32 Million Japanese Affected by Fukushima nuclear catastrophe
Fukushima Today, Dissident Voice by Robert Hunziker / December 29th, 2015 32 Million Japanese Affected by Fukushima “……..According to 2015 Fukushima Report released March 11, 2015 by Green Cross/Geneva founded by former Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev, thirty-two million people in Japan are negatively affected by the nuclear disaster.
The Green Cross criteria is based upon direct exposure to radiation as well as people influenced by stress factors due to the disaster, all of whom are at risk of long-term and short-term consequences, including neuropsychological and/or cancer disorders.
According to estimates, 80 percent of the released radiation was deposited in the ocean and the other 20 percent was mostly dispersed within a 50 km radius to the northwest of the power plant in the Fukushima Prefecture. While the expected cancer risks to humans caused by the radiation released over the Pacific Ocean are small, trace amounts of radiation have already reached the North American continent and, in particular, parts of the northern West Coast of the United States. The risk of cancer overall will increase, especially for those individuals who were still children at the time of the accident. Their health will be at risk over their entire lifetime as a result of the radiation released by the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.3
The 2015 Fukushima Report was prepared under the direction of Prof. Jonathan M. Samet, Director of the Institute for Global Health at the University of Southern California (USC), at the initiative of Green Cross Switzerland.
Yet, proponents of nuclear power, including several distinguished climate scientists, promote more nuclear to solve the world’s greenhouse gas problems, claiming nuclear accidents are so rare as to be low risk. But, that logic misses an important point. When nuclear disaster does strike, it lasts a lifetime, affecting millions upon millions. It only takes one disaster like a Chernobyl or a Fukushima to be equivalent to untold thousands of disasters by renewable energy sources like wind and solar.
As for a lifetime of radiation misery, one only need visit one of a couple hundred homes for Chernobyl children hidden in the back woods of Belarus. They all have physical if not mental defects or both. Because of one nuclear accident, 6,000 children are born every year in Ukraine with genetic heart defects; the country experiences a 250% increase in congenital birth deformities; 85% of Belarusian children carry “genetic markers” that could affect health at any time; UNICEF found children’s disease rates off the map, for example, a 63% increase in disorders of the bone, muscle and connective tissue; more than one million children still live in contaminated zones. Belarusian doctors have seen a dramatic increase in cancers, including a 200% increase in breast cancer, a 100% increase in leukemia, and a 2,400% increase in incidence of thyroid cancer. All from only one nuclear disaster!4
Meanwhile, China plans on building 400 nuclear power plants along waterways and coastlines where water is plentiful, thus cooling radioactive power. Imagine the fateful range of possibilities!
Robert Hunziker (MA, economic history, DePaul University) is a freelance writer and environmental journalist whose articles have been translated into foreign languages and appeared in over 50 journals, magazines, and sites worldwide. He can be contacted at:rlhunziker@gmail.com. Read other articles by Robert. http://dissidentvoice.org/2015/12/fukushima-today/
Sloppy health data collection in the history of America’s nuclear workers
Nuclear workers: Projects’ results were worth illnesses, deaths Amarillo.com December 28, 2015 Tribune News Service “…………The death toll for American workers has never been disclosed. The U.S. Department of Labor, which administers the compensation program, makes routine reports on how much it spends and how many people it serves, but never on the number who have died.
At first, department officials told TNS they do not even bother to collect information on the cause of injury or deaths for deceased workers. But later they said they do, on a limited basis, to comply with federal law.
The investigation also found vast differences in the way the federal program is run. As an example, workers at the nuclear facility at Hanford are nearly twice as likely to win money from the government as workers at their sister plant at Savannah River.
The department goes to great lengths to protect its data, taking several months to release it and comply with a request under the Freedom of Information Act. Then the department refused to release the names of companies that have provided medical care for sick workers under the program, formally called the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. The department cited privacy concerns, but TNS is appealing that decision.
An examination of the data reveals the program that began accepting applications in 2001 has far surpassed anything envisioned by its founders.
The explosive growth of the program surprised even its chief architect.
Bill Richardson, the former governor of New Mexico who served as energy secretary under President Bill Clinton, said sloppy record-keeping at the nuclear sites made it difficult to predict the ultimate size of the program.
“See, you don’t know when you enter a program like this what the result is going to be, except you need to be guided by: Is it the right thing to do?” he said in September.
Richardson said the federal government had shown “a lack of conscience” in its decades-long refusal to help workers who had legitimate claims until Congress finally reversed course.
He said getting the program passed became easier after the Washington Post in 1999 first reported that thousands of unsuspecting workers had been exposed to plutonium and other highly radioactive metals for 23 years at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in western Kentucky.
Richardson, who apologized at the time for the government’s denial of any plutonium exposures, said the program’s dramatic growth is a good sign, adding that no one’s getting rich, with individual payments capped at $400,000.
James Melius — the chairman of the federal Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, a presidential panel that examines compensation claims — said it’s hardly a surprise that the program has grown so rapidly.
“The DOE complex is huge,” he said, with “literally hundreds of thousands of workers who are potentially eligible who worked at various times within the complex.”……..
Congress passed the program in 2000 after the Department of Energy submitted studies covering 600,000 people that showed workers at 14 sites had increased risks of dying from cancer and nonmalignant diseases……….http://amarillo.com/news/latest-news/2015-12-28/nuclear-workers-projects-results-were-worth-illnesses-deaths#.VoMfhne5dh0.twitter
“Radiation Sensors in Major U.S. Cities Turned Off By EPA
BEFORE IT’S NEWS, Dec 19 to Dec 26, 2015″ By Bob Nichols”………“Radiation Sensors in Major U.S. Cities Turned Off By EPA”: Billings, Montana on Oct 16, 2015 was reading a Combined Beta and Gamma Rad of 1,227 Beta and 703 Gamma for a Combined reading of 1,930CPM. The Beta Rad unit stopped publicly reporting, then four (4) days later on Oct 20, 2015 at 12:37:25 the unit came to life again. It’s… ahh, personality had changed, though. The new Beta and Gamma reading was 926 Beta and 401 Gamma. The new Combined radiation number on Oct 20 was 1,227 CPM Combined. The Combined reading was 603 CPM less than it was 4 days before. There was no Note or Comment on the missing four days. It was a 4 Day Rad Gap and an unexplained disappearance of 603CPM. The disappearing CPM was comprised of 302 CPM Gamma and 301 CPM Beta. In the next 4 Hours the Combined CPM eroded another 550 CPM for a total CPM Loss of 1,153 CPM. Billings, Montana today is barely in the List of cities above 1000 CPM. Billings is now 23rd on the list and reads 1,101 CPM. The missing Radiation remains “Unaccounted For.” Presumably it [the radiation] did not go to the Moon; therefore, it is on Earth somewhere now. (So, they apparently tried to “rig” the system and failed, so instead turned it all off. Just my hunch… – CP)Iran has complied with its obligations to get rid of enriched uranium – John Kerry
Iran nuclear deal: Tehran on track, says John Kerry http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35191146 28 December 2015
The US says Iran has taken a “significant step” towards meeting its nuclear commitments, by sending a large quantity of uranium abroad. Secretary of State John Kerry spoke after Iran dispatched a shipment of more than 11 tonnes of low-enriched uranium to Russia.
Iran signed a deal in July with six international powers. It is designed to demonstrate that Iran is not on the threshold of being able to make an atomic bomb.
Under the deal, Iran agreed to reduce its holdings of low-enriched uranium; sharply reduce its quantity of centrifuges – used to enrich uranium – and cut its output of plutonium by re-engineering a power plant.
Mr Kerry said Monday’s shipment of low-enriched uranium to Russia had tripled the amount of time it would take to produce enough fuel for a bomb – from two or three months to nine months. “I am pleased to report that we have seen important indications of significant progress towards Iran completing its key nuclear commitments under the deal,” Mr Kerry said.
Under July’s agreement, the International Atomic Energy Agency will decide when Tehran has complied with its obligations.
After this, the US and other world powers will begin to dismantle their programme of economic sanctions against Iran.
Key areas of the nuclear deal:
Uranium enrichment: Iran can operate 5,060 first generation centrifuges, configured to enrich uranium to 3.67%, a level well below that needed to make an atomic weapon. It can also operate up to 1,000 centrifuges at its mountain facility at Fordow – but these cannot be used to enrich uranium.
Plutonium production: Iran has agreed to reconfigure its heavy water reactor at Arak, so that it will only produce a tiny amount of plutonium as a by-product of power generation, and will not build any more heavy water reactors for 15 years.
Inspections: International monitors will be able to carry out a comprehensive programme of inspection of Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Sanctions: All EU and US energy, economic and financial sanctions, and most UN sanctions, will be lifted on the day Iran shows it has complied with the main parts of the deal.
Today’s renewable energy headlines
reNews-27Dec.,2015
UPI.com-28Dec.,2015
Energy Voice-28Dec.,2015
Renewable Energy Trading Launched in GermanyMIT Technology Review-2 hours ago
Renewable Energy’s Secret Weapon
Spain’s Top Stock: A Renewable-Energy Company That Isn’t Abengoa
Renewable energy is crucial
180 MW Of Renewable Energy Projects In Pipeline In Jordan
In-Depth-The Guardian-28Dec.,2015
New Google Data Center To Be 100% Renewable Energy Powered
PennEnergy-23Dec.,2015
Japan’s controversial Takahama nuclear reactor loaded with problematic MOX fuel
The Problems With Takahama, Simply Info, December 29th, 2015
Takahama unit 3 is the most recent nuclear reactor to attempt a restart in Japan. It is also one of the more controversial. The reactor restart had been blocked by the courts for being unsafe until another judge overturned that decision. On December 25th 157 fuel assemblies including 24 MOX assemblies were loaded into the reactor. The power company plans to restart the reactor by the end of January.
The impact of MOX on the meltdown and explosion of unit 3 at Fukushima Daiichi is still not understood yet Japanese authorities allowed this unit to be loaded with this controversial plutonium fuel.
The plan to restart reactors in this area of Fukui prefecture has raised concerns about the ability to evacuate and respond to a nuclear disaster……..http://www.fukuleaks.org/web/?p=15253
All of Iran’s enriched uranium removed with Russian assistance
That’s It: All Enriched Uranium Removed From Iran Under Russian Assistance http://sputniknews.com/politics/20151229/1032438231/iran-uranium-russia.html MOSCOW (Sputnik) – All of the enriched uranium in Iran under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, accepted on July 14 in Vienna on Iran’s nuclear energy program, has been removed under Russia’s assistance, the Russian Foreign Ministry said Tuesday.
“Under Russia’s assistance, all of the enriched uranium falling into the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action has been removed from Iran,” the ministry said in a statement.
On July 14, Iran and the P5+1 group of mediators — Russia, the United States, China, France and the United Kingdom plus Germany — reached an agreement on maintaining a peaceful nature of Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.
On Monday, US Secretary of State John Kerry said that Russia played a vital role in arranging for Tehran’s low-enriched uranium being shipped out of Iran under the P5+1 nuclear deal
Increased risk of cancer for American heart patients due to diagnostic radiation exposure
American patients are ‘exposed to excessive radiation during heart tests – raising the risk of cancer’, Daily Mail, 29 Dec 15
- Scientists revealed US heart patients face higher risk of radiation exposure
- Myocardial perfusion imaging is used to diagnose coronary artery disease
- The imaging technology requires the use of radiation, the study said
- US patients receive a 20% higher radiation dose during these tests
- That’s because US facilities don’t closely follow radiation dosing guidelines
By LISA RYAN FOR DAILYMAIL.COM , 30 December 2015 |…………..Dr Einstein said the results from the studies show that doctors must do more to minimize radiation exposure.
That’s because radiation exposure will still cause cancer in a small – but real – number of patients, according to Dr Rebecca Smith-Bindman of the University of California, San Francisco.
Dr Smith-Bindman wrote, in an accompanying editorial: ‘The right imaging tests performed at the right time can lead to earlier and more accurate diagnoses, better treatment decisions and improved patient outcomes, and advanced imaging has had a very positive impact on patient care.’
Yet, she cautioned that ‘unnecessary and inappropriately performed tests cause patients discomfort and anxiety
They can lead to a large number of irrelevant incidental findings and expose them to ionizing radiation – which can have negative effects on their health – she concluded.
The studies were published in JAMA Internal Medicine. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3377866/American-patients-exposed-excessive-radiation-heart-tests-raising-risk-cancer.html
Did USA’s Dept of Environmental Protection ignore hazardous radiation from gas drilling?
Report revives debate over risks of radiation from drilling waste, State Impact Pennsylvania DECEMBER 28, 2015 BY JON HURDLE Concern over whether oil and gas drilling waste emits radiation at unhealthy levels in Pennsylvania has resurfaced with the publication of a report alleging the Department of Environmental Protection ignored hazardous radioactivity from the industry when it issued its own study on the issue almost a year ago.
The environmental group Delaware Riverkeeper Network said on Dec. 16 that DEP “turned a blind eye” to the dangers of radioactivity from gas wells, landfills, and sites where gas is being used, and accused the department of publishing a “fatally flawed and misleading” report last January on Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactivity (TENORM).
The DRN report, written by Dr. Marvin Resnikoff, a consultant on radioactive waste issues, said DEP failed to act on evidence of radium, a leading cause of lung cancer, leaking from landfills where oil and gas waste is dumped; failed to adequately regulate the transport of brine or wastewater transport, and did not accurately sample the radioactivity of various waste products…….https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2015/12/28/report-revives-debate-over-risks-of-radiation-from-drilling-waste/
Nuclear power not justified economically for South Africa
Who knows if the Indian chiefs are currying favour with the promise of thorium and the mysterious “M” will supply it at the right price? Steenkampskraal will be happy to provide that all-important discount and become Stampskraal. You go, Gupta!
On a more sober note before new year, M provides a handy reference to the ERC’s Energy Journal (26:2 of May 2015), in which the following assumptions are given:
“1: Uranium resources are expected to deplete, being the sole resource for supplying fuel to about 435 nuclear power reactors currently in operation and 71 under construction worldwide, which will bring up the prominence of thorium (WNA, 2014).”
Of course, if uranium resources “deplete”, then the sustainability of nuclear power itself is thrown into question. Uranium, after all, is a finite resource.
“2: The reactor construction duration is assumed to be four years (Koomey & Hultman, 2007).”
This has never been achieved in the history of the industry.
“5. The used UO2 fuel in PWRs is cooled for five years before it is chemically reprocessed to recover useful plutonium and uranium (Rose et al, 2011).”
Fuel reprocessing is hellishly expensive and dirty.
“8. It is assumed the lifetime of the two PWRs currently operating in Koeberg, SA, will be extended from 40 years to 60 years.”
Given the regular breakdowns and mishaps at Koeberg, this seems a little more risky. International, peer-reviewed studies have shown that neutron bombardment leads to the embrittlement of all metals in contact with the pressure vessel and the primary coolant loop, causing the entire reactor to be classifiable as nuclear waste. How is this embrittlement to be averted over the proposed 60-year lifespan and what NNR licensing programme has been introduced to manage this application?
“9. A new Accelerator Driven System (ADS), envisaged to incinerate nuclear waste and to produce electricity, needs a minimum of 40 years to be designed, built and reach commercial maturity (Hesketh & Worall, 2010). It is assumed that the first ADS will operate 45 years from now.”
And pigs can fly.
“10. The annual discharge of recyclable plutonium from a standard PWR is about 250kg (Galperin et al, 1997).”
If Koeberg has two reactors and has been operating for 30 years, this amounts to 2 x30 x 250kg = 15 000 kg of plutonium, with a half-life of 24 400 years. Where is this weapons-grade plutonium being stored?
Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.
As the priestess proclaimed on sighting the Trojan Horse: “I fear the Greeks, especially when they bring gifts.”
There has never been any economic justification for any form of nuclear power production and there never will be. It has always been a cover-up for nuclear weapons production and the sooner we abandon taxpayer and electricity consumer support for nuclear power, the sooner we will see the end of nuclear weapons.
This is the position of the World Council of Churches and every self-respecting believer ought to stand firm in telling truth to power.
l Kantey is a media and development consultant based in Plettenberg Bay
Explosives and uranium dumped at Hampshire tips
Revealed: explosives and uranium dumped at Hampshire tips 29 December 2015 EXPLOSIVES found at tips across the area have led to a warning to people dropping off waste.
It comes as The News can reveal mortars, Second World War shells and explosive caps have been found at tips serving the Portsmouth, Gosport, Havant and Fareham areas. Depleted uranium was even found dumped at Segensworth Household Recycling Centre……..http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/revealed-explosives-and-uranium-dumped-at-hampshire-tips-1-7135224
1 This Month
Website of the Week
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- January 2026 (106)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 