the face of the global energy industry. This series details my experience in visiting the exclusion zone nine years later.
In a world of single-use items, reusables are definitely attractive as a way of reducing environmental impact. This week’s post will compare major reusable menstrual products and their single-use equivalents, both in end-use waste volume and in price points. Hopefully part three of this series will be enough to help you make a more informed decision, should you choose to do so.
Gaining even a rough understanding of how many people in the United States alone are using single-use menstrual products helps us to understand how pervasive plastic waste is in our landfills. It is my intention with this post to have some fun crunching some numbers and to get a sense of how much of an impact our decisions have on the planet.
This series follows upon my Zero-Waste Lent experience last year, during which I tried not to generate any landfill waste, even while on my period. After the success of that post, I have intended for almost a year now to dive into some more detailed numbers around just how much waste is created by menstrual products in the US and what we can do about it.
Happy first anniversary! This post is the fifty-third on the blog, marking one year of Radical Moderate. In honor of the traditional “paper” anniversary, that’s what we will be looking at this week: the resources needed, the pollution generated, how much actually gets recycled (despite our best attempts), and what you can do to reduce the quantity bound for the landfill.
In honor of the vacation we are currently enjoying, this post is about an amazing invention that is pretty standard across Japan and almost absent in America: the bidet. These devices are touted as more resource-friendly and bum-friendly than toilet paper, but the topic still seems to be avoided in polite conversation. And that’s what I’m here for – to do research and mention unmentionables.