Aftershock in Germany

The earthquake in Japan and the nuclear catastrophe at the Fukushima power plant caused a political aftershock in Germany. It may sound hysterical, that people in Germany are very concerned about the so called Super GAU at Fukushima, more than 8000 kilometres away – some actually started to buy iodine pills and governmental radiation experts got thousands of calls from concerned citizens. But one needs to understand, that Germany has had a very detailed, very emotional public discussion about the “residual risk” (which is not residual at all, anymore) since the explosion at the Ukrainian nuclear power plant in Tchernobyl and the radioactive fall-out in parts of Germany. It was a decades long political fight about how safe nuclear technology needs to be. Society concluded that nuclear power technology is neither safe enough nor is it the technology for solving a future of drastic climate change. Only a few years back the government of Gerhard Schroeder (social democrat party) and the green party leader Joschka Fischer negotiated an exit plan for the usage of nuclear power plants in Germany and started to invest heavily into alternative technologies. Even the current conservative party did not take back this plan, though it decided to delay the process just a few months ago. Now, in the face of the catastrophe in Japan, the Merkel government decided to delay the delay. A “moratorium” was announced to reconsider the safety of the remaining nuclear power plants in Germany and whether they need to be switched off immediately.

In consequence, the newspapers are full of news about the Japanese earthquake, tsunami, the nuclear emergency in Fukushima, and the political consequences in Germany. Most science sections try to contribute the scientific background information – not only about the goings on in Fukushima but also about the reactor types in Germany, German and Japanese cooling systems etc.

The Süddeutsche, like many others, wrote about the health consequences of radioactive substances. The Zurich Tages-Anzeiger explained, that it makes no sense for Europeans to swallow iodine pills (and that it may cause harm). A Q&A answered the most important questions. The Financial Times Deutschland decided to provide a “nuclear ABC” (based on dpa). And the Frankfurter Allgemeine had a risk assessment, organized in a Q&A.

The Tagesspiegel (Hartmut Wewetzer) explained in detail, how radiation affects the genome.

An article (Süddeutsche Zeitung) about a satirical twitter campagne against the huge lobby organization of the nuclear power companies (RWE, e.g.) might explain, how much the public is involved, emotionally.

But after a few days, we now see the results of some deeper research, too: Die Zeit had a dossier, stating, that Japan’s nuclear power managers knew about the risk in a severe earthquake (Gero von Randow, Hans Schuh). Also: A historical view about Tchernobyl, health related facts, and information graphics about the nuclear power plants in Germany.

The Frankfurter Allgemeine (Joachim Müller-Jung) presented a report about a 10 year survey, that will be presented in five weeks in Kiev, which concludes, that “Tchernobyl was the worst accident in the history of the civil usage of nuclear power.” In the face of the current development in Japan no one knows, whether this will still be true in five weeks, writes Müller-Jung, before he explains the details of the study about the health consequence of the accident – and about the (probably astonishing, but appeasing?) absence of consequences.

The Tageszeitung (taz) had a special article (Reiner Metzger) about the reactors 4, 5 and 6 at Fukushima. In common risk szenarios, the water filled tanks for old fuel rods were never considered to be a problem. But now it looks like the loss of the water cooling the rods at least caused a fire and probably a meltdown.

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung wrote against the hysteria – about “everyday radiation“. And Hanna Wick makes clear, how different Fukushima is compared to Tchernobyl. “Radiation causes big panicmongering“, cites the Süddeutsche Zeitung.

Sascha Karberg