Japan approves nuclear-contaminated water discharge plan, may turn Japanese people into ‘sick men of Asia,’ seafood consumption and export nosedive
By Zhang Hui and Xing Xiaojing Jul 22, 2022 , Japan’s nuclear regulator on Friday approved the discharge plan of Fukushima nuclear-contaminated water, with Chinese observers voicing concerns that the release of the contaminated water into the ocean may start earlier than the previous schedule of next spring and warning that Japan will bear the brunt of damage, with people’s lives under serious threat and seafood consumption and export nosediving.
………………… Although the Foreign Ministry statement said this does not mean that TEPCO can immediately start the discharge of the contaminated water into the sea as there are remaining processes, such as the Japanese regulator’s inspections to check and confirm the installation status of the discharge facilities, Chinese observers believed that Japan may accelerate its scheduled plan, making the release start earlier than April 2023.
Chang Yen-chiang, director of the Yellow Sea and Bohai Sea Research Institute of Dalian Maritime University, who has been closely following the Japanese government’s decision on discharging Fukushima wastewater, told the Global Times on Friday that the administrative process for releasing the contaminated water was done in a really fast manner, as it only took Japan five days from announcing completion of construction for undersea tunnel outlet to approving the plan.
The TEPCO has basically completed the construction of an undersea tunnel outlet to dump the nuclear-contaminated water, the Kyodo News agency reported on Sunday.
Japan’s latest move apparently aroused lots of concern and opposition from neighboring countries.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said at Friday’s media briefing that it is extremely irresponsible for Japan to attempt to create a fait accompli, regardless of various parties’ concerns and China firmly opposes it.
China once again urges Japan to earnestly fulfill its due international obligations, dispose of the nuclear-contaminated water in a scientific, open, transparent and safe manner, and stop pushing through the ocean discharge plan, Wang said.
……………. Meanwhile, Japan’s seafood exports will be greatly hindered, which would hurt the economy and local fishery groups, observers said.
Many countries, including the US and UK, banned imports of food products manufactured in and around Fukushima Prefecture following the 2011 nuclear disaster, and some countries and regions have not lifted the ban even now.
Fishery groups in Japan have repeatedly said they were firmly opposed to the plan due to concerns over a negative impact on the industry. ……………..
China and other stakeholders could through the UN request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice, to prove the release is illegal, Chang said.
Yu also advised countries to conduct maritime environment investigation, which could be evidence in seeking compensation from Japan in cases of biological resources damages and other damage.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1271183.shtml
Extreme heat warnings in effect in 28 states across US
Extreme heat warnings in effect in 28 states across US
100 million Americans are enduring searing temperatures as Biden declines to announce a climate emergency
Calling Putin ‘Hitler’ to Smear Diplomacy as ‘Appeasement’
FAIR, JOSHUA CHO, 21 July 22 ‘‘………………………………. To say Ukraine is “filled” with Nazis is an obvious exaggeration, although even a relatively small number of Nazis has wielded disproportionate influence in the Ukrainian government (Kyiv Post, 3/26/19; Euronews, 8/4/21). Nevertheless, FAIR (3/7/14, 1/15/22, 1/28/22, 2/23/22) has covered the Western media’s denial of the far-right’s role in the Ukrainian 2014 coup, as well as their complicity in amplifying Ukrainian neo-Nazi publicity stunts during the war.
But if it’s true that falsely associating a government with Nazism is a manipulation worthy of condemnation, how then should one judge Western media efforts to tie Russian President Vladimir Putin to Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler?
FAIR (3/30/22) has previously noted how evidence-free caricatures in Western media of Putin as irrational (and perhaps psychotic) make diplomatic efforts to end the Ukraine crisis seem pointless. Tracing a connection between Putin and Hitler is an even more insidious attempt to make the idea of a negotiated end to the war seem like a moral outrage……………………………………………..
Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine is a violation of international law, condemned by 141 out of 193 countries in a UN General Assembly vote. But claims that Russia is committing genocide—a charge that carries automatic repercussions under international law—have to reckon with the comparison between the Ukraine invasion and the largest US military operation of the 21st century, the Iraq War. The UN’s count of civilian deaths in the first four months of Russia’s war was 4,677; the tally in the first four months of Iraq, according to Iraq Body Count, a project that monitored press accounts of civilian casualties, was 8,576.
Both numbers are horrific, and each surely underestimates the true civilian toll of these wars. But if Russia is committing genocide in Ukraine, what was the US doing in Iraq?
“I know it’s hard…to swallow that the carnage and destruction could be much worse than it is,” a US Defense Intelligence Agency analyst told Newsweek (3/22/22). “But that’s what the facts show. This suggests to me, at least, that Putin is not intentionally attacking civilians.”
If one genuinely wants to compare Putin’s brutality to Hitler’s, one has to look at the actual civilian toll of World War II. In the European theater alone, tens of millions of civilians were killed; some 14 million of these deaths were inflicted in the Soviet Union, which comprised both Russia and Ukraine. When you assert that the enemy of the day is as bad as Hitler, you’re also asserting that Hitler is no worse than the enemy of the day……………………………………
Diplomacy = ‘appeasement’
One inevitable feature of these Hitler comparisons is frequent reference to “appeasement” when reporting on the US’s dealings with foreign leaders. This presents any attempt at diplomatic negotiations with foreign leaders opposed by the US as a misguided or unprincipled effort to placate an irrational or evil dictator bent on expansionist conquest. ……………………………….
This is a false dichotomy. Although establishment Western pundits and officials like to claim that the Russian invasion was “unprovoked,” FAIR (1/28/22, 3/4/22) has pointed out that this self-serving narrative omits a record of conscious provocations against Russia via NATO expansion towards Russian borders, in violation of promises made to Soviet reformer Mikhail Gorbachev. …………………
Accusations of “appeasing” Russia or Putin have been raised towards influential Western officials who have either engaged in diplomacy or advocated de-escalation through negotiations. Zelenskyy has made contradictory remarks throughout the conflict, arguing that diplomacy is the only way to end the war, while also advocating for escalation through more NATO military support and setting up a “no-fly-zone.”…………………………………………..
The cost of ‘appeasement’ charges
The hyperbolic comparisons between Russia and Vladimir Putin to Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler, as well as constant accusations that anyone who attempts to negotiate with Russia for a peaceful end to the war is engaged in “appeasement,” have cost the world opportunities to de-escalate. The Biden administration has not encouraged the Ukrainian government to engage in serious negotiations with Russia (Jacobin, 5/30/22)………………..
The extreme caricatures of Putin as equal to or worse than Hitler are setting up Ukraine and the world for a grim fate. A BBC report (6/20/22) last month featured NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg urging the West to “prepare to continue supporting Ukraine in a war lasting for years,” while the head of the British Army, Gen. Patrick Sanders, asserted that the “UK and allies needed to be capable of winning a ground war with Russia.” The frequent Nazi comparisons and Munich references made by Western media paint those who would prefer a negotiated settlement to years of bloodshed, the risk of World War III and nuclear war as “appeasers” of a Hitlerian dictator with genocidal ambitions. https://fair.org/slider/calling-putin-hitler-to-smear-diplomacy-as-appeasement/
Government gives go-ahead to ‘monumental modern folly’ Sizewell-C
Government gives go-ahead to ‘monumental modern folly’ Sizewell-C. The
Nuclear Free Local Authorities were saddened and disappointed, but
unsurprised, to hear yesterday’s announcement that the interim British
Government has decided to grant a Development Consent Order to the Sizewell
C nuclear power station in Suffolk; for Ministers have been signalling for
months that they would give this ‘monumental modern folly’ the
go-ahead.
NFLA 21st July 2022
UN Scientific Committee’s Dialogue Meeting Rocks – “No Change in Conclusion” when Error Pointed Out
2022/07/22
The United Nations Science Commission on Radiation Effects from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident (UNSCEAR), which compiled a report on the effects of radiation exposure from last year to this year, held an interactive meeting in Iwaki City, Fukushima Prefecture, on March 21 to explain the contents of the report to the public. The meeting was held in Iwaki City, Fukushima Prefecture. The former UNSCEAR chair Gillian Haas and others explained that the radiation doses were low and that cancer and other health problems did not occur, but domestic researchers raised questions one after another, saying that the report contained errors and underestimated radiation doses.
From July 19 to 22, UNSCEAR has been conducting “outreach activities” in Japan to disseminate the report. On this day, a meeting for the public was held for the first time, attended by about 30 people, including domestic researchers and media representatives. The meeting began with an hour-long presentation on the report, which cited 500 papers selected from more than 1,000 peer-reviewed articles and other materials published by the end of 2019. He emphasized that the report was scientific and objective, citing 500 papers selected from more than 1,000 peer-reviewed papers published by the end of 2019, and pointed out that the radiation dose from the accident was extremely low. He pointed out that the radiation doses from the accident were extremely low. The report concluded that the large number of pediatric thyroid cancers found in Fukushima Prefecture were not the result of the accident, but rather “the result of ultra-sensitive screening tests.
Dr. Hiyako Sakiyama, a medical doctor and president of the NPO 3.11 Thyroid Cancer Children’s Fund, raised the issue of the radiation dose of radioactive iodine being estimated in half based on the dietary habits of the Japanese people. Looking at the amount of iodine in urine, which is publicized as a result of the secondary thyroid examination conducted by Fukushima Prefecture, she pointed out that “the amount of iodine that Japanese people are consuming from food is the same as the world average. He refuted the report, saying that the exposure in the report was “clearly underestimated.
Shinichi Kurokawa, professor emeritus at the High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), criticized the existence of impossible data in the report. He pointed out that the deposition rate of radioactive cesium, which is used as a model for simulations to estimate absorbed doses in the thyroid gland, is at a “physically impossible” rate. He harshly criticized the report.
He also sharply criticized the previous day’s press conference, in which Kurokawa and his group of researchers had responded that the error was a mere typo and that they had not received any suggestions that would change their conclusions. He expressed his anger, saying, “Why did they say that?”
In addition, a number of people from the audience raised questions about the data used and its contents, including a former fishery cooperative official who complained that the doses of fish he had measured had been revised downward. Haas and others, however, reiterated that while they would verify the areas pointed out, their conclusions would not change.
The term “scientific” means “picked up from published papers.”
In an interview with Synodos, former Japanese representative Mamon Akashi emphasized that the report was scientific. When asked about the fierce criticism that was leveled at him in his dialogue with the public, he responded. The report is based on a review of published papers, with the exception of personal dosimeter data from Minamisoma and Naraha, but most of the data has been reviewed. I only said that I picked up the data from the published papers, and I described it as scientific, not that I arbitrarily excluded any papers or tried to exclude any papers. I didn’t say that I arbitrarily excluded or tried to exclude any papers,” he responded.
He also emphasized that he had no idea about the report’s suggestion that errors had occurred in its own analysis, since it was outside his area of expertise.
NRA approval for Fukushima Daiichi radioactive pollution of the Pacific Ocean – no justification, no scientific basis and illegal – Greenpeace condemns decision
Greenpeace Japan
2022-07-22
Tokyo, Japan – The final approval by Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) of Tokyo Electric Power Company Holding (TEPCO) plans to discharge radioactive waste water into the Pacific Ocean has no justification, is based on incomplete and limited data and flawed analysis and violates international law, according to Greenpeace East Asia.
Shaun Burnie, a senior nuclear specialist from Greenpeace East Asia, said:
“The decision by Japan’s regulator to deliberately pollute the Pacific Ocean with radioactive waste water is as bad as it sounds. The NRA approval of the TEPCO contaminated water discharge plan is scientifically and technically flawed. It is a decision intended to support the false narrative that decommissioning the destroyed reactors at Fukushima Daiichi is making real progress. In reality the contaminated water plan is a symptom of the wider crisis that the current decommissioning plan is doomed. The discharges into the Pacific will not solve any problems but create many more. The NRA knows that a fundamental reassessment of the decommissioning plan is inevitable, and that will also mean choosing the least environmentally damaging option which is long term storage and processing.”
“The NRA has failed to assess many important issues that are fundamental to any environmental assessment. Further, it disregards the human rights of those most impacted by the 2011 disaster – the citizens of Fukushima prefecture, including fishing communities, as well as neighboring prefectures. It ignores the wider environmental marine impact and the rights of the peoples of the Asia Pacific region who are opposed to the deliberate pollution of the Pacific with radioactive waste,” said Burnie.
Japan is legally required under the UN Convention for the Law of the Sea to conduct a comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). No such assessment has been made or is planned either by Japan’s regulator or the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). There are many legal issues that the NRA has just completely failed to consider.
The opposition to radioactive discharges continues to grow, including the efforts by the 18 nations of the Pacific Island Forum (PIF) to challenge the false scientific rationale for the radioactive pollution plans.
Greenpeace analysis on the Fukushima water crisis includes submissions to the NRA, IAEA, as well as two reports on the technical issues and problems with the management of contaminated water at the site and discharge plans.
ENDS
Notes:
See “TEPCO WATER CRISIS”, Greenpeace Germany, January 2019
And, “Stemming the tide 2020: The reality of the Fukushima radioactive water crisis”, Greenpeace East Asia, October 2020
Statement: Protest the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Approval of TEPCO’s Plan for the Oceanic Discharge of Contaminated Water from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
July 22, 2022
International Environmental NGO FoE Japan
Today, the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) approved an application for modification of the implementation plan for the installation of an offshore discharge facility for treated contaminated water from the TEPCO-Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. We believe that the following points should be taken into consideration: 1) radioactive materials should be centrally controlled and should not be released into the environment, 2) effective alternatives such as mortar solidification have been proposed, 3) there are strong objections from fishermen and citizens, and 4) there are many problems in the consensus building process as no public hearing or explanation meetings have been held since the decision on the ocean discharge policy. The company has long opposed the discharge of treated contaminated water into the ocean for a number of reasons.
The approval is problematic mainly in the following respects. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is not fulfilling its role as a regulatory agency.
1. It is unclear what and how much will be released
Currently, approximately 1.26 million m3 (as of March 2022) of treated contaminated water is stored in tanks. In addition to tritium, strontium-90 and iodine-129 remain in this water, and nearly 70% of this water exceeds the sum of the notified concentration ratio of 1 (exceeding the standard). The total amount of these radioactive materials is not indicated. TEPCO has measured 64 radioactive materials (62 nuclides targeted for ALPS removal, tritium, and carbon-14) only for three tank groups, but not for many other tank groups at this stage. TEPCO has stated that the water exceeding the standards will be treated sequentially and measured before being discharged. However, the total amount will not be known until the discharge is completed, which is expected to take more than 30 years.
Also, tritium has been shown to be present in the tanks at 780 trillion becquerels (as of May 2021), but there is still a large amount of tritium in the debris and in the buildings. The total amount of tritium released is unknown because the amount of contaminated water will continue to increase as long as the inflow of groundwater is not stopped.
The review was conducted without providing crucial data on what and how much will be discharged.
2. Verification of radioactive materials other than the 64 nuclides and selection of nuclides to be measured before release were postponed.
TEPCO had identified 64 nuclides (62 nuclides to be removed from the ALPS, tritium, and carbon-14) as those to be monitored, but the Nuclear Regulation Authority had requested an explanation of the basis for the absence of residuals of other nuclides. In the end, however, TEPCO’s explanation remained the same and no new verification was conducted. TEPCO has explained that it will verify this point in the future and, based on this verification, will also indicate the radioactive materials to be measured prior to the release. In other words, the Regulatory Commission has approved the plan before TEPCO has even begun to specify the “verification” that it will conduct and the radioactive materials that will be measured prior to the release of radioactive materials.
The measurements of radionuclides and their concentrations in the three tank groups that TEPCO now indicates as source terms in its radiation impact assessment were not measured after the tanks were agitated. In other words, it should be noted that there is a possibility that they may have failed to capture materials that have settled at the bottom of the tanks.
3. No indication that ocean discharge is “for risk reduction and optimization”
As a result of the review, the Regulatory Commission stated that “future risk reduction and optimization of the specific nuclear facilities as a whole are being pursued.
However, risk reduction and optimization should not be achieved only within the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant site, but should be evaluated including the marine environment.
In addition, other alternatives must be considered in order to demonstrate that “ocean discharge is the way to reduce and optimize the overall risk.
TEPCO has not adequately considered the storage in large, robust tanks and the mortar solidification disposal proposal proposed by the Citizens Commission on Atomic Energy and other groups.
Although TEPCO cites the risk of leakage in the large tank proposal, large tanks have a long track record in oil storage, and sufficient countermeasures have already been established technically, including the installation of dikes to prevent leakage. Rather, the current storage in tanks is vulnerable, and the risk of leakage is high considering the planned offshore release period of more than 30 years. Regarding the mortar solidification disposal proposal, the proposer points out that water evaporates due to the heat of hydration, which can also be addressed.
It is inappropriate to conduct a review based solely on TEPCO’s views without obtaining the opinions of the proponents of these alternative proposals.
4. Priority should be given to drastic water sealing measures
The major source of contaminated water is the inflow of groundwater into the buildings. The frozen soil wall, which was constructed at great expense, has not been able to sufficiently stop the inflow of groundwater and is only a temporary facility. It has also been pointed out that it has not reached the bottom of the geological stratum, which allows water to pass through easily. Geological experts have proposed the construction of a wide-area impervious wall using existing technology, and TEPCO and the government should seriously consider these proposals and give priority to drastic measures to stop the inflow of water.
https://foejapan.org/issue/20220722/8675/?fbclid=IwAR2czi0QX4uA89blKdKWxdQgSJqHQEDNQsRniPBazKVunyR_ECEiEKigzng
TEPCO Approves Plan to Discharge Treated Water into Ocean, Focuses on Local Consent to Begin Construction
July 22, 2022
The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) held an extraordinary meeting on July 22 and approved a plan for the offshore discharge of treated water from TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (Okuma and Futaba, Fukushima Prefecture), finding no safety issues. TEPCO plans to begin full-scale construction of the discharge facilities after obtaining the consent of local authorities. TEPCO aims to begin discharging the water in the spring of next year.
TEPCO applied for the review in December 2021. According to the plan, the concentration of tritium, a radioactive substance, in the treated water will be diluted with a large amount of seawater so that it is less than 1/40th of the national standard, and discharged about 1 km offshore through a newly constructed undersea tunnel.
There is strong opposition to the discharge of treated water into the ocean, mainly from the fishing industry, which is concerned about harmful rumors.
https://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/191227?rct=national&fbclid=IwAR0s4gKwWiMVmlLjToo0VuL0vGPtINMOVFCmrO8hYvCHwUpQc6lQly8kgQc
TEPCO ex-chairman and others ordered to pay over $95 billion in compensation, shareholders request seizure of property
July 22, 2022
Following the ruling on the 13th of this month ordering TEPCO to compensate its former chairman and four others with over 13.3 trillion yen, shareholders have asked TEPCO to promptly seize the assets of the former chairman and others. TEPCO was ordered by the court to compensate the former chairman and four others with over 13.3 trillion yen.
TEPCO shareholders demanded that the former management of TEPCO compensate the company for 22 trillion yen, claiming that the company suffered massive damages due to the nuclear power plant accident, including decommissioning work and compensation for evacuees. In response, the shareholders’ lawyers filed a lawsuit against the company, claiming compensation of 22 trillion yen.
In response to this decision, lawyers for the shareholders held a press conference on March 22 and announced that they had requested TEPCO to take steps for “provisional execution” to seize the assets of the former chairman and others.
The court decision allows for provisional execution, which means that if the procedure is followed, it is possible to seize the deposits and real estate of the former chairman and others without waiting for the court decision to become final and binding in order to promptly compensate them for their losses.
Lawyer Hiroyuki Kawai said, “The fact that the court declared provisional execution on the judgment shows the court’s anger and sense of justice. If TEPCO is truly remorseful, it should not be defending the former management team, but should be executing the provisional execution,” he said.
TEPCO “will consider the matter and take appropriate action as a company”
TEPCO commented, “We will consider the contents of the written request and take appropriate action as a company.
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20220722/k10013730811000.html?fbclid=IwAR19wE7q5OOEfZWwMGi-aulOevpWAcTBw4dbB9P2-TpsVuwdFA3nakWswqU
Official approval for ocean discharge of “treated water” from Fukushima nuclear power plant…Undersea tunnel construction to begin next spring
On March 22, the Nuclear Regulatory Authority officially approved TEPCO’s plan to discharge “treated water” from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the sea, on the grounds that there are no safety concerns. Once prior approval from Fukushima Prefecture and the cities of Okuma and Futaba is obtained, TEPCO will begin construction of the facilities for the sea discharge. The government and TEPCO aim to start the discharge next spring.
July 22, 2022
On July 22, the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) officially approved TEPCO’s plan to discharge the ever-increasing amount of “treated water” from TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the sea, saying there are no safety issues. TEPCO will now begin full-scale construction of facilities to discharge the water into the ocean after obtaining prior approval from Fukushima Prefecture and the towns of Okuma and Futaba in Fukushima Prefecture, where the plant is located. The government and TEPCO aim to begin the discharge next spring.
According to TEPCO’s plan, an undersea tunnel will be constructed from the plant to about 1 km/meters offshore, and treated water will be discharged from the top of the tunnel. The water will be diluted with seawater before discharge, and the concentration of radioactive tritium (triple hydrogen) will be reduced to less than 1/40th of the national discharge standard and 1/7th of the World Health Organization (WHO) standard for drinking water. The concentration of tritium in the water will be reduced to less than 1/40th of the national discharge standard and 1/7th of the World Health Organization’s drinking water standard.
The time required for the construction of the undersea tunnel and other work was initially estimated to be about 10.5 months, but will be shortened to about 8.5 months so that the discharge can begin next spring.
The treated water is produced by the ALPS (ALPS is a system for removing contaminated water after cooling nuclear fuel that has melted and hardened as a result of the 2011 meltdown accident). The amount of treated water continues to increase, and is currently about half of the total amount of radioactive materials in the plant. The amount of water has been increasing, and currently about 1.31 million tons are stored in more than 1,000 tanks on the plant’s grounds. The capacity of the tanks is expected to be reached by the end of next summer or fall. The tanks are expected to be full by next summer or fall.
Since continued storage would hinder decommissioning work, the government decided in April last year to begin discharging the waste into the ocean in the spring of 2011. It is expected to take several decades to complete the discharge.
The government and TEPCO need to provide more careful information.
The offshore discharge of “treated water” from TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi NPP is an unavoidable step to reduce the number of tanks on the plant site as much as possible and to facilitate the decommissioning of the plant. If decommissioning does not proceed steadily, it will hinder the reconstruction of Fukushima.
The treated water is water that has been purified from the contaminated water at the plant and most of the radioactive materials have been removed. Although tritium is technically difficult to remove, it has been scientifically confirmed that tritium has no effect on humans or the environment if it is diluted and its concentration is reduced. Tritium is also generated in the normal operation of nuclear power plants, and its release to the sea is permitted in Japan and other countries.
In April this year, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which includes experts from China and South Korea who oppose the release of treated water, released a report on the safety of TEPCO’s plans and purification facilities after studying them. The report found no problems with safety.
Nevertheless, concerns about harmful rumors persist, and local fishermen are opposed to the ocean discharge. In May of this year, after the Regulatory Commission approved a draft review report summarizing the results of its examination, it solicited opinions from the general public. As a result, 1,233 opinions were received, many of them from people who questioned the safety of the plant. The government and TEPCO need to further disseminate information carefully and seek the understanding of the public as a whole. (Makio Hattori, Science Department)
https://www.yomiuri.co.jp/science/20220722-OYT1T50110/?fbclid=IwAR1vstNjc7PCvVofMs-9yAA5GBKitGS0BkJPJw1-x62lwBfAt-0ghm-Ly6A
Exposure to radiation from nuclear power plant accident, UN Scientific Committee concludes that “possibility of health hazard is low”….but Fukushima venue voices doubts
July 22, 2022
On July 21, the United Nations Scientific Committee on Radiation Effects (UNSCEAR), which compiled a report on the health effects of radiation exposure following the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, held an exchange of opinions with researchers in Iwaki City, Fukushima Prefecture. Gillian Haas, former chairperson of UNSCEAR, explained that “overall radiation doses are low and the possibility of an increase in cancer and other health problems is low. The researchers questioned the report, saying that it underestimated the radiation exposure.
The report was published in March of last year, summarizing the results of peer-reviewed papers published from the time of the accident to the end of 2019. Dr. Mikhail Baranov, the author of the report, commented on the large number of pediatric thyroid cancers confirmed in Fukushima Prefecture, saying, “I think the results of the ultra-sensitive screening tests have had an impact.
Many questions were raised from the audience. Dr. Hiyako Sakiyama, Ph.D., representative director of the “3.11 Thyroid Cancer Children’s Fund,” pointed out the problem of estimating the exposure to radioactive iodine released by the accident to be half the world average, based on a paper published more than 50 years ago, which stated that Japanese people eat a lot of marine products. As the Fukushima Prefectural People’s Health Survey shows, the amount of iodine ingested by Japanese people is the same as the world average,” she said. This is a clear underestimation of exposure.
Shinichi Kurokawa, a physicist emeritus professor at the High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), said, “In addition to several incorrect graphs and data, the report also gives physically impossible figures and underestimates the radiation doses by misquoting papers. It is far from a scientific report,” he criticized. Kurokawa and his group of researchers also demanded that the report be independently verified and that its conclusions be retracted.
The committee will consider modifying or correcting the points raised, but Haas said of the report, “The conclusions are solid and will not change significantly in the future.
The three members of the committee met with the governor of Fukushima Prefecture on March 20. Immediately thereafter, Chiba Chikako, 74, of the Ajisai no Kai, which supports pediatric thyroid cancer patients and others, directly asked Borislava Metcalfe, Executive Director, to reconsider the report, saying, “The conclusions of the report may promote discrimination and prejudice against patients and their families.
A woman who accompanied Ms. Chiba, a junior high school student at the time of the accident who developed thyroid cancer, said, “I am distressed that the report concludes that there is no causal relationship between radiation exposure and cancer in the absence of sufficient data on initial exposure doses. I hope that a proper investigation will be conducted. (Natsuko Katayama)
https://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/191115?fbclid=IwAR16GvbZd5dYfA4sfOm3ED7X1-YJiOn-MLdbTAN4l_E_N6gAKyWF5s9SWsw
Japan Still Facing Challenges in Reconstructing Fukushim
Reconstruction without full decontamination is nothing else but a pipe dream, mostly made out of PR and propaganda…
July 19, 2022
Tokyo, July 19 (Jiji Press)–Reconstruction of areas in Fukushima Prefecture hit by the March 2011 nuclear accident has shown progress, but a number of challenges have yet to be overcome, including construction of essential facilities for everyday life and creation of jobs to bring back residents who evacuated to other prefectures.
The decommissioning of the meltdown-hit Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant of Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. should also be pushed forward.
With evacuation orders in afflicted areas having been lifted in stages, the number of evacuees outside the northeastern prefecture has now fallen to some 30,000 from the peak level of over 160,000.
Most recently, it has been decided to remove Aug. 30 the evacuation order for the so-called specified reconstruction zone in the town of Futaba, which co-hosts the Fukushima No. 1 plant, crippled by the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami, and is the only remaining completely evacuated municipality.
After the central and Futaba town governments reached the agreement to lift the order for the area around Futaba Station on the JR Joban Line, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno visited nuclear accident-hit areas for two days through Saturday.
No direct health effects seen from Fukushima nuclear crisis, ex-U.N. panel chair says
The U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation is everything but independent, and its report written mostly by Mikhail Balonov is full of baloney!
July 20, 2022
The former chair of a U.N. panel on the effects of atomic radiation has reiterated the committee’s view that radiation exposure from the 2011 nuclear accident in Fukushima Prefecture had no direct adverse health effects on local people.
“The accident led to no adverse documented public health effects that were directly attributable to radiation exposure from the accident,” Gillian Hirth told a news conference at the Japan National Press Club in Tokyo on Tuesday.
Noting that the investigation by the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation is independent and based on up-to-date data, Hirth said the conclusion is “unlikely to change significantly in the foreseeable future.”
Hirth observed that “future cancer rates that could be inferred from radiation exposure (from the Fukushima accident) are unlikely to be discernible.”
The nuclear accident, triggered by the powerful earthquake and tsunami in March 2011, happened at Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings’ Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
Regarding an increase in new thyroid cancer cases among local children, Hirth said that the rise “was judged to be the result of extensive ultrasensitive screening.”
The news conference was also attended by Mikhail Balonov, the main author of a report released by the panel in March last year.
Regarding the view that the report does not include enough data taken just after the accident, Balonov said that the impact of radiation on health is not something that occurs immediately.
While no adverse health effects have been observed until now, monitoring should continue, Balonov said.
Visits by officials related to the U.N. committee, including Hirth and Balonov, had been postponed due to the coronavirus pandemic.
They are set to attend a public meeting in the city of Iwaki, Fukushima Prefecture, on Thursday.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/07/20/national/un-fukushima-health-effects/
Regulatory Commission to Approve Plan for Ocean Discharge of Treated Water on 22nd, TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
July 20, 2022
The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) announced on July 20 that it will discuss at an extraordinary meeting on July 22 a draft review report on TEPCO’s plan to discharge contaminated water from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant after purification and treatment, stating that the plan has no safety problems and meets the requirements of government policy. Based on the results of a public comment period, the committee is expected to decide on the review report and approve the plan.
According to the Regulatory Commission, it received approximately 1,200 comments from the public during the period from May 19 to June 17. The Regulatory Commission will also present its views on the opinions at the meeting.
According to the plan, the treated water, which is mainly tritium, will be diluted with a large amount of seawater to less than 1/40th of the national discharge standard, and then discharged through a newly constructed undersea tunnel about 1 km offshore. More than 1.3 million tons of the treated water is stored in tanks on the plant’s premises, and TEPCO plans to finish releasing it over a period of about 30 years starting next spring.
TEPCO is preparing for the construction of the tunnel by installing a shield machine to excavate the tunnel on a site near the seawall of the plant. Tunnel excavation can only begin after receiving approval from the Regulatory Commission and obtaining the consent of Fukushima Prefecture and the two towns of Okuma and Futaba, where the plant is located.
Fishermen and fishermen are strongly opposed to the release of treated water. (Shinichi Ogawa and Kenta Onozawa)
Processed water at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Contaminated water generated when cooling water injected into the reactors of Units 1-3 came into contact with nuclear fuel debris that melted down in the accident and mixed with groundwater and rainwater that flowed into the buildings, and was purified by a multinuclide removal system (ALPS). Tritium, a radioactive substance that cannot be removed, remains in concentrations exceeding the national discharge standard. In April 2021, the government decided to discharge the treated water into the ocean by the spring of 2023. TEPCO is proceeding with a plan to use a large amount of seawater to dilute the tritium concentration to less than 1/40th of the discharge standard and discharge the water into the sea.
https://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/190829?fbclid=IwAR39Bvgz0pCGmfeTUIeMKiljEVAZgDWOVGRMwAnP2O_mbbKL9LlaUbwt40w
Nuclear reactor in Takahama to go back online on July 26
July 20, 2022
Kansai Electric Power Co. will resume generating and transmitting electricity at the No. 3 reactor at the Takahama nuclear power plant on July 26, the company announced on July 19.
The company had said the timing of resuming operations was undecided after a regular inspection that started in March discovered damage to heating tubes at the nuclear reactor in Takahama, Fukui Prefecture.
However, the company has decided it has done enough fact-finding and put in place enough countermeasures so that it can resume operations.
Of the company’s nuclear reactors, the No. 3 and No. 4 reactors at the Oi plant in Oi, Fukui Prefecture, are currently in operation.
The company plans to bring a total of five nuclear reactors online by the end of this year.
They will include the No. 3 reactor at the Mihama plant in Mihama, Fukui Prefecture, which started operations more than 40 years ago, as well as the No. 4 reactor at the Takahama plant, which is currently undergoing a regular inspection.
The government plans to have up to nine reactors operating this winter to prepare for expected severe energy shortages, including those of Kyushu Electric Power Co. and Shikoku Electric Power Co., Prime Minister Fumio Kishida announced at a news conference on July 14.
1 This Month
23 April – WEBINAR – Why new nuclear reactors are the wrong tools for decarbonization Thursday, April 23 • 1 AM – 2 AM AEST
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (275)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 