| 1888 Articles Home | Finance Articles | Insurance Articles | Insurance RSS |  |
||
Insuring nuclear accidents |
||||
|
The article looks at the way in which the US would deal with a major nuclear disaster. |
||||||||||||
| Author: Grace Oaks |
|
|||||||||||
The European Commission will not ease any of these limits in the immediate future. So, for example, sheep farmed in affected parts of the UK, thousands of miles away from Chernobyl, still cannot enter the human food chain.
There's clear evidence of serious health problems in the communities living around the plant itself and in the adjoining countries, although there has been a serious lack of commitment to establishing the real extent of the problems.
Now we have the damage to the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant in Japan which, on the international scale, is now rated as serious as Chernobyl. It has been interesting to watch the buying patterns of people living on the Pacific seaboard with spikes in medications to reduce the effect of radiation. All this follows on our own problems at Three Mile Island, albeit that the release of radiation was minimal. So, the question we need to consider is what would happen if there was a major disaster close to a large US city?
Let's start with the broader social consequences. The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act of 1957 deals with the issue of liability, creating a no-fault insurance funded by the nuclear industry up to $12.6 billion. If the costs were greater, the Federal Government would pay the rest. This fund was not tapped following the Three Mile Island accident. All claims amounting to $150 million were paid by the standard insurance policies. But none of this mandated insurance covers the cost of the medical treatment for anyone injured or affected by radiation.
If there was an accident, the first line of response falls on the local hospitals and there's no suggestion they would fail to give care to those affected by radiation. Whether this would be covered by the existing health plans is highly debatable. Many of the standard exemption clauses exclude nuclear accidents because the costs are difficult to quantify and may be long-term.
It would therefore fall to both the state and federal governments to decide what should be done. There could be formal legislation requiring the private insurance industry to cover the cost of treatment. The insurers would then have the right to recover these costs from the company owning the damaged plant. This would depend on being able to prove negligence and, no doubt, there would be a long delay.
So the expectation is that state and federal governments would create a special fund to cover all the individual and group health insurance costs. This might divert money from the Price-Anderson fund, or represent tax payers' dollars. However the states find this money, it would cover both the short and long-term costs of treatment. The problem is no one can even begin to estimate what those costs might be if several hundred thousand people require long-term care. What is clear is that most individual and group health insurance policies would not cover these costs.
About Author
To learn what Grace Oaks has to say about other things and look on the things from his point of view, visit http://www.hiinetwork.com/group-health-insurance.html where he frequently writes on many different subjects that you will find fascinating.
Article Source:
http://www.1888articles.com/author-grace-oaks-24697.html
Other Related Articles How can credit rating affect one's insurance rates by Grace Oaks Insurers and Consumers Face Japan Disaster by Grace Oaks Use Charity, Gifts to Avoid Taxes by Grace Oaks Insuring nuclear accidents by Grace Oaks Drive Carefully When Medicated or Else! by Norris Rios Economy Cars More Economical Than Luxury by Norris Rios How to book a self catering in Torrevieja, Spain by Teddy Major |
