| Japan | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: April 11 2011, 02:28 PM (7,657 Views) | |
| Audi-Tek | October 28 2011, 09:13 PM Post #561 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Over 30 years needed to decommission Fukushima plant: Tokyo, Oct 28 : Decommissioning the stricken reactors at the Fukushima No.1 nuclear power plant is likely to take 30 years or more, the Japan Atomic Energy Commission said in a provisional report released Friday. The commission said the situation at the Fukushima plant is more complicated than the process at the US' Three Mile Island Unit 2 reactor whose core was damaged in a massive accident in 1979, reported Xinhua. Removing fuel from the US reactor began six and a half years after the reactor melted down and took 10 years in all. The provisional report said that once a state known as "cold shutdown" has been achieved, which according to the plant's operator Tokyo Electric Power Co., will be at the end of this year, it will take in excess of 10 years to complete the process of decommissioning the plant. "We set a goal to start taking out the core debris within a 10-year period and it is estimated that it would take 30 years or more (after the cold shutdown) to finish decommissioning," the report said. However the utility, also known as TEPCO, has been unable to confirm an exact timeline for removing fuel kept inside the spent fuel pools within reactors No.1 to No.4 at the troubled plant in Fukushima. In addition, the report noted the hardest phase of the operation will be removing the melted fuel from reactors No.1 to No.3, once the spent fuel has been extracted. The commission will continue to study the logistics of decommissioning the plant over various time frames and submit its findings to the government by December. A separate panel comprised of international experts will also be convened to look into the exact cause of the world's worst nuclear disaster since the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. A massive earthquake and tsunami on March 11 knocked out key cooling functions at the No.1 plant in Fukushima, located about 220 km northeast of Tokyo, causing fuel rods to melt down and trigger the release of radioactive substances into the air, land and sea. Japan's various nuclear agencies as well as the plant's operator has yet to fully contain the nuclear emergency |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 01:22 AM Post #562 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Radioactive cesium exceeding designated limit detected in Fukushima's shiitake Tokyo, Oct 31 : Radioactive cesium exceeding the designated limit has been detected in Shiitake grown in greenhouses at a farm in Soma, Fukushima Prefecture, the prefectural government has said. The Kyodo news agency quoted the prefecture as saying that it has asked the city of Soma and dealers to stop shipment of the mushrooms, and a local agricultural cooperative has begun recalling them after they were found to contain 850 becquerels of cesium per kilogram, exceeding the 500-becquerel limit set by the state. The farm in question has grown the mushrooms on beds made of a mixture of wood chips and nutrients, and the wood chips used in them are suspected to have been contaminated with the radioactive substance, the local government has said. The mushroom beds were sold by the Soma agricultural cooperative. The farm has shipped 1,070 100-gram packages of shiitake since October 24, and they are believed to have been sold at nine supermarkets in the prefecture from Tuesday. No other shiitake produced by the farm have entered the market, it said. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 01:25 AM Post #563 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Fukushima Plant Released Record Amount of Radiation Into Sea... Oct. 31 (Bloomberg) -- The destroyed Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan was responsible for the biggest discharge of radioactive material into the ocean in history, a study from a French nuclear safety institute said. The radioactive cesium that flowed into the sea from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant was 20 times the amount estimated by its owner, Tokyo Electric Power Co., according to the study by the Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, which is funded by the French government. It’s the second report released in a week calling into question estimates from Japan’s government and the operator of the plant that was damaged in the March earthquake and tsunami. The Fukushima station may have emitted more than double the company’s estimate of atmospheric release at the height of the worst civil atomic crisis since Chernobyl in 1986, according to a study in the Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics journal. The oceanic study estimates 27,000 terabecquerels of radioactive cesium 137 leaked into the sea from the Fukushima plant, north of Tokyo. Tepco is aware of the estimate from the institute through media reports and has no comment, spokesman Hajime Motojuku said today by phone. The three melted reactors and at least one damaged spent- fuel pool may have emitted 35,800 terabecquerels of cesium 137 into the atmosphere, according to Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics journal. The estimated amount is about 42 percent of that released into the atmosphere in the Chernobyl explosion in 1986, according to the study. Japan’s nuclear regulator in June said 15,000 terabecquerels of cesium 137 was discharged. Cesium 137 is a source of concern for public health because the radioactive isotope has a half-life of 30 years. A becquerel represents one radioactive decay per second and involves the release of atomic energy, which can damage human cells and DNA. Prolonged exposure to radiation can cause leukemia and other forms of cancer, according to the World Nuclear Association. A terabecquerel is 1 million times 1 million becquerels. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 01:27 AM Post #564 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Post-Fukushima, 'they' can no longer be trusted — if ever they could Every year when I was a child, my parents would take my brother and me from our Los Angeles home to Las Vegas on vacation. Back then in the 1950s, Vegas was still a family-oriented holiday destination. Dad would drop a few bucks at the crap table while the rest of us basked in the sun. I vividly recall, one late afternoon, looking out over the desert that stretched endlessly from our hotel and pointing to a rather eerie glow over the horizon. "That's from the atom-bomb testing they do," Dad explained. "But isn't that dangerous, Dad?" "Do you think they would do it if it was dangerous?" That was the average person's attitude at the time toward nuclear testing in the atmosphere: "They" wouldn't do it if it caused harm. That incident from my childhood sprang to mind when the reactors at Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant began to spew radioactive materials into the environment. The Japanese public had the wool pulled well over their eyes, just as my father had. They had made the fatal mistake of believing that the government officials and company executives carrying out nuclear tests and establishing nuclear power facilities had the interests of their countries and their citizens at heart; while, in fact, what motivated both was the lust for power and an all-consuming greed. Now that lust and greed have wreaked havoc across huge swaths of the Tohoku region in northeastern Honshu. And no one has been a more ardent and articulate champion of the truth about the dangers of nuclear power — and allowing that lust and greed to rule our lives — than Takashi Hirose. His latest book, "Fukushima Meltdown: The World's First Earthquake-Tsunami-Nuclear Disaster," has just become available online as a Kindle book in an excellent and fluid translation by a team under the guidance of American author and scholar, Douglas Lummis. Originally published as "Fukushima Genpatsu Merutodaun" by Asahi Shinsho on May 30, 2011, this is the book that Hirose had hoped he would never have to write. For three decades he has been warning Japanese people about the catastrophes that could been visited on their country — and now his worst nightmare has become a reality. "This is called the '3/11 Disaster' by many," he writes, "but it did not happen on 3/11, it began on 3/11 and it is continuing today. ... Nuclear power plants are a wildly dangerous way to get electricity and are unnecessary. The world needs to learn quickly from Japan's tragedy." Hirose points out that from day one of the disaster the situation in Fukushima had reached the highest level of nuclear accidents, namely level 7 — and from the outset, the government was keenly aware of this fact. But it chose to conceal the truth from the people. "In past nuclear-plant disasters — those at Chernobyl (in present-day Ukraine, in 1986) and at Three Mile Island (in Pennsylvania in the United States, in 1979) — only one reactor was involved in each. However, at the Fukushima No. 1 plant, four reactors went critical at the same time." On March 13, two days after the tsunami that followed the magnitude-9 Great East Japan Earthquake, Masataka Shimizu, the president of Tokyo Electric Power Co. (Tepco), the operator of the stricken nuclear plant, said at a press conference: "The tsunami was beyond all previous imagination. In the sense that we took all measures that could be thought of for dealing with a tsunami, there was nothing wrong with our preparations." As Hirose and many other commentators have pointed out, Tepco executives and government planners knew perfectly well that tsunamis far exceeding 20 meters in height struck that very region in 1896 and again, 37 years later, in 1933. The 14-meter-high tsunami that inundated many of the Fukushima No. 1 plant's facilities was, in fact, well within the parameters of what could objectively be termed "expected" — and was simply not "beyond all previous imagination," as Shimizu claimed. In fact, the willful absence of care by both industry and government comprises nothing less than a blatant act of savagery against the people of Japan. This book is full of enlightening technical explanations on every aspect of nuclear safety, from structural safeguards (and their clear inadequacy) to the nature of hydrogen explosions and meltdowns. Hirose warns us, with detailed descriptions of the lay of the land and the features of each reactor, about the nuclear power plants at Tomari in Hokkaido, Higashidori in Aomori Prefecture and Onagawa in Miyagi Prefecture; about other plants in Ibaraki, Ishikawa, Shimane, Ehime, Saga and Kagoshima prefectures; and perhaps most dangerous of all, about the 14 reactors along the Wakasa Coast in Fukui Prefecture, constituting what I would call Hōshanō Yokochō (Radioactivity Alley). Many of the reactors at these plants are aging and plagued with serious structural problems. "I have looked through the 'Nuclear Plant Archipelago' from north to south," writes Hirose. "I cannot suppress my amazement that on such narrow islands, laced with active earthquake faults, and with earthquakes and volcanoes coming one after another, so many nuclear power plants have been built." There is no shortage of electricity-generating potential in this country. The 10 regional electric power monopolies have perpetrated the myth of the inevitability of nuclear power in order to manipulate this essential market to their own gain. Tepco created a fear of blackouts this past summer in order to aggrandize its own "sacrificial" role. As Hirose points out, Japan is not a preindustrial country; blackouts are not an issue. Many major companies could independently produce sufficient electricity to cover all of Japan's industrial and domestic needs. They are prevented from doing so by the monopolies created by self-interested businessmen and bureaucrats, and by their many lobbyists occupying seats in the Diet. Hirose states: "Electrical generation and electrical transmission should be separated, and the state should manage the transmission systems in the public interest. ... The great fear is that there are many nuclear power plants in the Japanese archipelago that could become the second or third Fukushima. These nuclear plants could cause catastrophes exceeding the Fukushima disaster and thus affect the whole country and possibly the world." There is little difference between this situation and the one in the 1930s, when all-powerful business conglomerates and complying politicians "convinced" the Japanese people that it was in their interests to go to war. One thing comes out of all of this with crystal clarity: "They" can no longer be trusted — if ever they could. The health and welfare of millions of people living in the vicinity of nuclear bomb testing in the atmosphere around the world — and not just in the Nevada desert outside Las Vegas — was compromised by self-serving bureaucrats, politicians and corporate officials. Our health and welfare in this country is no less compromised by cynical self-serving bureaucrats, politicians and corporate officials who deny their responsibility for showering us in that very same radiation. Nuclear testing in the atmosphere has ceased. No longer do parents "assure" their children that there is no danger because "they" say so. And yet, the dangers of radioactive contamination of the environment by nuclear plants exist around us today. All nuclear power plants in Japan should be shut down now, lest we find ourselves one day viewing Fukushima as the first of a chain of tragedies that threaten our lives and the very existence of the Japanese nation.... |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 01:29 AM Post #565 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Decades’ to Shut Crippled Fukushima Nuclear Plant. Tokyo. A Japanese government panel said it will take at least 30 years to safely close the tsunami-hobbled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, even though the facility is leaking far less radiation than before and is now considered relatively stable.The plant, site of the world’s worst nuclear accident since the Chernobyl meltdown in 1986, was severely damaged by Japan’s March 11 earthquake and ensuing tsunami.It suffered power outages, meltdowns and explosions that released radioactive material and forced tens of thousands of people to flee the area.While officials said the plant, about 240 kilometers northeast of Tokyo, is now relatively stable, an expert panel named by Japan’s Atomic Energy Commission said it would probably take 30 years or more to safely decommission it. The panel made the estimate in the draft of a report to be completed by the end of the year. The draft was posted on the commission’s Web site over the weekend.Plant workers are still struggling to contain radiation leaking from the plant, although the amount is far less than before.The massive earthquake and tsunami triggered meltdowns at three of the plant’s six reactors.Officials at Tokyo Electric Power Co., the utility that runs the plant, say they have largely succeeded in cooling the damaged reactors, but extensive repairs and safety measures must still be carried out. The panel said removal of the fuel rods at Fukushima would not begin until 2021, after the repair of the plant’s containment vessels.As a stopgap measure, one of the damaged units now has an outer shell of airtight polyester designed to contain radioactive particles inside the building. Similar covers are also planned for other buildings.Government officials must also deal with a massive decontamination effort in areas around the plant. A 20-kilometer exclusion zone around the facility remains in effect. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 01:30 AM Post #566 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Drilling Ship to Probe Fault Zone that Caused Fukushima Quake The fast-tracked expedition will measure the fault's residual heat...After being tossed about and damaged by the tsunami that devastated northeastern Japan on March 11, Japan's drilling ship the Chikyu has been given an especially fitting assignment: to drill into the fault zone and take temperature measurements near the epicentre of the magnitude-9.0 Tohoku earthquake that caused the tsunami. It will be the first time that researchers have drilled into an underwater fault soon after a quake. The aim of the exercise is to solve a decades-old mystery about the part that friction plays in such an event. This should help scientists to understand why some faults are more likely than others to cause tsunamis — in this case, one that ultimately claimed more than 23,000 lives. "It would be a great disservice to society if we did not learn as much as possible from the fault zone heated by this huge earthquake," says Kiyoshi Suyehiro, president and chief executive of the management group of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP). Following its initial approval of the proposal in September, the IODP has now confirmed that funding is available for the Chikyu to set sail in April and drill at a site south of the quake's epicentre (see map). The scientific rationale for the expedition, officially called the Japan Trench Fast Drilling Project, is detailed in a 2009 report promoting rapid-response drilling through fault lines as soon as possible after an earthquake in which the ground slips by more than one metre. The Tohoku event set a new record for the greatest amount of slippage ever observed — a whopping 50 meters — making it an ideal target. "It's a fundamental issue in seismology right now: how do you get rock to slip tens of metres?" says James Mori, a seismologist at the Disaster Prevention Research Institute of Kyoto University in Japan, a co-author of the rapid-response report and joint chief of the upcoming drilling expedition. Researchers think that an important part of the answer is that resistance between the plates of rock, sand and water in a fault line drops significantly during a quake — because of rock melting or increased water pressure, for example — but no one has been able to measure this effect properly. Because friction is dissipated as heat, precise temperature data should fill a crucial knowledge gap. "We did a lot of planning, not knowing what kind of quake we'd have to do it with," says Emily Brodsky of the University of California, Santa Cruz, who is also involved in the mission. Researchers have attempted to monitor the underground temperature after an on-land earthquake on three previous occasions — after the 1995 Kobe earthquake in Japan, the 1999 Chi Chi quake in Taiwan and the 2008 Wenchuan quake in Sichuan Province, China. But these projects produced only a few temperature readings between them, and found only tiny temperature increases, or nothing at all — perhaps because the temperature rise was too small to see, or because of imperfect monitoring techniques. "The recurring theme is that the faults tend to be colder than they should be," says Brodsky. A larger slip event provides a better chance of tracking the expected temperature increase of up to 0.5 °C, she says. "We need to do this now, and do it fast, and do it correctly." The Chikyu will drill down 1 kilometer through the fault, and drop a string of temperature sensors down the hole. By tracking temperatures for one to three years — much longer than has been attempted before — researchers should be able to calculate the total amount of heat that was generated by the quake. That will provide them with the resistance forces felt in the fault during the slip, filling in a blank in models of earthquake dynamics. "This is a key missing ingredient," says Jean-Philippe Avouac, a geologist at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, who is not involved in the project. Completing the drilling won't be easy. At the proposed site, the Tohoku fault lies under 7 kilometers of water and some 700 meters of Earth's crust, so a huge drill string will be needed. Previously, only a tiny 15-meter core has ever been extracted from beneath water of that depth, says Brodsky; most cores are taken from beneath 6 kilometers of water or less. In addition to temperature measurements, the project will also examine the sediments pulled up in the core. Certain sediment textures, such as ball-bearing-like particles of clay, might be associated with large-slip earthquakes. Identifying such features should help scientists to forecast the slip potential of other faults. The chance to collect precious information from the Tohoku event represents "an opportunity, maybe even a responsibility", says Mori. Almost all of the damage caused by the quake was done by the tsunami, he points out. "What we really want to understand is what caused that." |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 01:35 AM Post #567 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Tokyo Is Close to Providing Aid to Keep Tepco Afloat . TOKYO—The Japanese government is expected to approve financial assistance to Tokyo Electric Power Co. this week, after the embattled utility sought about ¥1 trillion, or about $13 billion, in public funds Friday to deal with compensation claims from the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. The government's objective is to keep the company afloat. Without public funds, Tepco would have to report a capital deficit for the July-September quarter, results of which are due by Nov. 14. Even the slightest hint of bankruptcy of a company with ¥13 trillion in liabilities could trigger major financial turmoil. Public assistance is expected to sustain Tepco in a state of positive net worth of about ¥700 billion at the end of the current business year in March, even after booking an expected annual net loss of about ¥570 billion. But if the bleeding continues at the current pace, much of the capital would be lost in the next business year. This makes it crucial for Tepco to secure either an electricity-rate increase or an early restart of idled nuclear reactors to deal with the cost increases resulting from the prolonged stoppage of nuclear power plants and greater reliance on expensive thermal power, a government official familiar with the matter said. Meanwhile, Tepco's main creditor banks are expected to accept a request to maintain the balance of their loans to Tepco—now at about ¥2 trillion—through the current business year, the official said. In addition, the government-affiliated Development Bank of Japan is expected to increase its supply of working capital to Tepco, the official added. Tepco originally sought to have the bank loan balance maintained for the next 10 years. But the banks found it difficult to agree to that, given the many uncertainties about the business outlook, including future electricity rates and the restart of reactors. Ten of Tepco's 17 reactors were knocked out in the March 11 earthquake, with an additional five closed due to maintenance or public opposition. This has forced Tepco to rely more on expensive fossil fuels to generate electricity, resulting in an increase in operating costs by ¥1 trillion a year, although the recent surge in the yen is expected to mitigate some costs. The earnings projections were made in an interim business plan Tepco submitted to the government Friday. The plan calls for the company to keep the pay cuts for executives and employees in place, and achieve total cost savings of ¥2.5 trillion over the next 10 years, as requested earlier this month by an independent government panel. The plan also details measures taken by Tepco to speed up compensation payments, including a new initiative to solve disputes with victims out of court. Public funds will be provided via the Nuclear Damage Liability Facilitation Fund, an organization set up jointly by the government and power companies last month to provide insurance for nuclear accidents. Under the interim plan, a supervisory committee comprising the top executives of the fund and Tepco will monitor cost-cutting progress. Tepco is required to produce a more comprehensive business plan in March, when there should be more clarity on rate hikes and reactor restarts. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 08:04 PM Post #568 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Japanese aide has a John Gummer moment as he drinks water from a puddle at tsunami-hit nuclear plant![]() ![]() Brave: Mr Sonoda looked nervous before downing the water in two swift gulps A Japanese official was accused of 'doing a Gummer' yesterday after drinking water from the tsunami-hit nuclear plant in Fukushima. With TV cameras rolling, Yasuhiro Sonoda downed a glass of water taken from a puddle inside the reactors, which suffered a partial meltdown when Japan was hit by an earthquake and tsunami in March. It wasn't to quench his thirst. The parliamentary secretary for Japan's Cabinet Office was trying to prove the water was safe. Looking nervous, with his hands visibly shaking, Mr Sonoda hardly inspired confidence that the plant has been thoroughly decontaminated as he swigged back the water in two gulps. Collected from beneath two reactor buildings at the plant, the water is not normally intended for human consumption. It is decontaminated before being used for tasks such as watering plants, a controversial procedure which has been the subject of safety concerns. Before drinking the water, Mr Sonoda read out a string of figures relating to its low contamination levels and explained he was drinking in response to journalists repeatedly asking him to 'prove”' the safety of the plant’s surrounding area. Mr Sonoda drank the water after a challenge from Japanese journalists at a press conference at Fukushima yesterday. He said: 'I don't want it to be seen as some kind of performance, but if that's the best way to prove that the water is safe then I would gladly drink it right here, in front of you, at any time.' Afterwards he said: 'Just drinking decontaminated water doesn't mean safety has been confirmed. Presenting data to the public is the best way.' The 44-year-old aide was also following in the footsteps of Japan's former Prime Minister Naoto Kan and his spokesman Yukio Edano. Earlier this year, both men made a point of eating fruit produced in the Fukishima area to try and allay fears over contamination. Japanese officials have said they will allow journalists to tour the plant next week for the first time since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami caused a partial meltdown in three of its reactors. Tens of thousands of people had to flee their homes after a 20km exclusion zone was enforced around the plant. The government believes it can fully stabilise the reactors by the end of the year, but nuclear experts have claimed that it could take up to 30 years to fully decommission the plant. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 08:17 PM Post #569 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Bianca Jagger leads global protest over Fukushima radiation. Bianca Jagger, Founder and Chair of the Bianca Jagger Human Rights Foundation, will tomorrow give symbolic leadership to a global protest in support of a network of thousands of Japanese mothers who are campaigning to save the children of Japan from radiation resulting from the Fukushima catastrophe. Ms Jagger will be hand-delivering a letter to the Embassy of Japan, 101-104 Piccadilly, London W1J 7JT at 11am on Wednesday 2nd November. She will be accompanied at the Embassy by Kate Hudson, General Secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. Copies of the letter will also be presented to Japanese Consulates and Embassies worldwide. Cities participating include London, New Delhi, New York City, Washington DC and San Fransisco. The letter appeals to the Japanese goverment to protect the children of Japan by evacuating them from highly radioactive areas. The mothers' network argue that since the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, small children have been tested and found to be contaminated with radiation. The mothers are demanding that the Japanese Government evacuates these children, rather than raising the limits of exposure. The letter also addresses the spread of radioactive contamination through the shipping and burning of contaminated rubble throughout Japan . The protest follows the release of two academic reports this month which find that the radiation fallout from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident is bigger than that reported by the Japanese government and up to 30 times the amount stated by TEPCO. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 08:23 PM Post #570 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Fukushima Daiichi crisis | Tsunami. Since the Fukushima accident there has been greater awareness of the risk from tsunami to reactors in seismically-active areas. It is important, however, to realise that tsunami include a wider range of phenomena that could impact a variety of nuclear facilities in different geographical settings. By Ian G. McKinley, W. Russell Alexander and Hideki Kawamura The tragedy of the March 11th Tohoku earthquake and tsunami has focused attention on the risks of such events for reactors located on the coast in seismically active regions. ![]() Credit: Picture:?Toru Sasaki Ancient warning stone from northeastern coast of Japan (Aneyoshi) which is translated as “High dwellings are the peace and harmony of our descendants; remember the calamity of the great tsunami. Do not build any homes below this point.†The potential for large tsunami impacting the north east coast of Japan was known (see photo) and the particular concerns for reactors and other nuclear facilities in such settings has been identified [1, 2]. Although post-mortem assessment is currently evaluating the extent to which such warnings were ignored by the operator, TEPCO, it is fair to say that, in the absence of previous nuclear experience of an event of this type, the risk of such massive failure of defence-in-depth had also fallen under the radar in most countries. This reality forms the basis of many of the recommendations for action for regulatory bodies (as identified in the IAEA fact finding mission and Weightman reports [3, 4]). To date, the heroic efforts of Japanese reactor staff have limited the off-site consequences of the disaster, to the extent that nobody has received life-threatening radiation doses despite major damage to three reactor units and four fuel storage ponds. Even ‘statistical deaths’ in the future as a result of contamination (both on- and off-site) are likely to be very few – certainly in comparison to Chernobyl [5] and even the less well-known accidents at Windscale [6] and Kyshtym [7]. Nevertheless, Fukushima has dominated both Japanese national and international media. Indeed, when comparing international media coverage, the Fukushima incident has even eclipsed the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, which caused loss of life and damage to infrastructure on a scale of an order of magnitude larger than that in Japan. It is clear, therefore, that—regardless of absolute hazard —nuclear facilities require special assessment of risks and, even if of low likelihood, tsunami need special consideration. The historical record A tsunami may be defined as a series of waves that are generated when a large volume of water...is displaced by an impulse disturbance such as an explosion, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide or meteorite impact [8]. The two great tsunami of the 21st century were caused by huge ‘megathrust’ earthquakes, which are a characteristic of the subduction zones found at the boundaries of tectonic plates. The locations where such events may occur are well-known [9] and, although individual events cannot be predicted, the global frequency of magnitude 9 quakes like these with the potential to generate large tsunami is probably in the order of five per century. Such tsunami may cause significant damage and loss of life at distances thousands of kilometres from their epicentres. Looking at the major destructive tsunami of the last few centuries, however, it is clear that many were generated by earthquakes of considerably smaller magnitude. Although global effects are more limited, major devastation may result locally as the tsunami follows the destruction caused by the initial earthquake, as in the 1775 Lisbon earthquake and tsunami, one of the deadliest in recorded history. There are several more recent examples, such as the tsunami resulting from the magnitude 7.9 quake in Mindanao, Philippines in 1976; the 7.9 magnitude quake in Tumaco, Columbia in 1976; the 7.8 magnitude quake in Hokkaido, Japan in 1993, and the 7.1 magnitude quake in Papua New Guinea in 1998. It is important to realise that earthquakes are not the only tsunami sources and, indeed, are not directly responsible for the very largest waves in the geological record. In particular, volcanoes and landslides are common tsunami sources and may, indeed, produce waves so large that they are classed as megatsunami: many tens or hundreds of metres height. Nevertheless, it is often difficult to decouple the tectonic and volcanic events that may contribute to the large earth slides that usually cause megatsunami. A volcanic example is the 1792 Mt Unzen eruption in Kyushu, Japan where volcanic activity (possibly along with associated earthquakes) cause the collapse of the eastern flank of the volcanic dome, resulting in a tsunami with waves reaching 100m high. More recently, the 1883 Krakatoa eruption in Indonesia generated tsunami reaching heights of 40m. As an example of tsunami generation distant from the coast, the 1980 eruption of Mt St Helens in Washington USA caused a major landslide into Spirit Lake that produced a 260m-high megatsunami. Even major landslides without clear tectonic or volcanic links can also give rise to major tsunami. Of particular importance in terms of nuclear facilities may be localised rock- or ice-falls into constricted bodies of water that can generate huge waves. Examples are the 500m high megatsunami in Lituya Bay, Alaska in 1958 or the 200m high wave from the Vajont Dam in Italy in 1963. Landslides big enough to generate regional or global scale tsunami are relatively rare, but include several Storegga Slides in the Norwegian Sea (the most recent about 8000 years ago), which are assumed to be generated as a result of glacial unloading. Nevertheless, such submarine collapse of coastal shelf slopes has been postulated as a potential consequence of methane clathrate destabilisation as a result of global warming—so geological records should not be blindly extrapolated to calculate probabilities of future recurrence of such events. Even bigger tsunami can result from the collapse of seamounts such as the Canary and Hawaii Islands. Even though the most recent event of this type occurred about 10,000 years ago, there is good geological evidence of multiple debris flows at these sites and no convincing reason why they could not also occur at similar, less-studied locations. Finally, for completeness, it can be noted that meteorite impact is also a source of large tsunami. These are, however, very rare events, the last substantial one being the Eltanin Impact 2.15 million years ago [8]. Tsunami risks In general, the probability of a tsunami as a function of peak wave height follows a power-law distribution, but the actual risk is very site-specific. In order to carry out quantitative risk analysis, local palaeotsunami data can be combined with formal methods that combine information on potential sources with regional topographic data that determines wave propagation and impact [8]. It is notable, however, that the development of a tsunami assessment method for nuclear power plants in Japan [10] considered only earthquake-induced tsunami and a much lower observational database derived from relatively recent historical records. This led to very obvious underestimates of total inundation risk (see [11] for example). The impact of a tsunami of particular size is influenced by the source of the water displacement, particularly if it is a major earthquake and/or volcanic eruption relatively nearby . In such a case there may be little warning of the tsunami and additional complications due to damage and regional disruption caused by ground movement, ash falls, and so on. Major nuclear facilities may generally be sufficiently strong to withstand the initial impact of even large waves, but it has to be ensured that they are strong enough to resist also the high drag forces, which are rarely considered during design, but can greatly exceed the surge force for larger waves (Figure 1). Also, as the dramatic video material from Japan has shown, it is not only the wave itself that can cause damage, but also large objects carried with it, including ships torn from moorings, buildings ripped from their foundations, oil tanks, etc. It is also important that access hatches, ventilation intakes and so on are protected from flooding. It is also essential to ensure that all critical infrastructure providing control, communication, monitoring, power, cooling, ventilation, drainage, transportation, etc. is protected from both mechanical damage and inundation. Especially in areas where earthquake and inundation risks are considered to be low, these may be more vulnerable than the major facilities that they support. But even in an area with known risks like Fukushima, scenarios producing common-mode failure of redundant systems may be insufficiently analysed. Rapid shutdown (‘scram’) of reactors can be achieved either automatically or manually as a result of either warning from tsunami-monitoring networks or seismic networks picking up the initiating event. While these are well-proven in areas of high risk, they are not universally adopted and might be considered even in cases where probabilities are low. As illustrated at Fukushima Daiichi, however, core cooling after the scram is more challenging and requires that both the cooling system is mechanically intact and power is available for pumps, valves, critical instrumentation and safety equipment (for example, hydrogen recombiners). For modern reactor buildings, the mechanical forces from even large waves should not exceed design specifications, especially when they are designed to contain pressure, and hence are less vulnerable to surge forces. It is certain that robustness of emergency power supplies will be a focus for future studies, especially when these are currently situated in un-hardened structures outside the reactor building. Nevertheless, it should not be forgotten that there are a number of secondary perturbations that could give rise to cooling problems. As shown already in the 2004 Indian Ocean case, the initial drawback of water before the arrival of the tsunami can approach the level of sea cooling water intake pipes, which could potentially lead to early pump failure [1, 2]. This is directly addressed in the current Japanese hazard assessment, which quantifies maximum draw-down in addition to wave height [10, 11]. A further concern could be blocking of cooling water intake by tsunami debris (or, more seriously, infill of the cooling water intake by ash in the case that local vulcanism initiates the tsunami). Although the discussion tacitly applies to power reactors, the basic principles are applicable also to research reactors. Although their power densities and contained radionuclide inventories may be much lower, this may be balanced by less robust engineering and institutional defence systems. A wide range of large-scale nuclear facilities may be vulnerable to tsunami perturbations, including uranium conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, research laboratories and, in some countries, military installations. The most potentially-significant type of nuclear facility, however, is reprocessing plants, as these tend to have, by far, the greatest inventories of radiotoxic materials on the premises. Relative to a reactor, such plants contain a more complex array of active facilities, which include those producing, transporting and storing highly active liquid wastes. As is known from past accidents (particularly at Kyshtym), highly-active liquid waste management requires active control and, in case its fails, is liable to temperature excursions, build-up of explosive gases and in some cases, even criticality. Ensuring safety thus requires that all key buildings are resistant to both the initiating event (if nearby), the tsunami itself, and subsequent loss of services that are not in hardened structures. The Fukushima accident has illustrated the vulnerability of fuel storage pools in the event of complete loss of power. This is especially the case for the BWR designs involved, as their raised location (to aid fuel handling) makes them particularly susceptible additionally to earthquake damage. Nevertheless, fuel storage ponds are a general concern: delays in implementing central storage, reprocessing and geological disposal have all resulted in fuel reracking to increase density of storage, increasing the potential impact of major perturbations. Although inventories of long-lived radionuclides may be larger than those in reactor cores, absence of primary and secondary containment may make pools inherently more vulnerable to both direct impacts of tsunami (plus the initiating event) and also to loss of services, particularly cooling (as seen at Fukushima Daiichi, and particularly for the highly-loaded unit 4 pool). Dry storage systems for both spent fuel (SF) and other highly active material (such as vitrified high-level waste (HLW)) are generally more physically robust, especially if stores are strong (for example, designed to withstand aircraft impacts) and rely on natural convection for cooling. Flooding could certainly give rise to management problems, but barrier degradation to the point that there is a risk of release of radioactivity is probably unlikely. Although the hazard associated with stored low active wastes is relatively low, container damage and subsequent contamination of the local tsunami debris field would certainly be of great public concern. Concerns include physical damage to storage buildings and waste containers (which may be coupled in the case of building collapse), flooding and destruction of infrastructure (power, drainage, monitoring and control systems). For open surface or near-surface repositories, the situation is similar to waste stores, where physical damage of containers and flooding can combine to produce a potential source of off-site contamination. Even in cases where a repository is partially closed, wave impacts and scouring could damage containment and flood monitoring systems, requiring costly remediation. Deeper disposal facilities are inherently less directly vulnerable to tsunami, but concerns focus on the risk of flooding via access/ventilation ramps and shafts and destruction of surface infrastructure–in particular the supply of power, drainage and ventilation. Risks of releases off-site may be small, but the hazard to operators and the potential need for expensive remediation needs to be considered. To date, despite the existence of many coastal disposal sites, there has been little assessment of tsunami risks and only recently more detailed analysis for deeper repositories [12]. Risk management For new facilities, a clear question is whether the risk of tsunami impact justifies consideration of siting measures to limit it. Alternatively—and this is the only option for existing facilities—risk can be managed by consideration of tsunami barriers or modified facility design. There is clearly a trade-off between the advantages of locations close to the sea or large water bodies (availability of cooling water; ease of ship transport) and the desire to avoid risk of tsunami. Nevertheless, measures can be taken to assess local probability of very large tsunami (for example, potential for landslides or volcanic eruptions, Quaternary palaeotsunami record) and, where possible, high-risk locations can be avoided. It is important to note here that the local impact of any tsunami may be greatly influenced by regional topography and/or bathymetry which can either reduce or increase the maximum wave size by a considerable margin (factor of 2-3). This can be readily assessed on a site-specific basis by current tsunami propagation models. More generally, siting on a raised position will always provide benefits; hills tend to divert waves around it. Distance from the coast (or water body) will also reduce risks, although large tsunami may have a run-up kilometres long on flat plains. For protection of an entire site, tsunami walls are a common approach. These can be combined with offshore breakwaters to disperse or refract the wave. Although such systems work well for smaller-wavelength storm surges and small tsunami, they may be overwhelmed by larger waves. Long walls, in particular, if perpendicular to the tsunami, may simply cause large waves to build up until the wall is overtopped. Nevertheless, when combined with local tsunami propagation models, the effectiveness of different wall designs can be readily assessed. Due to the difficulty of predicting low-probability, high-consequence events, it is prudent, where possible, to ensure that key safety functions are not lost even in the event of barrier overtopping. This is particularly the case for very large industrial facilities (such as reprocessing plants) where the cost of a barrier against low-probability events surrounding the entire site may be prohibitive. Where the option exists, construction of nuclear facilities (or key infrastructure) underground may reduce risks—although here supply of cooling water and protection of access points needs to be assured. A possible advantage of this option is that it is not specific to tsunami and may, in parallel, reduce risks from earthquakes, extreme weather, terrorist attacks, and so on. It is important not to overstate the risks to nuclear facilities after Fukushima: seen objectively, both the direct and long-term hazards from radiation released are less than those from the subsequent bio-beansprout epidemic in Europe [13]. Nevertheless, great public concern and the resultant huge costs associated with remediation mean that tsunami risks should be carefully evaluated for all nuclear facilities. This article was originally published in the October 2011 issue of Nuclear Engineering International (p14-17) Author Info: We thank many colleagues in Japan and abroad who have provided insight into the Fukushima incident and background on the wider topic of tsunami risk assessment in Japan. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 08:51 PM Post #571 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Nearly eight months after nuclear reactors at Fukushima melted down and exploded they are still throwing up surprises, writes Channel 4 News Science Correspondent Tom Clarke.![]() Last week, in the Tokyo commuter town of Kashiwa, officials found a radiation hotspot in the soil around a leaking drain nearly as high as those which prompted the evacuation of towns much nearer to the stricken nuclear plant. It didn't make sense: the majority of fallout was over rural areas to the north west of the Fukushima plant. Kashima, a town of 400,000, is 80 miles due south. The hunt is now on for further hotspots around drain and sewer systems. Another surprise came this week when a new analysis concluded the disaster released twice as much radioactivity into the atmosphere as previously estimated. Both are examples of how the true impact of the Fukushima crisis is still hard for experts to judge, not just on the health and livelihoods of people from the region but for the nuclear industry in Japan, and the future of nuclear power worldwide . ![]() Progress at Fukushima Each day at Fukushima there are still 2,500 to 3000 workers slowly clearing up the mess. Work is hindered by pieces of intensely radioactive debris scattered across the site by the explosions -- in some parts levels of radiation are high enough to kill in minutes. Progress has been made: all three of the reactors that melted down are now being automatically cooled by seawater being pumped through them. Tepco, the plant's operator, has just finished installing a highly sophisticated water decontamination system. This is taking about 10,000 tonnes of water irradiated during the cooling process and evaporating it to remove radioactive contamination which is then stored on site. But there is still around 120,000 tonnes of highly contaminated water trapped in tunnels beneath the plant. Work can only begin on that once the reactors have cooled down. Tepco says the reactors will be made safe in a state called "cold shut down" by the end of the year. However, given the damage to the reactor cores and the melted fuel within, observers doubt that the target will be met. "That fuel will remain hot and continue to do so for many years to come," said veteran Greenpeace nuclear campaigner Shaun Burnie. The picture in the contaminated areas around the plant is less clear. The worst affected towns and villages to the northwest of the plant have all been evacuated. Fortunately only about 20 per cent of the fallout from the plant ended up on the land. ![]() The physical and psychological fallout Most of the long-lived radiation is due to caesium isotopes – a breakdown product of uranium nuclear fuel. Caesium has a half-life of 30 years. "My guess is that there are some areas where people won’t be able to return for decades," said Jim Smith, who has studied the ecological legacy of the Chernobyl disaster. A particular problem is that caesium is absorbed by plants and animals. Farming food crops and livestock in some areas will remain impossible. That’s a major problem for parts of Fukushima prefecture. Fruit and beef production were some of their economic mainstays. Produce from uncontaminated parts of the region are being shunned by consumers because of the fear of contamination. On the up-side caesium can be cleaned up. It sticks to soil particles and so can be skimmed off using bulldozers or ploughs. Last week authorities in Fukushima City started pressure hosing and scrubbing 110,000 homes and businesses with the highest levels of contamination. But any clean-up will be limited. Not only is the process costly, so too is the long term storage of potentially enormous quantities of radioactive soil and debris. The direct affects on human health though, are expected to be minor. Japanese authorities were quick to ban food, especially milk, and issue iodine tablets. It is expected that an epidemic of thyroid cancer – anticipated in Belarus as a result of the Chernobyl disaster – will not happen in Japan. But one lesson from Chernobyl is that the social and psychological damage from fleeing radioactive fallout can be far worse. Leaving homes and farms behind takes a heavy emotional toll - so can the stigma of radioactivity. "I've heard of school children evacuated from around the plant being shunned by their schoolmates because they are perceived to be contaminated," said Smith. "We saw the same after Chernobyl." ![]() What next for nuclear? After the disaster Japan's then prime minister ordered a moratorium on nuclear power. New impetus was given to renewable energy and fossil fuel generation. In September the country abandoned plans to build a new fleet of "fast breeder" reactors. But given the energy needs of its weakened economy widespread public opposition has now given way to an acceptance that Japan will source its power from nuclear for a long time to come – even if new plants don't get built. But will there be a lasting impact on plans for fleets of new nuclear plant in places like the Middle and Far East and parts of Europe? The catastrophic engineering failure at Fukushima was not supposed to happen. In response to the crisis the US and China are conducting safety reviews of nuclear plants. Switzerland, Italy and Germany have abandoned nuclear power altogether. Early on, many analysts believed the reputation the "new nuclear" industry had fought hard to rebuild in recent years would never survive. But experts like Malcolm Grimston, a nuclear industry analyst at Imperial College in London, thinks the damage was not as great as predicted. "The lasting effect of Fukushima was not as great as we assumed at the time. The key question is, what will the impact be on the economics of new nuclear?" Cracks are beginning to appear. German engineering giant Siemens – which co-designed many of Europe's reactors -- announced last month it was pulling out of nuclear power. And German energy major RWE abandoned plans to build two new nuclear plants in the UK. New civilian reactors will most likely get built in China, the US and the UK – though not as quickly as first planned. But their future could still be affected by the Fukushima disaster. The true nature of the damage – and when it was caused – is only likely to emerge as workers get closer to the highly radioactive reactor cores. "One of the key issues is whether there was damage to the plant by the earthquake itself," said Shaun Burnie. Initial analyses have all but ruled this out. But if the design of the nuclear plant was seriously damaged by shaking – not just by the 50ft tsunami wave - it could have major implications for the designs of new reactors planned for the rest of the world, possibly even pushing their costs beyond the realms of economic reality. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 1 2011, 10:18 PM Post #572 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Life in the deathzone. This report was broadcasted on October, 18 and 24 by the german TV-station WDR. WDR is a part of the public channel ARD. Their Japan-correspondent went to Minamisoma for a week and talked to people there about their lives after the Fukushima catastrophe. Video link ........... http://youtu.be/M3z0rC5Ua_w |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 2 2011, 09:57 PM Post #573 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Emergency zones planned for future N-crises / Drawing on lessons of Fukushima Pref. disaster, preparations to be made up to 50 km from plants The Yomiuri Shimbun A panel of the Cabinet Office's Nuclear Safety Commission has agreed to set up new nuclear disaster management zones by tripling the radius of the present standard emergency zone to 30 kilometers around the nation's nuclear power plants. In a draft of its report, which the panel basically agreed upon, a key disaster management zone with a current radius of eight to 10 kilometers will be expanded to a zone with a 30-kilometer radius to be called the urgent protective action planning zone (UPZ). In the UPZ, evacuation plans and other measures will be implemented if an accident occurs at a nuclear power plant. Within the UPZ, a five-kilometer radius will be designated as the precautionary action zone (PAZ), from which residents should immediately evacuate in the event of a nuclear accident. Outside the UPZ, a zone called the plume protection planning area (PPA) will be set up. In this zone, with a radius of about 50 kilometers, people will be instructed to stay indoors or will be provided with iodine pills in such an emergency. Around the nation, the number of municipalities located partially or fully within the emergency zones will increase from the current 45 to 135 if the UPZs are established. Among prefectural capitals, the whole of Mito and part of Kyoto will be included. The review is part of the commission's revisions of disaster management guidelines. The commission will compile an interim report about the guideline revisions by the end of this fiscal year. A nuclear safety agency, which will take over the commission's duties next fiscal year, will implement the guideline revision. The municipal governments to be affected will include the new zoning in their respective disaster management plans under a basic law on disaster management. Lessons from the crisis at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in Fukushima Prefecture are behind the expansion of the disaster management zone. In a previous version of the draft of the report, the area within a 50-kilometer radius was regarded as a single zone in which preparation for such an emergency would be necessary. But the latest draft designates the area within a 30-kilometer radius as such a zone and considers areas beyond 30 kilometers as a separate zone, to indicate a difference in the seriousnessness of measures to be taken. The new zone system will cover three times as many municipal governments and four times as large a population as the current system. The local governments will also begin reviewing their respective disaster response plans for such purposes as securing evacuation places. Drafting evacuation plans and other measures requires close collaboration with nearby local governments. Thus there will be many hurdles to clear. Haruki Madarame, chairman of the Nuclear Safety Commission, said, "Though it isn't perfect, [the draft of the report] was compiled in a proper form," after he approved the the panel's decision to expand the emergency planning zone (EPZ) on Tuesday. The planned expansion is based on developments of the Fukushima No. 1 plant crisis, in which the radius of the evacuation zone was expanded repeatedly--from three kilometers to 10 kilometers to 20 kilometers. As a result, residents in the expanded zone were thrown into confusion. The changes also include new guidelines over whether evacuation will be necessary. Until the Fukushima crisis, the government designated evacuation areas with data from sources such as the System for Prediction of Environmental Emergency Dose Information (SPEEDI). After the revision, the government will be able to order an evacuation if monitored radiation levels inside the UPZ reach a predesignated limit. The zoning is in line with a 2002 proposal by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Though the commission once discussed a review of the nation's zoning in 2006, the revision was not made. The current review plan took into account the fact that an airborne plume of radioactive substances reached points 50 kilometers from the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant. Thus the panel initially planned to designate areas between 30 and 50 kilometers from nuclear power plants as a third category of disaster management zone in which local governments will distribute iodine pills to deal with internal exposure to radiation and compile plans to have people stay indoors. But many members of the panel criticized the measure, saying that the difference between the third-category zones and the UPZ is unclear. Thus the commission decided to designate the places as "areas" instead of "zones" to help clarify the drawing of borders. The commission will begin discussing radiation levels at which the guidelines will call for people to be evacuated or instructed to stay indoors. The IAEA has presented standards calling for residents to evacuate within a week if the radiation level reaches 100 microsieverts per hour and within a few hours if the level reaches 1 millisievert per hour. The commission plans to use the figures as references. The work to revise the guidelines, including the expansion of the EPZ to a 30-kilometer radius, will be finished in or after next fiscal year. After that, the municipal governments will revise their respective disaster prevention plans. The local governments will need to upgrade or acquire radiation monitoring devices, but it is uncertain how they will secure funds for this purpose.. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 2 2011, 10:00 PM Post #574 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Guest Post: Boots On The Ground In Fukushima, Japan........I had to come see for myself. What does the worst radiation and natural disaster in history look like? Chaos. Devastation. Cataclysm. Right? Actually… none of the above. Fukushima and the surrounding prefecture is as quaint and picturesque as ever. Eight months on, there are hardly any signs of a nuclear accident or major earthquake, at least on the surface.I was half-expecting the town to have a permanent decontamination facility… with radiation detectors as far as the eye can see, and legions of workers in biohazard suits. After all, this town of nearly 300,000 is now the world’s largest dirty bomb. But riding through the surrounding area and walking around the streets today, Fukushima looks like any other small(ish) town. Schools, temples, shops, and restaurants… everything is normal. In fact, it’s almost eerily normal, like something out of an old Hitchcock film.People here have moved on and even learned to joke about the incident with an untraditional sarcasm. At dinner this evening, my friend asked the waiter “How’s the eggplant?” to which the waiter replied with a dry smile, “Oh don’t worry, we source that from another location now…” The really bizarre thing is that the radiation levels are still really high… yet everyone is staying put. Tepco, the group that operates the failed nuclear reactors nearby, has been publishing all sorts of propaganda saying that radiation levels are falling. Nobody believes it. A group of politicians staged a recent media stunt, drinking water that was supposedly filled from a puddle outside Fukushima’s reactors, and dining on local produce. Nobody seems to care.The government is telling them not to worry while private studies suggest otherwise. A recent paper published by Norwegian atmospheric scientist Adreas Stohl refutes a number of claims made by the Japanese government, and it more than doubles the government’s estimate of how much radiation was released in the accident. And yet, nearly everyone is still here. After the initial evacuation, people just came back to town and picked up where they left off. They know the government is lying to them. They know they’re in danger and that their lives and livelihoods are at risk. But they’re staying put. Some of this is due to a lack of preparation. Most people didn’t plan for this emergency and didn’t have an action plan or bolt hole somewhere. For others, it’s just the expected thing to do– stay and suffer. It seems crazy, but this is a familiar story. Think about how many people are lied to on a regular basis by their politicians. They know they’re being lied to. They know their livelihood is under attack. They know the trend is bad, and it’s getting worse. But they do nothing and plan nothing, warning signs be damned. Oh, how politicians love it when citizens are good little sheep, patiently waiting to be milked and sheared. Look, each of us has a choice to make. Like the folks here in Fukushima, most people will simply put up with constant abuse indefinitely. Others will grab a pitchfork and join the lost souls’ convention on Wall Street. Most will pin their hopes on the next election. Fukushima teaches us that voting with your feet is sometimes the only sensible option. After all, there are a lot of green pastures out there in the world. It may not be a popular decision. Throughout history, societies frequently derided anyone with the foresight and fortitude to leave. And so what? Let them complain. Our obligations are to ourselves, our families, and whomever else we choose to let into our circles. There is no natural debt to society or political servitude simply by accident of birth. It’s time to start rejecting antiquated social expectations and think in new directions. With so much uncertainty, it makes a world of sense to have a backup plan overseas... Link to above article....... http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-boots-ground-fukushima-japan |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 2 2011, 10:01 PM Post #575 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
New International Report Shreds Japan's Carefully Constructed Fukushima Scenario.....Japan’s six reactor Fukushima Daichi nuclear complex has inadvertently become the world’s bell-weather poster child for the inherent risks of nuclear power ever since the 11 March Tohoku offshore earthquake, measuring 9.0 on the Richter scale, triggered a devastating tsunami that effectively destroyed the complex. Ever since, specialists have wrangled about how damaging the consequences of the earthquake and subsequent tsunami actually were, not only for the facility but the rest of the world. The Fukushima Daichi complex was one of the 25 largest nuclear power stations in the world and the Fukushima I reactor was the first GE designed nuclear plant to be constructed and run entirely by the Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO. Needless to say, in the aftermath of the disaster, both TEPCO and the Japanese government were at pains to minimize the disaster’s consequences, hardly surprising given the country’s densely populated regions. But now, an independent study has effectively demolished TEPCO and the Japanese government’s carefully constructed minimalist scenario. Mainichi news agency reported that France’s l’Institut de Radioprotection et de Surete Nucleaire (Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, or IRSN) has issued a recent report stating that the amount of radioactive cesium-137 that entered the Pacific after 11 March was probably nearly 30 times the amount stated by Tokyo Electric Power Co. in May. According to IRSN, the amount of the radioactive isotope cesium-137 that flowed into the ocean from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant between March 21 and mid-July reached an estimated 27.1 quadrillion becquerels. Why should this matter? Aren’t the Japanese authorities on top of the issue? Cesium-137 can cause burns, acute radiation sickness and even death at sufficient doses. It can contaminate food and water and, if ingested, gets distributed around the body, where it builds up in soft tissues, such as muscles. Over time, it is expelled from the body in urine. And where might tingested cesium-137 come from? Seafood, anyone? One of the problems of the release of radioactivity into a maritime environment is that is represents a ***ulative food chain, from plankton consumed by larger organisms, as evidenced by mercury contamination of swordfish, none of whom swam around ingesting globules of the silvery metal. IRSN estimated that of the total amount, 82 percent had flowed into the sea by 8 April, adding that the Pacific was polluted at exceptional speed because the devastated Fukushima Daichi nuclear power plant (NPP) is situated in a coastal area with strong currents. If the IRSN report contained any good news, it was that the impact of the cesium-137 contamination on marine life in remote waters is likely to lessen later this year. The radioactive silver lining? Radioactive cesium-137 has a half life of roughly 30 years, so if the IRSN estimates are accurate, then my 2041 the Pacific’s aquatic life will only be subjected to a mere 13.55 quadrillion becquerels of radiation. This is not to suggest that Japanese will shortly be keeling over from consuming their sushi but rather, that for better or for worse, a significant amount of cesium 137 has entered the Pacific’s aquatic environment, and the long-term effects of low-level exposure on the population consuming Pacific seafood are unknown. Numerous tests since 1945, when before it was believed that only massive bursts of radiation were hazardous to human health, have documented the insidious effects of long-term, low level radiological exposure to humans. Fukushima sits at the nexus where the Kuroshio Current, running northward off the eastern coast of Japan, collides with the cold subarctic Oyashio Current that flows southwards, circulating counterclockwise along the western North Pacific Ocean. Their interaction produces the North Pacific Current, a slow warm water eastwards flowing current between 40 and 50 degrees north in the Pacific Ocean. In the eastern northern Pacific, the North Pacific Current divides into the southern flowing California Current and the northern Alaska Current. The potential level of pollution outlined in the IRSN report indicate that it is long overdue for both TEPCO and the Japanese government to stop dribbling out information about the true state of events since Fukushima was devastated, and that foreign governments, particularly the United States, whose western shores are washed by the same currents that pass by Fukushima, insist that they do so. While trillions of dollars are at stake in the worldwide nuclear industry, the potential health consequences are now simply too significant to ignore. .. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 2 2011, 10:02 PM Post #576 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Radium 'likely cause' of Tokyo supermarket radiation hotspot TOKYO — Japanese authorities believe radium was to blame for a radiation hotspot at a Tokyo supermarket, a local city office said on Tuesday, in another scare for a nation still on edge over Fukushima. Workers wearing protective suits and goggles drilled into the asphalt at one of the two hotspots where inspectors last week detected alarming levels of radiation—up to 10 microsieverts per hour—one meter above the surface of the ground. Despite public worries about how far contamination has spread from the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant, authorities believe radium—a substance not released in the disaster—is likely the cause of the hotspots, the city office said. “The science and technology ministry said it is highly possible that radium 226 is the source of radiation,” the Setagaya ward office said in a statement. “The ministry also said this case is not linked to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant,” it said, adding inspectors plan to continue investigating the hotspots over the next two weeks. The radiation levels of the hotspots are much higher than the 20 millisieverts per year government threshold that would prompt evacuation, though no evacuation was required as the contamination was highly localized. The statement gave no indication of the source of the radium. The finding came weeks after authorities discovered old containers of radium powder, likely used for luminous paint, under the floorboards of a house in Setagaya, western Tokyo. Radiation fears are a daily fact of life in many parts of Japan following the earthquake and tsunami-sparked meltdowns at the Fukushima plant, with reported cases of contaminated water, beef, vegetables, tea and seafood. Radiation levels as high as those in the evacuation zone around the Fukushima nuclear plant have been detected in an eastern Tokyo suburb, which are likely linked to the disaster. Levels of two microsieverts per hour were detected one meter above the surface of the soil in a vacant lot in Kashiwa city, Chiba prefecture. Inspectors from the science and technology ministry believe the hotspot was created after radioactive cesium carried by rain water became concentrated in a small area because of a broken gutter. Variable winds, weather and topography result in an uneven spread of contamination, experts say, and radioactive elements tend to concentrate in places where dust and rain water accumulate such as drains and ditches. The March 11 earthquake triggered a tsunami that tore into Japan’s northeast coast, leaving 20,000 people dead or missing, and sparking meltdowns and explosions Fukushima. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 2 2011, 10:03 PM Post #577 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Japanese urged to wrap up as Warm Biz gets under way TOKYO — After months of being told to strip off to keep cool for summer, Japanese workers on Tuesday were urged to wrap up for winter in an energy-saving “Warm Biz” campaign. As the nation continues to face possible electricity shortfalls in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster that has left dozens of atomic reactors offline, the government is asking people to keep warm the old-fashioned way. Officials are telling homes and offices to set heaters and air conditioners no higher than 20 degrees C. Average temperatures in Tokyo fall to around 6 degrees C in January and February and the government is advising people to wear extra layers of clothes and eat hot meals to keep out the cold. Using a cartoon ninja character, the environment ministry suggests putting on scarves, gloves and leg warmers during the day and an extra layer after the evening bath, or wearing a towel around the neck in bed. For dinner, it recommends a traditional Japanese hotpot. “You can lower the heat if you enjoy ‘nabe’ with your family and friends, making both bodies and the room warm. The temperature will feel higher than it actually is thanks to steam from the pot,” the ministry website says. Eating root vegetables and ginger will help to “warm the body up,” it says, adding that getting off the train a stop earlier and walking the rest of the way to work will boost circulation. Companies have also got in on the act, with adverts on the Tokyo subway extolling the energy-saving virtues of home appliances and reminding commuters to keep the dial turned down. Clothing giant Uniqlo has stocked up on thermal underwear and department stores are promoting a range of knit wear to stave off the winter chills, the Yomiuri newspaper reported. More off-the-wall ideas include a suggestion from brewer Kirin that beer drinkers microwave their stout-style brew and add sugar or spices. The campaign, which runs until March, comes as Japan eyes a potential electricity shortfall over the cold winter months with the bulk of nuclear generators, on which resource-poor Japan is heavily dependent, still offline for safety checks amid public disquiet over the technology. Japan’s hot summer months were marked by a heightened “Cool Biz” campaign—aimed at limiting air conditioner use and encouraging workers to ditch jackets and ties. Local governments prohibited overtime and factories changed shifts to make use of cooler evenings, early mornings and lower-demand weekends. In one region, employees were told to take a two-hour siesta after lunch as the nation pulled together to stretch out the available electricity and avoid blackouts. Consumers in Japan have long been used to a plentiful and reliable electricity supply that powers everything from garish neon signs to heated toilet seats. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 2 2011, 10:08 PM Post #578 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
TEPCO injects poison after fission products detected in new unit 2 gas treatment line 02 November 2011 .. Unit 2 PCV filter unit ..new gas control system installed to reduce radioactive nuclides from the unit 2 primary containment vessel has possibly detected amounts of radioactive xenon with short half-lives, TEPCO said.he presence of these nuclides is 'undeniable' evidence that a fission reaction has occurred in the reactor recently, TEPCO said, though the nature or causes of the reaction remain unclear. However, the detected amounts of xenon are relatively small—the largest is Xe-131m at 6.9x10^-4 Bq/cm3—and a maximum of a multiple of five above the detection limits. The three xenon isotopes found, the one above and Xe-133, Xe-135, have half-lives of 12 days, 5 days and 9 hours, respectively. The samples are currently under review. TEPCO said that there were no significant variations in measured temperature or pressure readings. However, it injected the neutron poison boric acid into the reactor for an hour on 2 November as a precautionary measure. It has also slightly increased the amount of water injection, by a total of 0.5 m3/hr. Operation of the gas control system, installed to filter out Caesium 134 & Caesium 137, began on 28 October. The units consist of high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) and activated charcoal filters, which TEPCO claims absorb 99% of radioactive materials. The system also monitors H2 concentrations, and after noticing that H2 concentrations in the system had risen to 2.7 vol% on 30 October, increased the injection rate of nitrogen gas from 16 to 21 N m3/hr to maintain a non-combustible concentration of hydrogen (the limit is 4 vol%). The system extracts gas from the PCV via the combustible gas density control line, from which new piping carries the gas out of the reactor building and into the turbine building. There, it is cooled by radiators and sent to one of two filters mounted in series, behind which is mounted an extractor fan that creates the vacuum pull. The air is monitored, and some air is recirculated and reheated to pass through the filters again. Treated, decontaminated air is vented outside. TEPCO aims to install similar systems at unit 1 and 3 by the end of the year. In other news, TEPCO has announced that the unit 1 reactor building cover has been completed, after five months of work. The building includes a filtration system. The building will help reduce the amount of rainwater contaminated by radionuclides. Research and surveying work has begun on a shielding wall to isolate the Fukushima Daiichi 1-4 groundwater, which is likely to be contaminated, from the sea. At the site, water generally flows downhill toward the sea. The wall would consist of deep sheet piles that wall off the site from the sea bed, a low-permeable layer beneath the sea-bed, and the permeable layer beneath that. Workers will also install a groundwater drain to collect contaminated groundwater. Work will begin immediately. However, TEPCO also reports that it has decided not to isolate site groundwater from land-side groundwater by piling on the uphill side, for several reasons. It found that such a wall would likely lower groundwater by 1-2 metres, enhancing the risk that contaminated water pooling in site buildings might leak into the groundwater. Second, land-side piling work would interfere with other site recovery issues. Link to article ......... http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectioncode=72&storyCode=2061044 |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 3 2011, 10:12 PM Post #579 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Radiation fears behind debris refusals / Remaining refuse may cause secondary damage, hinder reconstruction efforts The Yomiuri Shimbun The start Wednesday of shipments of debris from the Great East Japan Earthquake to Tokyo, the first destination for such refuse outside the Tohoku region, was a long-awaited first step toward wider disposal of the wreckage. However, an Environment Ministry survey released Wednesday showed that only 54 local governments and garbage-disposal unions, less than 10 percent the figure in a previous survey, were considering accepting debris from disaster-hit areas. A huge quantity of debris remains in the devastated areas almost eight months after the March 11 disaster, and secondary damage such as fires in piles of debris has occurred. People also have voiced concern that the slow pace of disposal may adversely affect reconstruction efforts. In Miyako, Iwate Prefecture, on Wednesday, wood, plastic and other debris were thrown by heavy machinery into containers on trucks, which then headed to a JR cargo terminal in Morioka. Miyako Mayor Masanori Yamamoto observed the work and said: "Today's achievement represents great progress for reconstruction. I'm grateful." The Iwate prefectural government and the Tokyo metropolitan government signed an agreement that Tokyo will accept 11,000 tons of debris by the end of fiscal 2011 to dispose of it. Including this figure, the metropolitan government plans to accept about 500,000 tons of debris from Iwate and Miyagi prefectures by the end of fiscal 2013. So far, however, Tokyo is the only prefecture outside the Tohoku region that has accepted debris from the disaster-hit areas. An official involved with the issue at the Kyoto city government said, "The Environment Ministry says the debris is safe, but we can't convince our residents." The Kyoto city government once abandoned a plan to burn firewood made from pine trees in Rikuzen-Takata, Iwate Prefecture, during the Kyoto Gozan Okuribi fire festival. The ministry conducted a similar survey in April, at which time the Kyoto city government said it could accept about 50,000 tons of debris annually. In the latest survey, however, it said it could take none. The decision was made in light of Kyoto residents' concern about radioactive contamination from debris, according to officials. The municipal governments of Akita and Tsu also said they could accept debris in the April survey but backed out in the latest survey. Local governments that expressed their intention to consider accepting debris are also in a difficult position. The city government of Hachinohe, Aomori Prefecture, has decided to accept debris only from Iwate Prefecture because the city and Iwate Prefecture both belonged to the Nambu-han feudal clan during the Edo period (1603-1867). However, the city said its acceptance would be conditional. "We know we have to cooperate with reconstruction, but we'll only accept debris from which there will be no effect from radiation," an official said. An environmental affairs union in charge of garbage disposal in central and southern parts of Nagasaki Prefecture also said it would accept 6,500 tons a year on the condition that debris contaminated with radioactive substances would be excluded. Nagasaki Prefecture received aid from across the nation when Fugendake peak in the Unzen mountain area erupted in 1991 and related volcanic disasters damaged the area. As a result, many people in the prefecture have expressed their willingness to help the disaster-hit areas. At the same time, however, the prefecture is in a difficult position. "Nagasaki suffered an atomic bombing, so some people have strong fears about radiation pollution. It's difficult to explain this," a union official said. The ministry plans to compile documents to explain how filters in garbage incinerators can remove more than 99.99 percent of radioactive cesium, among other information to relieve public concerns. The ministry also aims to encourage local governments to accept debris from the disaster-hit areas through such efforts. === Debris hinders recovery Debris has hampered reconstruction efforts in areas affected by the March 11 disaster. In Rikuzen-Takata, which was devastated by the quake and tsunami, a city government official said: "We're securing sites to temporarily store debris, even borrowing land owned by private individuals. Our reconstruction work won't make progress if the debris remains. It will hinder urban planning." In Ofunato, Iwate Prefecture, three temporary debris storage sites are in school yards. "If the debris can be removed quickly, the yards can be used for students," a city official said. In Yamadamachi, Iwate Prefecture, a fire started in a 15-meter-high pile of debris on Oct. 12 and has still not been extinguished. An official at a municipal fire station said, "In winter, when the air tends to be dry, the fire may grow bigger and spread to surrounding areas." The fire station was carefully breaking the pile of debris apart with heavy machinery and spraying water on it. According to Shinichi Sakai, a researcher of environmental engineering who heads Kyoto University's Environment Preservation Research Center: "The Tokyo metropolitan and Iwate prefectural governments made their decisions after carefully checking for radiation pollution through such means as analyzing the kinds of radioactive particles inside the waste and radiation emissions on the surface. "Pollution levels differ from place to place. Radiation levels of incinerated ash on the northern part of the Sanriku coast are lower than those in Tokyo. I hope local governments will cooperate to dispose of debris over wider areas based on rational numerical data," he said. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 3 2011, 10:13 PM Post #580 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
TEPCO: N-plant xenon not result of criticality The Yomiuri Shimbun Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Thursday radioactive xenon detected in the No. 2 reactor at its crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant was the result of spontaneous fission, not a nuclear chain reaction known as criticality as had been feared. TEPCO said spontaneous fission, in which radioactive curium produced during the operation of a reactor splits on its own, is occurring sporadically inside the reactor. The recent detection of minute amounts of xenon can be explained by the splitting of curium, it said. Xenon was detected Tuesday in gas from the No. 2 reactor's containment vessel. Although the amounts were minute--about one-100,000th becquerel per cubic centimeter--TEPCO said a small-scale criticality incident could have taken place temporarily, given the short half-lives of the two types of xenon detected--five days for xenon-133 and nine hours for xenon-135. However, after analyzing the data, TEPCO concluded criticality did not occur, explaining that even a small-scale criticality incident should produce 10,000 times more xenon than the amount detected. TEPCO said the spontaneous fission of curium is a normal phenomenon in idled reactors and it would not hamper ongoing efforts to stabilize the reactor. "There will be no impact on the stabilization of the nuclear reactor and the surrounding environment," the utility said. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 6 2011, 09:16 PM Post #581 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
High Level of Radiation at Fukushima Station Tokyo Electric Power Co. found a dangerous level of radiation at its wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant, eight months after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami that caused the worst atomic crisis in 25 years. Workers at the company usually called Tepco detected 620 millisieverts of radiation an hour on the first floor of Reactor 3 on Nov. 3, the highest level found in that unit, it said. The level of radiation is more than the 500-millisievert short-term dose recommended as the maximum for emergency workers in live-saving situations, according to the World Nuclear Association. The company and government officials are trying to contain the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl in 1986 after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami caused a loss of cooling and the meltdowns of three reactors. Tepco will today start taking radiation out of water used to cool spent fuel rods, spokesman Hiroki Kawamata said today by phone. The utility will start decontaminating coolant water for spent rods held in the upper section of Reactor 2, which was relatively undamaged in the explosions that rocked the Fukushima Dai-Ichi plant in March. Tepco on Nov. 4 won approval for a 900 billion yen ($11.5 billion) bailout from the government after the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe to avert bankruptcy and start paying compensation for the crisis. Support Approved Trade and Industry Minister Yukio Edano approved the support after Tepco committed to cutting 7,400 jobs and 2.5 trillion yen in costs. The utility forecast an annual loss of 600 billion yen, its second since the March earthquake and tsunami wrecked its Fukushima nuclear plant. The government of Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda is stepping in to ensure residents, farmers, fishermen and forestry businesses are properly compensated by a utility that supplies power to 29 million customers in the political and economic heart of Japan. The forecast by Japan’s biggest utility brings its losses to 1.8 trillion yen since the disaster. The company plans to cut about 14 percent of its workforce and shave off the costs during the next 10 years, it said in a statement last week. Tepco shares fell 0.7 percent to 300 yen at the close in Tokyo on Nov. 4. They are down 86 percent since three reactors melted down at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant north of Tokyo. The company reported first-half earnings at about 4 p.m. after the market closed on Nov. 4. Reporting Losses Tepco had a 627.3 billion yen loss in the six months to Sept. 30 against a profit of 92 billion yen a year earlier. It’s forecasting an operating loss of 305 billion yen for the full- year, according to its earnings statement. Its loss was 1.25 trillion yen in the year to March 31 and 572 billion yen in this year’s first quarter. The reactor meltdowns in Fukushima forced 160,000 people to flee radiation and damaged fishing, farming and forestry businesses. “Tepco must compensate those affected with sincerity and generosity as well as carry out a thorough reorganization,” Edano told reporters in Tokyo on Nov. 4. Higashi-Dori village about 600 kilometers (380 miles) north of Tokyo and the host village of one of the nuclear power plants shut down in the disaster, received 15.7 billion yen from nuclear operators, the Asahi newspaper reported today. Tepco and Tohoku Electric Power Co., which have had all their east coast atomic stations shut down in the disaster, paid the donations and fees over a 30 year period, the newspaper said. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 6 2011, 09:25 PM Post #582 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Fukushima: Further Away From a Stable Shutdown Than Japanese Claimed Read more ....... http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/11/fukushima-%e2%80%9cfar-from-any-stable-shutdown%e2%80%9d/ |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 6 2011, 09:26 PM Post #583 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Fukushima: Further Away From a Stable Shutdown Than Japanese Claimed Read more ....... http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/11/fukushima-%e2%80%9cfar-from-any-stable-shutdown%e2%80%9d/ |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 8 2011, 04:59 PM Post #584 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Japan TV host diagnosed with acute lymphocytic leukemia — Had been eating Fukushima produce on show.![]() Norikazu Otsuka “A 63-year-old TV newscaster has been diagnosed with acute lymphocytic leukemia and is now hospitalized, getting ready for chemo. He felt a strange lump in his neck on October 28, he says. (Various news sources including: Zakzak 11/7/2011, Yomiuri Shinbun 11/6/2011) “In his morning program on Fuji TV he’s been promoting Fukushima produce by eating them in the show. He also happened to be in Fukushima in March 15. Just a coincidence. Never mind that ALL is predominant in small children, and an adult case is one in 100,000 annually in Japan.” |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 8 2011, 05:00 PM Post #585 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hospital worker leaks information about recent increase in acute leukemia — Tokyo area? Tweets from “a medical staff of a hospital leaks information” about “the case of acute leukemia is unusually increasing,” reports Mochizuki. Apparently, most of the cases used to be lymphoma malignum, but the recent increase in acute leukemia “is too obvious to ignore” and “not a negligible scale of a change”. Translation of @jadesurfkent’s tweets, via Google: Nov. 2: Here’s what you want – friend who works nearby hospital nucleic acid. “In the hospital recently, too many acute leukemia. Bakkari earlier but was malignant lymphoma. Is Seriously.’ll Never feel blame. That would not be scientifically backed them 取Retara fuss. And this is absolutely watching blood disorder I feel everyone should see. “pun not Nov. 3: Hospital work yesterday (Kanto) friend’s comment. “I really feel nothing but. Are in their 80s from 20s to Iloilo. With acute leukemia certainly stand out in the introduction Toka Toka who come here who become hospitalized recently, but I feel like all staff involved in blood cancer are.” |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 8 2011, 05:04 PM Post #586 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The Economist: Setting the scene for its revealing report on the plight of workers at Fukushima Daiichi, the Economist details conditions outside the stricken plant. “Patrol cars stop passing vehicles,” notes the reporter, “The police are particularly vigilant in preventing unauthorised people getting near the stricken plant.” Meet the Workers “The air of secrecy is compounded when you try to approach workers involved in the nightmarish task of stabilising the nuclear plant. Many are not salaried Tepco staff but low-paid contract workers lodging in Iwaki, just south of the exclusion zone.” “It is easy to spot them, in their nylon tracksuits — They seem to have been recruited from the poorest corners of society”: One calls home from a pay phone because he can’t afford a mobile phone Another has a single front tooth Both are reluctant to talk to journalist (condition of employment is silence) They share their concerns about safety One said he got 30 minutes of safety training He said almost everything he learned about radiation risks came from TV Conditions On-site Hiroyuki Watanabe, an Iwaki official reports there are “many safety breaches.” “Workers wading through contaminated water complain that their boots have holes in them — Some are not instructed in when to change the filters on their safety masks,” according to Watanabe. “Even such basic tools as wrenches are in short supply, he claims. Tepco is shielded by a lack of media scrutiny. The councillor shows a Tepco gagging order that one local boss had to sign. Article four bans all discussion of the work with outsiders. All requests for media interviews must be rejected.” The Engineer “One engineer who has played a front-line role in helping cool the meltdown of Fukushima’s three reactors spoke unwittingly to The Economist.” The engineer revealed to the Econominst the in May, “The hardest work was done by the low-level labourers. They had so much rubble to clear, he says, that they often keeled over in the heat under the weight of their protective gear. Taken out in ambulances, they would usually be back the following day.” |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 8 2011, 05:27 PM Post #587 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
JP Gov officially admitted that Japanese food is harmful. Since 311, every time it turned out a kind of food is contaminated, they made “safety” limit, such as 500 Bq/Kg for vegetables, and allowed them to distribute. However, at today’s meeting of the Lower House Budget Committee, Edano former chief cabinet secretary, current minister of Economy, Trade and Industry admitted that it is harmful for your health if you keep having it for one year. Edano former chief cabinet secretary is famous for his trade mark phrase, “In short term,it is not harmful”. He was even called “Short term fraud” by some people. It is not a small number of people who trusted his word and didn’t evacuate or kept eating food under the “safety limit”. At today’s meeting of the Lower House Budget Committee, he “explained”. He held 39 press conferences in the first 2 weeks after 311. BUT he said “In short term, it is not harmful” ONLY 7 times. OF those, 5 “In short term, it is not harmful”s were for food and drink. By this he “meant”, you will be sick if you keep having it for one year, but if you have it once or twice, it doesn’t hurt your body. 2 “In short term, it is not harmful”s were for the north west area of Fukushima plant, which was severely contaminated right after the explosions. It therefore means, those people who stayed there for long time shall be damaged by radiation. In conclusion, as Japanese government admitted, if you keep having food from Japan for one year, probably you will be sick. If it’s only once or twice, you may be ok. People who abandoned their own sense of judgement, and trusted the government blindly, great job. Good bye. Bonus: Otsuka Norikazu, a TV news caster was a good Japanese. He devoted himself for the national campaign of “Let’s support north Japan by eating their food.” He was sent to the hospital for acute lymphatic leukemia on 11/7/2011. In the morning, he touched his neck and felt something strange. He went to the doctor. The doctor diagnosed him to be acute lymphatic leukemia. It is not clear the connection between his patriotic challenge and acute lymphatic leukemia.It will never be clear. His TV show was named “Wake up TV”. He actually woke up some Japanese at the end of his career. ![]() Video link ........ |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 8 2011, 05:34 PM Post #588 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
50,000Bq/Kg of pollen will fly to Tokyo. Posted by Mochizuki on November 8th, 2011 · According to the survey of Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology , in Kawamata machi ,Fukushima,where is in the planned evacuation area, leaves of Japanese cedar contain 177,600 Bq/ Kg of cesium. In Okutama,where is just west to Tokyo, pollen of Japanese cedar contains 93.8 Bq/ Kg,leaves contain 322 Bq/Kg,soil contains 1,381 Bq/Kg. From their calculation, next year,pollen of over 50,000 Bq/Kg will fly around. Pollen of Japanese cedar fly for tens of Km, over 300km when it’s on the wind. Tokyo is only 220km away from Fukushima. It is highly likely that Tokyo gets hit by the highly contaminated pollen. I strongly recommend you to leave Tokyo before radioactive pollen hit here |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 9 2011, 08:23 PM Post #589 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Fukushima units have been air-sealed 09 November 2011 Operator Tepco has carried out an operation to seal the stairwells, hatches and other penetrationsthat lead to the Fukushima Daiichi units 1-4 turbine halls and other buildings to reduce the spread of radioactive dust. The dust is carried by draughts created by the movement of water from the building basements as they are pumped dry. The work, carried out in October, involved fitting non-combustible plastic sheets over the openings and sealing with tape or urethane foam. Some entryways were blocked with boards to prevent access through the barrier. In the units 2,3 and 4 turbine buildings, the large equipment hatch was sealed with balloons. •Tepoc reported on 8 November that the presence of the short-half life fission product Xe-135 detected a week before did not indicate a dangerous situation. It was detected in small quantities, the detected quantity did not change after injection with boric acid, and because no other reactor parameters changed. It said that the fission product reflected a continuous low-level fission reaction, and was only detected because of a new, sensitive measuring method. In a separate statement, the Japanese nuclear regulator NISA concurred with these conclusions. •Japanese national broadcaster NHK reported that the Japanese environmental registry has begun a detailed survey of radiation levels in air within the 20km exclusion zone around the plant, in order to determine decontamination priorities when work starts in January. It will use unmanned helicopters and cars to carry out the survey at 100m intervals. The NHK report was published by Japan Atomic Industrial Forum's Atoms in Japan information service. •JAIF reports that Japan's advisory committee on the Fukushima cleanup has released a provisional estimate that cleanup of the station will take 30 years or more. Work to remove fuel from spent fuel ponds could begin as early as 2014. After damaged primary containment vessels are repaired and filled with water, melted fuel could begin to be removed from them in about 2021. The committee chairman, Kyoto professor Hajimu Yamana, said that definitive estimates require investigation of the interior of the reactors. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 9 2011, 08:35 PM Post #590 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
25% of displaced Fukushima residents do not wish to return home again: survey National Nov. 09, 2011 - 03:30PM JST ( 17 ) TOKYO — A recent survey conducted by Fukushima University shows that trust in the government when it comes to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster is low among some former residents, and that one in four do not wish to return to their homes. The survey covered 28,000 households displaced by the crisis in Futaba and Okuma, which are closest to the stricken nuclear power plant, the university said on its website. Replies were received from 13,460 households. When asked why they didn’t want to return to their homes, 83% of respondents said they believed that decontamination of the area would prove difficult, 66% responded they don’t trust the government’s assurances that radiation levels are safe, and 61% answered that they do not expect the area to return to normal. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 9 2011, 08:53 PM Post #591 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Japanese food retailer promises radiation-free food.![]() In the months since the beginning of the Fukushima nuclear crisis, Japanese consumers have rightly been worried about the radiation levels of food they are buying and eating. Now, following months of discussion, Greenpeace seafood radiation monitoring and the growing public distress over food contamination, AEON Japan’s largest retailer, announced yesterday that it is moving to zero radiation contamination of its food products. This includes all seafood - which is a central part of the Japanese diet - sold by AEON. To achieve this, AEON is strengthening its radiation screening, releasing the results to the public, and stopping sales of products they find to contain any amount of radioactive contamination, not just those that are below official government safety levels. Consumers in Japan have been extremely worried about internal radiation doses from the consumption of contaminated food, and so far there has been no way for them to know if the food they are consuming is contaminated or not. Both the Japanese Government and nuclear corporation TEPCO have instigated monitoring of some products, but is still no clear or consistent way for consumers to know that what they are buying is actually safe. AEON’s decision is a huge step forward for Japanese consumers, especially for pregnant women and young children, who are the most vulnerable to radiation exposure.Greenpeace has spent months communicating with AEON and the other four largest retailers in Japan about the risks to the population. In October, we began a programme of surprise investigations of seafood products to pressure them to improve protection measures. We have been asking the companies to: Conduct radiation screening on seafood products that they are selling, and clearly show the results to the public lTo not rely on the official safety levels, which have been set too high , and to instead establish their own distribution standards, and to inform the public. Greenpeace welcomes AEON’s announcement, and hopes that other retailers will soon follow in its footsteps. In taking this stand AEON has gone against the government, and shown that the official 500 Bq/kg limit is just not right. This strong stance will not only help protect AEON’s customers, but it will help push the political discussion for the food safety regulations and seafood issues in the right direction. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 9 2011, 09:02 PM Post #592 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
New method tracks radiation levels faster Tokyo, Nov 9 : Researchers have hit upon a new way of tracking radiation faster and more efficiently at nuclear power plant accident sites. Seiichi Yamamoto and Jun Hatazawa from Kobe City College of Technology and Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan, have combined three modes of detection into a single hybrid technology. The new technology would also drastically limit the exposure of clean up workers to hazardous radiation, journal Review of Scientific Instruments reports. Radioactive decay produces three types of emissions: alpha, beta and gamma. Alpha particles comprise two neutrons and two protons, according to a Kobe City College statement. Because of their large mass and relatively slow speed, alpha particles are the least penetrating of the three types of radiation, and can be stopped by a sheet of paper. Beta particles are electrons that can travel farther than alpha particles but not as far as high-energy gamma photons, the third type of radiation. The researchers took advantage of the different penetrating properties of the three types of radiation to design their device. Their new radiation detector has three scintillators, which are sheets of material that light up when hit by radiation. Alpha particles strike only the first scintillator, beta particles travel on to the second scintillator, and gamma photons make it all the way through to the third scintillator. The scintillators were then coupled to a photomultiplier tube, a device that converts the light pulses into electrical current. Because the shape of a light pulse differs depending on which type of radiation produced it (alpha particles produce sharp peaks, gamma particles more broad pulses), the device could distinguish between the different radiation types and produce counts for all three simultaneously. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 9 2011, 09:27 PM Post #593 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Tepco Ordered to Create Road Map to Decommission Reactors The Japanese government ordered Tokyo Electric Power Co. to draw up a road map to decommission the damaged four reactors at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant in a process that could take 30 years. The utility known as Tepco should start removing fuel rods in spent fuel pools within two years and melted fuel in reactors within 10 years, said Goshi Hosono, the minister in charge of responding to the nuclear disaster, in a meeting with Tepco President Toshio Nishizawa in Tokyo today. Tepco must submit the roadmap by the end of this year, Hosono said. The March 11 earthquake and ensuing tsunami wrecked the Fukushima Dai-Ichi plant, about 220 kilometers (137 miles) north of Tokyo, leading to three meltdowns and radiation leaks. Decommissioning the four reactors will cost at least 1.15 trillion yen ($15 billion), a government investigation of Tepco’s finances revealed in a report last month. “Full scale government’s involvement will be necessary in the decommission process,” Hosono told reporters after the meeting. Tepco must submit a roadmap that will continue regardless of the utility’s corporate structure and financial situation, he said. It may take more than 30 years to dismantle the reactors, a sub-committee of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission said in a draft report today. Normal decommissioning takes about 15 years, said the JAEC sub-committee headed by Kyoto University Professor Hajimu Yamana. At the Three Mile Island accident in Pennsylvania in 1979, fuel removal started about six and a half years later and was completed in 10 years, the sub-committee said. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 10 2011, 10:14 AM Post #594 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Many evacuees 'won't go home' / Uncertainty, distrust, radiation discourage displaced Fukushima people.![]() ![]() More than a quarter of evacuees from eight municipalities around Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s crisis-stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant do not wish to return to their original residences, according to a survey. The younger the respondents, the less likely they were to wish to return to their pre-crisis addresses. More than half of those aged 34 or younger said they would not return. The survey was conducted by Fukushima University on all evacuees' households from the eight towns and villages in the Futaba-gun region of Fukushima Prefecture. The results were released Tuesday. The survey was conducted in September with cooperation from the eight municipal governments. Questionnaires were mailed to the 28,184 households who evacuated to other places in the prefecture and outside of the prefecture. Of them, 13,463 households responded. Asked about the circumstances under which they would return to their original residences, 26.9 percent of all respondents said they had no intention to return. Only 4.9 percent said they would return as soon as radiation levels fall below safety standards set by the central government. By age group, 52.3 percent of those aged 34 or younger and 36.5 percent of those aged 35 to 49 said they did not intend to return at all. Among those 65 to 79 years old, 16.8 percent said they would not return and 13.1 percent of those aged 80 or older replied so. As for why they did not wish to return, 83.1 percent said they thought decontamination of areas polluted by radiation spewed out by the nuclear power plant would be difficult, and 65.7 percent said they could not trust the government's declarations about safe levels of radiation. The survey permitted multiple answers. When asked about how long they would likely wait until returning to their original residences, 37.4 percent said one to two years, and 14.6 percent said they would wait indefinitely. Fuminori Tanba, an associate professor at the university who conducted the survey, said, "I assume they replied they will not return mainly because it remains unknown when they will be able to return home." "The central and prefectural governments should quickly make it known when people will be able to return and make efforts to maintain relations among the evacuees who now live in and outside the prefecture," he said. Kenichi Yatsuda, chief of the Namiemachi town government's planning and coordination section, said about the survey results: "It's shocking that about a quarter of the people don't wish to return. I want the government to definitively present a policy over, for example, how to decontaminate the land." |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 10 2011, 10:23 AM Post #595 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Fukushima women against nuclear power: finding a voice from Tohoku Nov. 09, 2011 Introduction by David H. Slater From the very first, it has been quite difficult to politicize earthquake and tsunami hit Tohoku, despite the poor planning, the slow and uneven response, the failure to provide aid in a timely way in the days and weeks afterward, and the often poorly organized evacuation centers—an issue which resulted in a number of unexplained deaths. Now, the temporary housing facilities virtually insure that communities, or what is left of them, will stay dysfunctional for a while, even as their residents are often the ones called upon to manage their own relief. While the silences of fatalism and the shock of such a terrible disaster have been noted, anyone who has been to the Northeast on a regular basis is aware that the frustration and anger erupt in different ways almost every day. The point, however, is that rarely does it emerge in the unified voices of protest, rarely in coherent demands for systematic help, almost never in anger expressed in a way that the rest of the nation can hear. In contrast, the threat of nuclear radiation and critiques of the nuclear industry have been skillfully politicized in ways that have led to the largest set of demonstrations in Japan (with the exception of Okinawa) since the US-Japan security treaty protests of the 1960s and 1970s. These protests have been based in Tokyo, utilizing urban networks of activists who have provided the digital framework for organization that has brought together an older generation of anti-nuclear activists, young families, hip urbanites, office workers and union protesters. This is, perhaps ironic, considering that many of the protesters and marchers rarely have contact with Tohoku. The nuclear threat, organizers say, extends beyond Tohoku, even beyond Japan. And indeed, this is the message that has been heard around the world, as the anti-nuke protest and politics were staged with specific reference to Fukushima (sadly, rarely with respect to the wider ‘Tohoku’ region). Bridging voices Women, and in particular, mothers, have been quite active in radiation measurement, calls for contaminated soil removal, and efforts to secure safe food since the early months of the crisis. Today, perhaps more than any other group, they have emerged as particularly effective anti-nuke spokespersons. Of course, there is nothing new in women being at the front of social shifts, as seen in work as diverse as Sheldon Garon's Molding Japanese Minds and Robin LeBlanc's Bicycle Citizens illustrate. The movement of “Women from Fukushima Against Nukes” (Genptasu iranai Fukushima kara no onnatachi”) is positioned to express a range of issues that respond to and exploit this particular position. The logic of political potency, now as then, relies on the privileged position of women as the core of Japanese society and polity. The eternal maternal role of producer and reproducer of Japanese society and culture has taken an even sharper edge in this age of demographic decline. Today, women as mothers are charged with a more specific and often overtly political task: to do their job of having and nurturing babies to maintain the dwindling population (usually, while also doing part-time jobs). Secondarily, we hear of women in their role as wives, supporters of their husbands, who are off working, not marching. These shifts have positioned woman with an even stronger foundation from which to speak, at least on some nuclear issues. DS In many of these protests, it is as mothers that women speak out against corporate interests and government policy. They speak as they protect their children, their families; in this capacity, they are forced but also entitled to protest nuclear threats. They have been charged with something more fundamental than capital accumulation, more important than the postwar protection of corporate heath. Feeding children healthy food is more important than feeding the energy demands of a hungry urban popular. In this respect, they are unlike other protesters (compare the stalled anti-poverty movement of the last five years and the “Occupy Tokyo” groups of the last few weeks) who must position themselves outside of society and culture in order to critique politics, running the risk of charges of selfishness when they are expected to suffer in silence. Mothers protesting nuclear contamination (and thus the nuclear power industry) critique politics from within, at the core of public perceptions of Japanese society and culture, and indeed, from the perspective of the ‘natural’ obligation of reproduction and nurturing another generation. They cannot suffer in silence; they cannot accept some collateral damage as inevitable; to do so would be irresponsible to their children’s and to Japan’s future. This broad appeal of Fukushima woman as a symbol has provided common ground across often divided constituencies. As mothers and wives, they are not a threat to men. From Tohoku, they are not pitting a rural backwater provider of energy against a voracious urban consumer. The vaguely NIMBY-odor from the early anti-nuke protests, coming from urban protestors who were more intent on marching and chanting than on conducting relief work in Tokuku, is also at least obscured for the time being; the women’s demands begin with the most immediate concerns—safe food, air and play areas for their children—such that opposition to nuclear industry is repositioned as means to that end (rather than the much more abstract fear of an urban population sitting at some remove from Fukushima). Emotional Response Women, unlike men, are able to address another range of issues through the recognition and demonstration of the high emotions that confront us all, but is rarely expressed in polite company and serious discourse. Remember when DPJ Economics Minister Kaieda Banri began to cry, on TV? Rather understandable from the pressure and confusion of the moment, as the scope of the tragedy was revealed, and the frustrations of not being able to respond appropriately to it mounted. And yet, there was an outpouring of negative reaction to this performance. Men should not cry, particularly not those in leadership positions. But women who are caught in interviews and on camera addressing governmental or corporate groups are often crying or on the verge of crying. They are doing what their male counter-parts cannot, and when they do it, it means different things. We see the fear (of the nuclear threat), frustration (at the lack of government and corporate cooperation) and exhaustion (from living with uncertainty) as the immediate response to their being mothers, to mothering under intolerable conditions. Note that it is beside the point to try to privilege the “expressive” function of tears against their “instrumental” function, making one more or less authentic and significant. The point is that these are both, at once, authentic, and it is this unity that makes them so powerful. It also transforms the expressions of anger—the politically correct emotional response to injustice—into something that is grounded in a woman’s body, in a family, in a community, and maybe, for these reasons, all the more accessible for a nation. It transforms individual anger into collective sentiment that viewers from all over Japan and beyond can feel, can identify with, and can share as the basis of a platform for collective action. Women’s Protests in Action The ongoing Fukushima disaster has brought attention to earlier studies showing that women and children face a much greater risk of radiation-induced cancer than men. According to a US National Academy of Sciences study of 2006, the threat to women of radiation-induced cancer is 50% higher than that for men. The results were identical both at legally permitted levels of exposure and at ten times higher levels. Infants and unborn children of either gender are at higher risk than either men or women. As the NIRS report notes, the differential risk is not limited to cancer. “Radiation harm includes not only cancer and leukemia, but reduced immunity and also reduced fertility, increases in other diseases including heart disease, birth defects including heart defects, other mutations (both heritable and not). When damage is catastrophic to a developing embryo spontaneous abortion or miscarriage of a pregnancy may result.” While anti-nuclear protests held since April have brought together a cross-section of Japanese citizens to oppose nuclear power and helped to sway public opinion – a June public opinion poll indicated that over 80% of Japanese favored at least a gradual phase-out – some of the most consistent and specific demands have come from women’s groups which work to draw attention to issues such as the exposure of children to radiation as well as food safety. Women’s groups have been particularly scathing and effective in condemning the government’s casualization of exposure – the increase of the permissible exposure rate from 1 to 20 mSv, its inadequate attention to “hotspots” outside of the official evacuation areas, its calculation only of external radiation while ignoring internal radiation, and its spotty food supply oversight. Sato Sachiko, a 53 year old Fukushima farmer and mother of four is one example of a local woman who has worked tirelessly to get the message out. She reports, “I was able to evacuate my four children out of Fukushima. However, for economic reasons or because of job circumstances and things like that there are lots of people who say ‘I want to evacuate but just can’t.’ There are many places in Fukushima City such as the Oonami and Watari areas where high levels of radiation are being detected. If they don’t give immediate support to those who wish to evacuate, children, who are the most vulnerable to radiation, will suffer more and more exposure.” There are indeed areas of Fukushima City beyond the official 20 kilometer evacuation zones where radiation levels exceed those of Minami Soma and other localities directly adjacent to the stricken Fukushima Daiichi plant. Women like Sato have campaigned tirelessly to ensure that more are aware of these blindspots in the official stance and to pressure the state to accept responsibility for the safety of children.. Female protest leaders have helped to maintain the momentum of the September 19 protest in Tokyo that attracted 60,000. Hundreds of women, many of them from Fukushima, organized a sit-in protest at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry from October 30-November 5 (poster here) They call on the government to evacuate children from areas with consistently elevated radiation levels. The group includes women who have long participated in protest against the Fukushima TEPCO plants and many others who have come forward recently. Now, in the wake of 3.11, they have a chance to have their views aired nationwide. Greenpeace has reported on their efforts in a blog entry and has posted a video of the demonstration: Fukushima women peacefully protest nuclear ....Video Link ..... http://youtu.be/fnnloSF1ZqQ The September 19 Tokyo protest also expanded to include a march on TEPCO. Supporting protests were organized in other areas such as Osaka, Sapporo, Hiroshima, and other major cities, indicating the national scope of the movement. As this video of the discussions leading up to the sit-in movement of October 30-November 5 demonstrates, female protestors are not speaking only as mothers or grandmothers. They are engaging in meta-level discussion about Japan’s energy future, the role of energy alternatives in post-disaster reconstruction, and similarly broad themes at a time when Japan’s energy policies are under critical review. Fukushima has been the focus of the crisis, but as many reports have documented, radiation dispersion is difficult to predict and certainly does not stop at prefectural or even national boundaries. The need for wide-scale and multifarious testing and measurement seems obvious, but there has been resistance. In Ibaraki Prefecture, one of the regions outside of Fukushima that has seen the highest spikes in radiation level, for example, despite a statement by Health and Welfare Minister Komiyama Yoko that a system of health checks for children should be put in place, the prefecture has called this “unnecessary” because radiation “is at a very low level compared to Fukushima.” While this may be true, it fits with a tendency since March on the part of both central and local governments to label low rates of exposure “safe” that has outraged many members of the public, and particularly mothers in the effected regions. Ibraraki mothers are now stepping up their calls for comprehensive health checks for their children. Whether participating in protests in Tokyo or demanding testing and accountability at the local level, Japanese women have been a powerful presence in post 3.11 civil society. Link to article......... http://japanfocus.org/events/view/117 |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 11 2011, 12:44 AM Post #596 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Fukushima crisis 'stunting children's growth.![]() Photo: Thousands of children living in the fallout zone are confined indoors because of radiation fears (Kim Kyung Hoon: Reuters) Eight months on from the nuclear meltdowns at Japan's Fukushima plant the long-term cancer risks for children are in the spotlight, but a new study has highlighted more immediate problems. Thousands of children living in the fallout zone are confined indoors because of radiation fears, and doctors worry they are not growing at a sufficient rate. "The kids just can't play in the dirt or enjoy nature," teacher Junko Akanuma said. "They may look cheerful enough but they are building up tremendous amounts of stress inside." According to doctors stress in children can lead to physical problems. Shintaro Kikuchi is a paediatrician who has been tracking the weight of 250 kindergarten children in Koriyama, less than 60 kilometres from the crippled nuclear plant. His findings are startling. They show there was an average weight gain of 0.8 of a kilogram over the past year. The year before children in the same age group put on 3.1 kilograms, or nearly four times as much weight. "We can blame this low-growth rate on the disruption to hormone production caused by stress" Dr Kikuchi said. Kids who can't get enough outdoor exercise tend to lose their appetite and they may then not get enough protein to build up their muscles." One of the children surveyed by Dr Kikuchi is Natsumi Suzuki. Since the nuclear meltdowns she has not been allowed to play outside. Instead she spends most of her inside with her colouring in set. "I want to play in the park and to ride the swings too. To be outside," she said. Natsumi has only put on half a kilogram in the eight months since the Fukushima disaster and her mother is worried. "I hardly ever hear Natsumi say she's hungry any more" she said. "My daughter is eating less. She used to eat a lot after playing outside." Until all the radioactive hotspots are found and cleaned up, most parents in Koriyama will continue to ban their young children from playing outside. So mayor Masao Hara has come up with a solution of sorts, announcing the construction of a 1,900-square-metre indoor play centre. "Let's call it a Christmas present" he said. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 11 2011, 12:50 AM Post #597 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Study starts on 'long-term no-return zones' in Fukushima ![]() The government started discussions on establishing "long-term no-return zones" in areas with high radiation levels near the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. The administration of Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda is also considering extending assistance for a "two-stage return," whereby new towns are created in areas of low radiation levels to prepare for a future return of evacuees. Radiation levels will soon be measured in the no-entry zone within a 20-kilometer radius of the nuclear plant. Areas that are designated long-term no-return zones will be announced when a state of cold shutdown is achieved at the plant, which the government plans by the end of the year. The government has not decided on the length of the ban on entry to these zones, but expects it will continue for a long time. The central and local governments may lease out or buy up land from residents of the zones and provide them with public-run "reconstruction housing." A science ministry survey in mid-October found that annual human exposure to radiation exceeded the evacuation threshold of 20 millisieverts at 37 of 50 measurement locations in the no-entry zone. Annual exposure exceeded 100 millisieverts at 15 locations, where more than 10 years will be needed for the figure to fall below 20 millisieverts. The government plans to start model projects in the no-entry zone to verify how far decontamination measures can lower radiation levels. The results will be used to calculate how many years it will take before residents can return and to designate areas where a return will remain difficult in the longer term. The designation will also include areas where everyday life is expected to remain difficult, even if the radiation levels are low, because of scant prospects for a recovery in infrastructure. The town of Okuma in Fukushima Prefecture, in which part of the Fukushima No. 1 plant lies, has already incorporated a "two-stage return" in its draft reconstruction design. According to the plan, a "new town" with a concentration of public facilities will be created in an area of low radiation levels to prepare for the eventual return of all evacuees. The central government plans to extend assistance to similar initiatives. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 11 2011, 12:56 AM Post #598 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
TEPCO procrastinated even after tsunami threat shown![]() This seawater pump for the No. 3 reactor at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant was damaged by the March 11 tsunami. (Tokyo Electric Power Co.) ![]() In March 2002, Tokyo Electric Power Co. revised upward the height of potential tsunami and took precautionary measures at its nuclear plants. The new maximum height was 5.7 meters, and the company stuck with that scenario despite warnings and simulations showing that waves much higher could hit the coast of northeastern Japan. And TEPCO's anti-tsunami measures, for 5.7-meter waves, were left untouched until March 11, when a tsunami up to 13 meters high swamped the Tohoku region and crippled the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, leading to multiple meltdowns. "In retrospect, it is true that we were too late," Junichi Matsumoto, acting general manager of TEPCO's Nuclear Power and Plant Siting Division, said at a recent news conference. "We did not sense any pressure that we should promptly take up the matter." The government's Investigation Committee on the Accident at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations plans to investigate TEPCO's failure in this matter. TEPCO's official tsunami height prediction was set at 3.1 meters when the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant was built in the early 1970s. But it was upgraded to the current 5.7 meters after the Japan Society of Civil Engineers (JSCE) in February 2002 established a method to evaluate tsunami heights using up-to-date simulation techniques based on a source fault model. TEPCO's calculations were based on source models presented by the JSCE by way of illustration. Yet they were limited to areas where tsunami occurred in the past. No model was available for the "gap" beneath the seabed close to the Japan Trench, or far off the Fukushima Prefecture coast, where no tsunami was known to have originated. However, the government's Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion said in July 2002 that tsunami could originate close to the trench anywhere between the Sanriku coast of the Tohoku region and the Boso Peninsula in Chiba Prefecture. This included a potential tsunami originating below the seabed off Fukushima Prefecture. But TEPCO took virtually no action. Incorporating the ideas of the earthquake research headquarters into a tsunami model involved the major challenge of dealing with uncertainties in the properties of the tsunami, including its source size. Only in 2008 did TEPCO simulate a tsunami originating close to the trench off Fukushima Prefecture. When the source of the Meiji Sanriku-oki event of 1896 and the source of the Boso-oki event of 1677 were relocated to the gap off Fukushima Prefecture, the simulations produced tsunami heights of 15.7 and 13.6 meters, respectively. But TEPCO argued that these results included assumptions because the scenarios were not actually based on an event in the target location. It decided not to revise its official tsunami height prediction, although the simulated heights far exceeded 5.7 meters in both cases. TEPCO management was also informed of the simulation results, but it merely said it would "prepare" or consider potential improvements on waterproof designs for reactor buildings and pumping equipment. The simulation results were presented to the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) on March 7, four days before the Great East Japan Earthquake triggered the deadly tsunami. Documents submitted by TEPCO on that occasion, which were disclosed in October, stated that measures were still "under consideration" and that the official tsunami height prediction would be revised "at an appropriate time." The target date for the revisions was October 2012. A NISA panel in 2009 advised TEPCO to consider the results of simulations that gave heights of up to 9.2 meters for the tsunami spawned by the Jogan earthquake in 869. But TEPCO did not take action, saying the ancient event was full of uncertainties. In 2009-10, TEPCO studied geological formations in Fukushima Prefecture. The utility told a scientific conference in spring this year that a tsunami would likely not have exceeded 4-5 meters above sea level because evidence of past tsunami showed no waves above that height. TEPCO had planned to present a tsunami source model that would account for that height at a scientific meeting this autumn. On March 11, the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant was swamped by a tsunami "beyond imagination," in TEPCO's words. It soared to an estimated height of 13 meters along the coast and 11.5 to 15.5 meters on land. The waves damaged pumps at a height of 4 meters, flooded 10-meter-high areas that were supposed to be safe from water, and flooded the reactor building basements that housed emergency power generators and switchboards. The central government's anti-seismic guidelines, revised in 2006, called for preparedness for earthquakes and tsunami that are "very rare but have a chance of taking place." It called on power companies to take into consideration any active fault that had slipped at least once during the past 120,000-130,000 years. The Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion in 2002 estimated that tsunami are generated from beneath the seabed close to the Japan Trench once every 530 years. A research institution had also pointed out the risk, albeit low, of a serious accident caused by a major tsunami from that area. When the Niigata Chuetsu-oki Earthquake damaged TEPCO's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant in 2007, the utility spent 100 billion yen ($1.3 billion) to reinforce the facility against earthquakes. The plant passed NISA's screening based on the revised guidelines, including tsunami preparedness, and was given the green light to resume operations. TEPCO, however, failed to submit to NISA a reassessment of its tsunami preparations at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant based on the new guidelines. In August, NISA's screening experts finally learned about the simulation results through news reports. A NISA official said the simulation results should have been made available for open assessment by experts. TEPCO, however, argued that the results lacked enough scientific backing to justify open discussions. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 11 2011, 01:00 AM Post #599 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Nuclear watchdog releases stress test evaluations on website![]() The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency released information on its instructions to Kansai Electric Power Co. regarding a stress test conducted at the No. 3 reactor at its Oi nuclear plant in Fukui Prefecture. (Asahi Shimbun file photo) To ensure transparency, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) on Nov. 8 began releasing on its website exchanges with utility companies over assessments of how earthquake and tsunami resistant nuclear reactors are. "I gave instructions that the agency and utilities should communicate in written documents, and that those documents should be made public," Yukio Edano, minister of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), which oversees NISA, told a news conference on Nov. 8 after a Cabinet meeting. The website carried NISA's instructions on Nov. 4 to Kansai Electric Power Co., which submitted reports on its own safety evaluation of the No. 3 reactor at the Oi nuclear plant in Fukui Prefecture. NISA called on the utility to make additional assessments that take into account the safety of facilities storing fire-fighting pumps and fuel for power source vehicles at the plant. Nuclear reactors that have been offline for regular maintenance are required to clear before they restart what is called a "stress test," introduced by the government after the accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. The test assesses through computer simulations how much safety cushion a nuclear reactor has against a powerful quake and tsunami at expected levels and beyond. The NISA will also accept questions and requests from the public on the technological aspect of assessments made by utilities. |
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| Audi-Tek | November 12 2011, 06:56 PM Post #600 |
|
Prince
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Report Gives New Details of Chaos at Stricken Plant ![]() The No. 3 nuclear reactor of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant on fire on March 14, three days after the tsunami struck. Fukushima Daiichi Unit 1 was stuck in darkness, and everyone on site feared that the reactor core was damaged. It was the day after a huge earthquake and a towering tsunami devastated the plant, and the workers for Tokyo Electric Power Company knew they were the only hope for halting an unfolding nuclear disaster. Another power company tried to help. It rushed a mobile electrical generator to the site to power the crucial water pumps that cool the reactor. But connecting it required pulling a thick electrical cable across about 650 feet of ground strewn with debris from the tsunami and made more treacherous by open holes left when manhole covers were washed away. The cable, four inches in diameter, weighed approximately one ton, and 40 workers were needed to maneuver it into position. Their urgent efforts were interrupted by aftershocks and alarms about possible new tsunamis. By 3:30 in the afternoon, the workers had managed what many consider a heroic feat: they had hooked up the cable. Six minutes later, a hydrogen explosion ripped through the reactor building, showering the area with radioactive debris and damaging the cable, rendering it useless. Those details about the first hours after the earthquake at the stricken plant are part of a new 98-page chronology of the Fukushima accident. The account, compiled by American nuclear experts, is meant to form a basis for American nuclear operators and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to learn lessons from the disaster. But it also provides a rare, detailed look at workers’ frantic efforts to save the plant, portraying (in measured technical language) scenes worthy of the most gripping disaster movies. The experts who compiled the report work for the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, an Atlanta organization that is an integral part of the American nuclear industry and one that has won praise over the years for its audits, sometimes critical, of plants around the country. The authors could provide a deep level of detail because they were able to interview operators and executives from Tokyo Electric Power Company and had access to many of the company’s documents and data. The chronology does not draw any conclusions about the accident, or analyze the actions taken after the earthquake; it is intended only to provide an agreed-upon set of facts for further study. In that way the document might be more useful for the nuclear industry than for Japanese citizens still hungry for assurances that they are no longer in danger and angry over missteps, documented in the news media, that led to more people being exposed to more radiation than was necessary. One aspect of the disaster that American companies are likely to focus on is Fukushima’s troubles with its venting system, meant to reduce pressure and avert explosions when crucial cooling systems fail. Another focus is likely to be the extreme difficulty workers had in getting emergency equipment to the reactors where they were needed. The report is likely to reinforce the conviction of American companies that operate reactors of the design used at Fukushima that venting from the containment vessels around reactors early in an accident is better than waiting, even though radioactive material will be released. The delays in Japan appear to have contributed to explosions that damaged the vessels and ultimately led to larger releases of contaminants. It has been clear for months that Fukushima operators delayed venting for hours, even after the government ordered that the action be taken. The chronology, however, suggests for the first time that some delays were because plant executives believed that they were required to wait for evacuation of surrounding areas. Because the chronology is based mainly on accounts by Tepco and its workers and company data, it is by nature limited. It does not, for example, relate that there was tension between Tepco and the government over when to vent, as the news media have reported. The report is also likely to incite more debate about how emergency equipment and material are stored and what types of contingency plans need to be made to ensure equipment can reach reactors in a disaster. Nuclear critics in the United States have long complained that American emergency rules do not take into account that a natural phenomenon could cause an accident at a plant and make it hard to get help from outside. For example, although the plant had three fire engines that could have pumped in vital cooling water, one was damaged in the tsunami and another was blocked by earthquake damage to roads. Inspections at some American reactors after the Japanese quake and tsunami found that they were storing emergency gear in a way that made it vulnerable to the emergency it was intended for. The report was perhaps most vivid when it was describing workers’ often unsuccessful efforts to salvage the situation. In one case, plant workers are said to have broken through a security fence to take a fire truck to unit 1 so it could pump water to cool the reactor. (The plant’s cooling system by that time was unusable, and without it, reactors and fuel pools can overheat and cause meltdowns.) But as often happened during the disaster, the workers’ struggles only partly paid off. Increasing heat caused the pressure inside the containment vessel to build. By the time the fire truck started pumping, workers were able to force in less than 10 gallons per minute, not much more than a kitchen faucet puts out. That was far too little to cool the nuclear fuel and reduce pressure. The report also takes note of the human toll the disaster took on workers. It points out that many plant workers had lost their homes and even their families in the tsunami, and that for days after the quake, they were sleeping on the floor at the plant, soaking up radiation doses even in the control room. Because of food shortages, they were provided with only a biscuit for breakfast and a bowl of noodles for dinner. Working in darkness and without electricity, even simple tasks became challenging. At one point, control room operators formed themselves into teams of two, to dash into high-dose areas to try to open a crucial vent. One would hold the flashlight and monitor the radiation dose, while the other would try to get a valve to move. But there was no communication once the team was in the field, so the next team could leave for the reactor only after the first had returned. Eventually, the radiation levels got too high, and they gave up. The first explosion rocked the plant soon after, belching clouds of radioactive materials and giving the world its clearest sense of the scope of the catastrophe unfolding in Japan. Edited by Audi-Tek, November 12 2011, 06:59 PM.
|
| Why is cloud 9 so amazing ? What is wrong with cloud 8 ? | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." Learn More · Sign-up for Free |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Earthquakes/Volcanos · Next Topic » |




![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)






















2:10 AM Jul 11