The Spread of Radiation Internal Contamination thru Fresh Produce in Japan.
[Photo] Green: vegetables, Brown: mushrooms, Navy blue: seafood.
FROM THE ARCHIVES – June 15, 2016
Here is the map of Japan, which indicates the spread of radiation contamination studied with fresh produce.
Everyone should be careful and aware that radiation contaminated food is being distributed anywhere in Japan, not only in Fukushima Prefecture.
To know the exact measure, becquerels level in each food to be consumed is becoming vital so as to not be harmed internally, knowing that radiation exposure internally is much more harmful than external exposure : at least 100 times more harmful.
Professional insight is there important. In Japan today professional insight is only presently given by White Food company, whose main concern is now to sell food that is not radioactive contaminated. (If only once proven wrong White Food would lose its credibility, which is the foundation of their company.)
Why is this happening ◾️? Because radioactive contamination in distributed foods is harder to be known, to be detected than the geographical distribution of hotspots in Japan which can be easily detected and are now well listed.
As an example, although it is not well known, the best shiitake mushrooms are mostly produced in Fukushima prefecture, and from there distributed all over Japan, some even exported abroad.
Map of mushrooms only. Type details.
Recently, information about contaminated foods is become more available, than just after the accident. Nevertheless radioactive contamination is ongoing and well present in food everywhere as it shows on the map above.
Data Sources:
Radioactivity inspection map per category & destination list links
Seafood: http://news.whitefood.co.jp/tag/map_fish/
Meat: http://news.whitefood.co.jp/tag/map_meat/
Mushroom: http://news.whitefood.co.jp/tag/map_mush/
Beans: http://news.whitefood.co.jp/tag/map_bean/
Fruit: http://news.whitefood.co.jp/tag/map_fruit/
Vegetables: http://news.whitefood.co.jp/tag/map_vegi/
Rice, grain: http://news.whitefood.co.jp/tag/map_rice/
Water, tea: http://news.whitefood.co.jp/tag/map_drink/
Radioactivity inspection map of food (2015) information source
Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare
2014 monthly test results
http://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/kinkyu/0000045281.html
http://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/kinkyu/0000084439.html
Article Sources:
http://saigaijyouhou.com/blog-entry-10727.html
http://sharetube.jp/article/2958/
https://news.whitefood.co.jp/news/foodmap/
Special credits to Kitagawa Takashi for the informations
Translated by D’un Renard from Japanese.
Fukushima, the Hidden Side of the Story
“The Fukushima Disaster, The Hidden Side of the Story,” is a just-released film documentary, a powerful, moving, information-full film that is superbly made. Directed and edited by Philippe Carillo, it is among the strongest ever made on the deadly dangers of nuclear technology.
It begins with the words in 1961 of U.S. President John F. Kennedy: “Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by an accident, or miscalculation or by madness.”
It then goes to the March 2011 disaster at the Fukushima Daichi nuclear power plants in Japan after they were struck by a tsunami. Their back-up diesel generators were kicked in but “did not run for long,” notes the documentary. That led to three of the six plants exploding—and there’s video of this—“releasing an unpreceded amount of nuclear radiation into the air.”
“Fukushima is the world’s largest ever industrial catastrophe,” says Professor John Keane of the University of Sydney in Australia. He says there was no emergency plan and, as to the owner of Fukushima, Tokyo Electric Power Company, with the accident its CEO “for five nights and days…locked himself inside his office.”
Meanwhile, from TEPCO, there was “only good news” with two Japanese government agencies also “involved in the cover-up”—the Nuclear Industry Safety Agency and Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.
“Japanese media was ordered to censor information. The Japanese government failed to protect its people,” the documentary relates.
Yumi Kikuchi of Fukushima, since a leader of the Fukushima Kids Project, recalls: “On TV, they said that ‘it’s under control’ and they kept saying that for two months. The nuclear power plant had already melted and even exploded but they never admitted the meltdown until May. So, people in Fukushima during that time were severely exposed to radiation.”
Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear engineer and now a principal of Fairewinds Energy Education in Burlington, Vermont, speaks of being told by Naoto Kan, the prime minister of Japan at the time of the accident, that “our existence as a sovereign nation was at stake because of the disaster at Fukushima Daichi.”
Kan then appears in documentary and speaks of “manmade” links to the disaster.
The documentary tells how Kan, following the accident, became “an advocate against nuclear power….ordered all nuclear power plants in Japan to shut down for safety” and for the nation “to move into renewable energy.”
But, subsequently, “a nuclear advocate,” Shinzo Abe, became Japan’s prime minister.
Yoichi Shimatsu, a former Japan Times journalist, appears in the film and speaks of “the cruelty, the cynicism of this government.” He speaks of how in the accident’s aftermath, “nearly every member of Parliament and leaders of the major political parties” along with corporate executives, “moved their relatives out of Japan”
He says “Shanghai is the largest Japanese community outside Japan now…while these same people” had been “telling the people of Fukushima go home, 10 kilometers from Fukushima, go home it’s safe, while their families are overseas in Los Angeles, in Paris, in London and in Shanghai.”
“If it’s safe, why they left?” asks Kikuchi. “They tell us it’s safe to live in Fukushima, and to eat Fukushima food to support Fukushima people. There’s a campaign by Japanese government…and people believe it.”
Gundersen says: “At Fukushima Daichi, the world is already seeing deaths from cancer related to the disaster…There’ll be many more over time.” He adds that there’s been a “huge increase in thyroid cancer in the surrounding population.”
“Unfortunately,” he goes on, “the Japanese government is not telling us al the evidence. There’s a lot of pressure on the scientists and the medical community to distort the evidence so there’s no blowback against nuclear power.”
There is a section in the documentary on the impacts of radioactivity which includes Dr. Helen Caldicott, former president of Physician for Social Responsibility, discussing the impacts of radiation on the body and how it causes cancer. She states: “There is no safe level of radiation. I repeat, there is no safe level of radiation. Each dose of radiation is cumulative and adds to your risk of getting cancer and that’s absolutely documented in the medical literature.”
“The nuclear industry says, well,” Dr. Caldicott, continues, “there are ‘safe doses’ of radiation and even says a little bit of radiation is good for you and that is called the theory of hormesis. They lie and they lie and they lie.”
Maggie Gundersen, who was a reporter and then a public relations representative for the nuclear industry and, like her husband Arnie became an opponent of nuclear power, speaks of how nuclear power derives from the World War II Manhattan Project program to develop atomic weapons and post-war so-called “Atoms for Peace” push.
Gundersen says in becoming a nuclear industry spokesperson, “the things I was taught weren’t true.” The notion, for example, that what is called a containment at a nuclear plant is untrue because radioactivity “escapes every day as a nuclear power plant operates” and in a “calamity” is released massively.
As to economics, she cited the claim decades ago that nuclear power would be “too cheap to meter.” The president of Fairewinds Energy Education, she says: “Atomic power is now the most expensive power there is on the planet. It is not feasible. It never has been.” Regarding the radioactive waste produced by nuclear power, she says “there is literally no technology to do that…It does not exist.”
As to international oversight, the documentary presents the final version of a “Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation” issued in 2014 which finds that the radiation doses from Fukushima “to the general public during the first year and estimated for their lifetimes are generally low or very low….The most important effect is on mental and social well-being.”
Shimatsu says it is not only in Japan but on an international level that the consequences of radioactive exposure have been completely minimized or denied. “We are all seeing a global political agreement centered in the UN organizations, tie IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], the World Health Organization…All the international agencies are whitewashing what is happening in Fukushima. We take dosimeters and Geiger counters in there, we see a much different story,” he says.
In Germany, says Maggie Gunderson, “the politicians chose” to do a study to “substantiate” that no health impacts “happened around nuclear power plants….But what they found was the radiation releases cause significant numbers of childhood leukemia.” A summary of that 2008 study comes on the screen. The U.S. followed up on that research, she says, but recently “the [U.S.] Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it was not going to do that study,” that “it doesn’t have enough funding; it had to shut it down.” She said the real reason was that it was producing “data they don’t want to make public.”
Beyond the airborne releases of radiation after the Fukushima accident, now, says the documentary, there is the growing threat of radioactivity through water that has and still is leaking from the plants as well as more than a million tons of radioactive water stored in a thousand tanks built at the plant site. After the accident, TEPCO released 300,000 tons of radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean. Now there is no land for more tanks, so the Japanese government, the documentary relates, has decided that starting this year to dump massive amounts of radioactive water over a 30-year period into the Pacific.
Arnie Gundersen speaks of the cliché that “the solution to pollution is dilution,” but with the radiation from Fukushima being sent into the Pacific, there will be “bio-accumulation”—with vegetation absorbing radiation, little fish eating that vegetation and intensifying it and bigger fish eating the smaller fish and further bio-accumulating the radioactivity. Already, tuna off California have been found with radiation traced to Fukushima. With this planned further, and yet greater dispersal, thousands of people “in the Pacific basin will die from radiation,” he says.
Andrew Napuat, a member of the Parliament of the nation of Vanuatu, an 83 island archipelago in the Pacific, says in the documentary: “We have the right to say no to the Japan solution. We can’t let them jeopardize our sustenance and livelihood.” Vanuatu along with 13 other countries has signed and ratified the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty.
As the documentary nears its end, Arnie Gundersen says that considering the meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania in 1979, the meltdown at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in Ukraine in 1986, and now the three Fukushima meltdowns in 2011, there has been “a meltdown every seven years roughly.” He says: “Essentially, once every decade the world needs to know that there might be an atomic meltdown somewhere.” And, he adds, the “nuclear industry is saying they want would like to build as many as 5,000 new nuclear power plants.” (There are 440 in the world today.)
Meanwhile, he says, “renewable power is no longer alternative power. It’s on our doorstep. It’s here now and it works and it’s cheaper than nuclear.” The cost of producing energy from wind, he says, is three cents a kilowatt hour, for solar five cents, and for new nuclear power plants 15 cents. Nuclear “makes no nuclear economic sense.”
Maggie Gundersen says, with tears in her eyes: “I’m a woman and I feel it’s inherent for us as women to protect our children our grandchildren, and it’s our job now to raise our voices and have this madness stop.”
Philippe Carillo, from France, who worked for 14 years in Hollywood and who since 2017 has lived in Vanuatu, has worked on several major TV documentary projects for the BBC, 20th Century Fox and French National TV as well as doing independent productions. He says he made “The Fukushima Disaster, The Hidden Side of the Story” to “expose the nuclear industry and its lies.” His previous award-winning documentary, “Inside the Garbage of the World,” has made changes regarding the use of plastic.
“The Fukushima Disaster, The Hidden Side of the Story” can be viewed at Amazon, Apple TV, iTunes, Google Play and Vimeo on demand. Links are: iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/movie/the-fukushima-disaster/id1672643918?ls=1 Apple TV: https://tv.apple.com/us/movie/the-fukushima-disaster/umc.cmc.3rfome5kj2hfpo2q9fwx5u0y0 Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/placeholder_title/dp/B0B8TLPZ9K/ref=sr_1_1Amazon USA: https://www.amazon.com/Fukushima-Disaster-Yoichi-Shimatsu/dp/B0B8TLSRN4/ref=sr_1_1 Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/movies/details?id=vehqb5ex-L8.P&sticky_source_country=US&gl=US&hl=en&pli=1 Video on demand: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/thefukushimadisaster
Also, extra footage and interviews not in the film are at www.exposurefilmstrust.com
Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, and is the author of the book, The Wrong Stuff: The Space’s Program’s Nuclear Threat to Our Planet, and the Beyond Nuclear handbook, The U.S. Space Force and the dangers of nuclear power and nuclear war in space. Grossman is an associate of the media watch group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR). He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion.
Nuclear Contaminated Water Dumping: IAEA Concludes ‘Absolute Safety of Nuclear Contaminated Water’ with Japanese Government Money?
Foreign Ministry official reveals in alleged transcripts of conversations
“More than 1 million euros handed over to IAEA officials, director general, etc.”
“IAEA report conclusion of nuclear contaminated water was ‘absolutely safe’ from the beginning”
Adopting an investigation method that detects only easy-to-detect elements129 etc.
South Korea’s Kim Hong-seok and others “IAEA experts are just decorations”
A memo from a senior official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ 1
A document has surfaced in Japan that raises suspicions that the Japanese government is paying IAEA officials large sums of money to work with each other and “collude” in the dumping of Fukushima nuclear contaminated water into the ocean.
‘Foreign Ministry Executive A Memo’, 1 million euros to IAEA
According to the document, which was obtained by citizen journalist Mindle on Nov. 21, the final report of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) safety inspection, which is expected to be released later this month, has already concluded that the plant is “absolutely safe,” as demanded by Japan. To this end, the Japanese government has paid more than 1 million euros in “political contributions” to IAEA officials, so there is “no need to worry” about opposition from South Korea and China to the dumping of contaminated water into the ocean, which will begin as early as mid to late July, according to “Foreign Ministry official A” in the document.
A even says that “if the relationship with the IAEA Secretariat is good, the experts are just a decoration.” Thus, the criticism that the Korean inspection team’s visit to Fukushima was nothing more than a bridesmaid to support Japan’s “safety” claims can be found here.
Like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s “Handling Caution” report, which was obtained and reported by the citizen media Dandelion on the 8th of this month (“Fukushima Contaminated Water Already Declared “Harmless” During Korean Inspection Team’s Visit?”), this document does not reveal its source or how it was written, but its contents are very specific and in line with the actual situation, so there is a lot of room for insiders to leak confidential documents.
‘Memo A from a Foreign Ministry official’ 2
‘Recovered from the meeting table’ external secret (社外秘)
The three-page document exposed this time is titled “Memo of Foreign Ministry Executive A,” and is written in the form of a conversation with a foreign ministry executive named A (hereinafter referred to as A) in which the “person in charge” Asakawa asks questions and A answers. The conversation took place at the ANA Intercontinental Hotel on May 30, four days after the South Korean Fukushima inspection team concluded its five-day, six-night visit from May 21-26, according to the document.
Just as the document reported on May 8, which summarized a conversation between Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Company President Akira Ono and a Nuclear Regulatory Commission official, was marked with a red confidential document classification of “handling with caution,” this document is also marked with a red lettering of “seat recall,” and the words “private secret” in pale large letters are stamped at an angle throughout the document.
The IAEA’s methodology and conclusions were dictated by Japan
In the document, A states that the contaminated water filtered by the ALPS, which the Japanese government and TEPCO claim is “treated water,” is “safe” because the methodology and conclusions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which will make the final determination, are in accordance with the Japanese government’s requirements. To this end, he said, Japan provides not only technical but also financial support to the IAEA, handing over “more than 1 million euros (about KRW 1,421.5 million)” to “Mr. Freeman” and “Mr. Grossi” as “political contributions”.
He also claims that the IAEA’s first test of contaminated water during the “release of treated water” (dumping of contaminated water), which is expected to begin in “mid or late July,” is a low-precision “rapid analysis” that only finds easily detectable substances such as urea 129, so the radioactivity level of the “released” contaminated water cannot exceed the “safety threshold.” Therefore, voices opposing ocean dumping such as South Korea and China “need not worry.
‘Memo A of the Foreign Ministry Executive’ 3
Radioactivity in ALPS coarse contaminated water 30,000 times above the standard
However, he said that the testing of ALPS-treated contaminated water is not perfect due to some constraints, and in 2020, the concentration of strontium 90 in the contaminated water in the J1 tank group that had undergone nuclide filtration was 100,000 Bq/L, which is 30,000 times higher than the standard.
Perhaps more importantly, he said, they still don’t know why it happened. That’s why the IAEA uses rapid analysis, he said, because they don’t know the cause. In Mr. A’s words, the Japanese government and the IAEA are “colluding” not to find and fix the faulty ALPS operation and its cause, but to cover it up with other tricks and present it as safe. The process and results of IAEA final inspections are reported to Japanese officials before IAEA headquarters. One cannot help but suspect that this is also a conspiracy to hide and mislead and, if necessary, to pay off.
“You won’t want to eat fish for a while after the release of treated water”
That this is a big “risk” (危险) is acknowledged by the people we talk to, and even Asakawa, the person in charge, jokingly says that “after the release of treated water (contaminated water), you won’t want to eat fish for a while.
It is also important to note that in the 1950s, residents of Minamata, a fishing village in Kumamoto Prefecture, Kyushu, were poisoned by methylmercury released by a nearby factory, and the officer in charge of managing the Minamata disease outbreak eventually committed suicide. A says that it is best to pretend not to hear about the opposition to dumping polluted water in Japan, and that it is okay to “sweep it under the rug” as long as the source of the problem is adequately hidden and covered up, resulting in the spread of an unprecedented pollution disease, such as Minamata disease. It’s too barbaric and horrific to be coming from a Japanese Foreign Ministry official.
Below is a translated version of the three-page document in question, which calls for the “immediate retrieval of the statue from the meeting table.
Foreign Ministry Executive A Memo
1.
(Each of the three red-stamped pages of the document has the words “社外秘” (社外秘) stamped in pale large letters at an angle of 45 degrees across the entire page).
“Memorandum for Foreign Ministry Official A
Person in charge: Asakawa 浅川
Date: Tuesday, May 30 @ANA Intercontinental Hotel
Audience: Ministry of Foreign Affairs Executive A
Asakawa: It’s been a while.
A: Yes, I’ve been very busy lately, so I haven’t had a chance to talk to you.
Asakawa: Thank you for your time. So this is the last hurdle to discharge the treated water.
A: That’s right, we’ve been delayed, so now we have to hurry.
Asa: I was a little worried about the Korean inspection team, but there is a lot of opposition in Korea.
A: You don’t have to worry about that.
Asa: And we don’t have to worry about the IAEA’s final inspection?
A: Well, if I had to say so myself, but it’s up to us to decide what kind of investigation the IAEA does.
Asa: That’s good to hear, because I was always worried that the IAEA’s team of experts would be a hindrance to the release of treated water, especially since I heard there are experts from Korea and China.
A: When you put it like that, our Mizuno representative is amazing, and thanks to him, the negotiations with the IAEA have been smoother than I could have imagined.
Asa: That’s great.
A: That’s right, the normal flow is to submit the materials to the IAEA first, but the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and the Ministry of the Environment actually saw them first, which is probably too much for the average person.
Asa: You mean the ALPS treated water review mission?
A: Yes, that was delivered in March or April of this year.
Asa: You mean the final inspection, which has already started.
A: Yes, as you mentioned.
Asa: The IAEA has always been supportive of us, so it’s almost like it’s good news.
A: That’s on the surface, but there are differences of opinion.
Asa: There’s also the behind-the-scenes stuff, so to speak.
A: Absolutely. The IAEA needs financial support, not just technical support.
Asa: South Korea and China also pay the IAEA to accomplish their goals.
A: But we have a better personal relationship with them. We have made a significant effort to have frank communication with Mr. Freeman.
Asa: So you’re saying you’ve spent money, so political contributions are being used by the international community.
A: Yes, it is.
2.
Asakawa: The exact amount.
A: All I can say is that it is at least one million euros.
Asakawa: In addition to Mr. Freeman, you also have Mr. Grossi’s share, so what did you get in return?
A: Of course, the return (quid pro quo) is big. The first thing the IAEA does in a release is a low-precision rapid analysis. That way, the water is not above the threshold.
Asa: Low precision rapid analysis.
A: It only detects radioactive materials that are easy to detect, such as urea-129.
Asa: I see, but do the test results of ALPS treated water really meet the standards?
A: In most cases, no, but that’s the problem. The results are limited by several factors. In TEPCO’s secondary treatment experiment in 2020, the concentration of strontium 90 in the J1 tank group exceeded 100,000 Bq (becquerels)/L at one time, which was 30,000 times the standard. We don’t know the cause, so it’s rapid annihilation.
Asa: That’s a big risk, too.
A: It doesn’t mean anything. Most of the ALPS treated water is fine, diluted with seawater, and safe.
Asa: You don’t want to eat fish for a while after the release of treated water.
A: (laughs)
Asa: So when do you expect to release the final report?
A: By the end of June. We agreed to stay on schedule for the summer. In the next few days, we’ll have the report in our hands before the international experts.
Asa: So the report will be fine?
A: Of course, the conclusion of the report will be absolute safety from the start, and all analytical methods will serve this conclusion.
Asa: Is South Korea’s Kim Hong-Seok now convinced, no way….
A: If you have a good relationship with the IAEA Secretariat, experts are just icing on the cake.
Asa: Won’t there be other opinions (異論)?
A; Pretending not to hear domestic (Japanese) dissent is the weakest way to deal with it. Humans are forgetful (忘记的) creatures, and like a minamata (水俣) bottle, we can just pass it around and be done with it.
Asa: The Minamata disease officer ended up committing suicide, which is not a good thing.
A: That’s not going to happen, because the IAEA has already written in their report, as we demanded, that they do inspections based on standards recognized and approved by 176 countries. So if South Korea, China, the Pacific Islands, etc. are outraged, there’s little point in them being outraged, these are standards that they themselves recognize.
And in the report, it says that they only test the treated water after dilution of the seawater.
Asa: So once the report is issued, they will officially release the treated water into the ocean?
3.
A: If all goes well, it will be mid to late July.
Asa: After that, there will be diplomatic and public opinion responses.
A: I won’t go into too much detail, but I’ve heard that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and TEPCO will hold briefings for third-country media.
Asa: Thank you for sharing this important information with us. If there’s anything we can do to help, please don’t hesitate to tell us.
A: I’m sharing this with you because we’re old friends. Please don’t take notes or I’ll bother you.
Asa: No worries.
Will this whistleblower be heard by anyone?
RELEASES INTERNAL IAEA DOCUMENT PROVING COLLUSION WITH JAPAN OVER FUKUSHIMA RADIOACTIVE WATER RELEASE
A whistleblower-released document created by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on June 1, 2023, shows that “the fix is in” – IAEA is not only is planning to approve the release of 1.3 million tons of radioactive water from Fukushima but to manipulate their communication to the world in support Japan’s position despite facts showing otherwise, eliminating anything that might “be viewed negatively by the public.”
This is outrageous and dangerous for the entire world. Japan, with the IAEA’s support – NOT protection – is planning to commit its own nuclear assault on the world through this radioactive water release.
We’ve suspected and accused the IAEA and Japan of working together in the past, and now we have the proof.
Please, do what you can to get this word out – not just to our echo chamber, but to media.
*********************************************
Few days ago a well-intentioned whistleblower has sent me an internal document of the IAEA.
In this IAEA’s internal document the IAEA is seen coaching TEPCO about what to tell and what not tell to the public regarding the « treated » water to be soon discharged into the Pacific Ocean.
One thing that can be drawn from that document’s content is that the IAEA and TEPCO have no intention to be fully transparent about the radioactive contamination of the said « treated water », only the one to cushion insidiously the real facts to the public eyes.
« Treated water » is quite an euphemism as it is public knowledge that in 12 years the TEPCO’s ALPs filtering system has never been capable to fully remove all the 64 radionuclides present in that radioactive water. Not even to mention the radioactive mud which has accumulated at the bottom of all those water tanks. For them to mention in their press releases only the tritium as being present in that “treated” water is their habitual lying by omission.
According to the news, Rafael Mariano Grossi, the director general of IAEA, will visit Japan on 4 July. The IAEA’s final report will be published soon and the nuclear water will be discharged into the ocean after the report.
This internal document is quite certainly making us question their future transparency, and their intention to protect truly the marine life and the health of the people. Cheap expediency, lying by omission when not just plain lying, are part of their usual modus operandi.
This whistleblower, who wishes to remain anonymous for his own protection, took a real risk leaking this document out, ascting out of his conscience as he knows from the inside the dangers of such radioactive marine pollution. Will it be enough to wake up the consciences and stop such dumping of radioactive polllution into our ocean?
Time is crucial in this matter, as for sure soon after the visit of the director general of the AIEA TEPCO will start discharging that water, and then it will be impossible to have them to stop.
I am just a blogger blogging on this little blog, I am sending this message in a bottle out to the world in the hope that someone, some journalists will take up this information and use it to influence the various governments to pressure Japan to not use our Pacific ocean as its personal trash backyard. The Asian countries neighboring Japan and the Pacific nations should protect their population from such marine radioactive pollution.
With all my prayerful wishes, asking for your help. Please share this article widely so that document will be of some use.
Many thanks to the anonymous whistleblower who did his part, now it is our turn to do ours.
Stopping covering the Fukushima nuclear disaster
April 11, 2023
The Fukushima Nuclear disaster will continue to affect the people on location and others, as well as our environment for many more years, I will not continue.
I have been following the Fukushima nuclear accident for the past 12 years, spending a lot of time in sharing those news, to the somehow detriment of my own personal life.
Unlike some other people I entered this activity without seeking to make money or gain fame, I am just a simple citizen living on my basic minimum retirement pension. I shared Fukushima news weekly for the past 12 years but on the other hand I was unable to go visit my daughter in Iwaki, Fukushima since June 2011, because my financial situation is very tight, and Japan is way too expensive, overpriced for my meager wallet.
That situation has been tearing apart, on one hand to share Fukushima news and on the other hand to be unable to visit my own daughter in Fukushima.
I cannot take it anymore, so I decided to end this situation, to stop sharing the Fukushima news, to stop my lttle Fukushima blog, to disengage myself from it all, and to finally concentrate only on my little personal life.
That attitude of the Japanese government is nothing new. They have always lack a sense of responsibility, hiding behind hypocritical denials and false excuses, lies and covering-up.
The Japanese government has always faced accusations with duplicity when it comes to various events and issues that have marred their history. Some of these issues include the Nanjing massacre, Korean and Filipina sex slaves during World War II, the Minamata tragedy affecting thousands of lives, whale and dolphin fishing, the Fukushima nuclear disaster, and the dumping of radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean.
One of the most controversial events in Japan’s history is the Nanjing massacre, which occurred in 1937 when Japanese forces invaded the Chinese city of Nanjing. During the six-week occupation, Japanese soldiers carried out a brutal campaign of murder, rape, and looting, resulting in the deaths of an estimated 300,000 Chinese civilians and prisoners of war. Despite overwhelming evidence of the massacre, the Japanese government has been accused of downplaying its significance and even denying that it occurred.
Another issue that has caused controversy is the use of Korean and Filipina women as sex slaves during World War II. These women, known as “comfort women,” were forced into sexual servitude by the Japanese military, with an estimated 200,000 women being subjected to this treatment. Despite numerous apologies and compensation payments made to some of the victims, the Japanese government has been accused of failing to fully acknowledge and take responsibility for this atrocity.
Minamata disease is a neurological disease caused by severe mercury poisoning. Signs and symptoms include ataxia, numbness in the hands and feet, general muscle weakness, loss of peripheral vision, and damage to hearing and speech. In extreme cases, insanity, paralysis, coma, and death follow within weeks of the onset of symptoms. A congenital form of the disease affects fetuses in the womb, causing microcephaly, extensive cerebral damage, and symptoms similar to those seen in cerebral palsy.
Minamata disease was first discovered in the city of Minamata, Kumamoto Prefecture, Japan, in 1956, hence its name. It was caused by the release of methylmercury in the industrial wastewater from a chemical factory owned by the Chisso Corporation, which continued from 1932 to 1968. It has also been suggested that some of the mercury sulfate in the wastewater was also metabolized to methylmercury by bacteria in the sediment. This highly toxic chemical bioaccumulated and biomagnified in shellfish and fish in Minamata Bay and the Shiranui Sea, which, when eaten by the local population, resulted in mercury poisoning. The poisoning and resulting deaths of both humans and animals continued for 36 years, while Chisso and the Kumamoto prefectural government did little to prevent the epidemic.
As of March 2001, 2,265 victims had been officially recognized as having Minamata disease and over 10,000 had received financial compensation from Chisso. By 2004, Chisso had paid $86 million in compensation, and in the same year was ordered to clean up its contamination. On March 29, 2010, a settlement was reached to compensate as-yet uncertified victims.
In addition to these human rights abuses, Japan has also faced criticism for its continued practice of whale and dolphin fishing. Despite a global ban on commercial whaling, Japan continues to hunt whales under the guise of “scientific research,” and dolphins are also hunted and captured for use in entertainment parks. Many animal rights activists and conservationists have called for an end to these practices, but the Japanese government has been accused of prioritizing economic interests over environmental concerns.
Another event that has caused significant controversy is the Fukushima nuclear disaster, which occurred in 2011 after a massive earthquake and tsunami struck Japan. The disaster resulted in a meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and the release of radioactive materials into the environment. While the Japanese government initially downplayed the severity of the disaster, it has since been accused of covering up information and failing to adequately respond to the crisis.
Perhaps one of the most recent controversies surrounding Japan involves the planned dumping of radioactive water from the Fukushima plant into the Pacific Ocean. Despite widespread opposition from environmental groups and neighboring countries, the Japanese government has defended the plan, claiming that the water will be treated and diluted before being released. However, many remain skeptical of these claims and fear the potential consequences of this decision.
In conclusion, the Japanese government has been accused of duplicity when it comes to a variety of issues that have marred their history and present-day actions. From human rights abuses to environmental disasters, the Japanese government has been criticized for downplaying or denying the severity of these events and failing to take responsibility for their actions. As such, it is imperative that the government is held accountable for its actions and takes concrete steps towards acknowledging and rectifying these issues.
The Japanese government as learned nothing from this nuclear tragedy, which they have conveniently sweeped under the carpet. Economics in their eyes always more important than people’s lives, PM Kishida promoting as of today the rebirth of nuclear full blast, wheras the consequences of the Fukushima nuclear disater have neither been yet adressed nor solved.
Best wishes to you,
Hervé Courtois
Many Fukushima mayors reluctant to take stand on nuke energy shift
The crippled No. 1 reactor at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant
March 4, 2023
Several mayors of the three prefectures hardest hit by the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami showed a reluctance to voice an opinion about the government’s return to a reliance on nuclear power.
The recent Asahi Shimbun poll showed the sensitivity of the issue particularly in areas that still have not completely recovered from the twin disasters.
In December, the government made a dramatic shift in nuclear energy policy that would allow for construction of new reactors and the extension of the operating life of those already built.
The Asahi Shimbun polled mayors of 37 municipalities along the Pacific coast in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures along with five others in Fukushima where evacuation orders were issued following the triple meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
In addition, mayors of three municipalities lying within a 30-kilometer radius of the Onagawa plant in Miyagi Prefecture were also asked their views.
Of the 45 mayors, 19 were somewhat or totally opposed to a reversion to nuclear energy, while 14 were somewhat or totally in favor.
But the mayors of six municipalities that either host the Fukushima No. 1 plant or are in close proximity to the plant did not take a clear stand on any of the questions in the survey.
When the mayors were contacted individually, many said with so many residents still living as evacuees away from their municipalities, expressing a clear opinion on nuclear energy would only further divide those with differing views.
One mayor had in the past voiced clear stands on the central government’s reconstruction policy, but that led to letters sent to the municipal government criticizing those comments.
“I always feel internal turmoil about whether criticism directed at me and the municipal government will also not be turned on the evacuees” who live in various parts of Japan, the mayor said.
Another mayor said, “I do not want residents to feel troubled by my comments about the central government’s nuclear energy policy.”
With part of the municipality still designated a “difficult-to-return zone” and the population and infrastructure nowhere close to the levels before the disasters, the mayor said, “Now is the time to put every effort into reconstruction.”
The mayor said taking a clear stand on nuclear energy issues might create division among local residents.
Toshiyuki Kanai, a professor of local public administration at the University of Tokyo, said it was understandable why the mayors were reluctant to take a clear stand because municipalities had to seek the cooperation of the central government for their reconstruction efforts.
“It is important that effects on local governments in such policy areas as reconstruction do not arise because of their opposition to nuclear energy policy,” Kanai said.
Eight Fukushima mayors did say they were either somewhat or totally opposed to returning to a reliance on nuclear energy.
The only Fukushima mayor who was somewhat in favor of nuclear energy was Ikuo Yamamoto of Tomioka.
But in response to questions from The Asahi Shimbun, Yamamoto recalled the difficulties he faced with discussions about a final storage site for low-level radioactive waste from the Fukushima nuclear accident.
“In my heart, I am opposed,” he said.
But Yamamoto added that in general terms he understood that nuclear energy was effective in preventing global warming and was also instrumental at a time when fuel prices for thermal power generation were surging.
The mayors were also asked if they thought the Kishida administration had done an adequate job of explaining to the public why a move back toward nuclear energy was needed.
Thirty-one mayors said they felt either somewhat or totally negative about the government’s efforts. Even nine mayors who favored reverting back to nuclear energy felt the Kishida administration had done a poor job of explaining the reason for doing so.
(This article was written by Wataru Netsu, Shoko Rikimaru, Keitaro Fukuchi and Takemichi Nishibori.)
Japan to Delay Ocean Dumping of Contaminated Waste Water from Fukushima
To delay but not to give up. One step backward to jump two steps forward at a later time…. Typical Japanese government shrewd tactics!
by John Laforge March 3, 2023
Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno announced in January that his government would delay its plan to pump over 1.37 million tons of watery radioactive waste into the Pacific Ocean from the devastated six-reactor complex at Fukushima-Daiichi. With the country facing harsh international pressure to cancel the dumping, Matsuno acknowledged “the need to gain public support,” for the plan, the Associated Press reported January 12. The wicked water is now being collected in large tanks that were hastily built near the wrecked reactors.
Fierce criticism of the deliberate pollution scheme has come from China, South Korea, other Pacific Rim countries, scientists, environmental groups, UN human rights experts, and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), an alliance of 17 Pacific island nations. Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida also indicated that the government wants a postponement of the dumping operation — designed by the Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) — until it is “verifiably safe to do so,” Thomas Heaton reported February 16 for Civil Beat.
The PIF, independent states where according to Reuters up to half of the world’s tuna is sourced, was crucial in forcing Japan’s apparent retreat. The PIF warned that contaminating the Pacific could harm the fishing that its economies depend on. Mary Yamaguchi reported on January 12 for the AP: “Some scientists say the impact of long-term, low-dose exposure to tritium and other radionuclides on the environment and humans is still unknown and the release plan should be delayed. They say tritium affects humans more when it is consumed in fish.” A scientific expert panel assembled by the PIF urged a reconsideration of the dumping “because it was not supported by data and more information was needed,” Ken Buesseler, with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said in January.
Japan announced in April 2021 that it would allow Tepco to pump the nearly 1.4 million tons of liquid radioactive waste into the public commons of the Pacific Ocean beginning in spring 2023. Tepco says it intends to dilute the material and pump it into the sea for the next 30 to 40 years using an underground tunnel now under construction. Media attention has focused on the tritium (radioactive hydrogen) in the wastewater which cannot be removed by Tepco’s (failed) filtering system and has generally ignored mention of the long-lived carbon-14 in the water, which likewise cannot be removed.
Often unreported about the plan is the failure of Tepco’s wastewater filer system, dubbed the “Advanced Liquid Processing System,” which has not removed the dozens of long-lived radioactive substances — including ruthenium, cobalt-60, strontium-90, cesium-137, and even plutonium – that the company said it would filter.
The water becomes radioactively contaminated (150 tons more every day) after being poured over hundreds of tons of melted, ferociously radioactive uranium — and in reactor #3 plutonium — fuel, the hot wreckage amassed deep inside the foundations of the three destroyed nuclear reactors, units 1, 2 and 3. All three suffered catastrophic meltdowns following the Great Tohoku Earthquake and tsunami of March 11, 2011. Some of the contaminated waste is groundwater that reaches the melted fuel after pouring through cracks in the reactors’ foundations caused by the earthquake. Dr. Buesseler Science magazine in 2020, “Many other isotopes are in those tanks still, and over 70 percent [of 1.37 million tons] would have to be cleaned up further before they might consider even releasing….”
Moreover, reactor 3 which was packed with “mixed oxide” fuel made of combined uranium and plutonium, suffered a huge hydrogen explosion at 11 a.m. on March 14, and Tepco announced that on March 21 and 22, in soil collected on the Fukushima site, plutonium was detected. Hydrogen explosions also caused severe damage to reactors 1 and 2, and to the waste fuel pool of reactor 4. (Three additional hydrogen explosions caused severe damage: to reactor 1 on March 11, and to reactor 2 and to the waste fuel pool of reactor 4 on March 15.)
In April 2021, Cindy Folkers, a radiation and health hazards specialist at Beyond Nuclear in Maryland, told Brett Wilkins of Common Dreams, “TEPCO data show that even twice-through filtration leaves the water 13.7 times more concentrated with hazardous tritium — radioactive hydrogen — than Japan’s allowable standard for ocean dumping, and about one million times higher than the concentration of natural tritium in Earth’s surface waters.”
Secretary Matsuno said in his January statement that the delayed dumping plan “includes enhanced efforts to ensure safety.” This vague reassurance comes from the same authorities that caused the triple meltdown and consequently the worst radioactive contamination of the Pacific Ocean in history; it follows two years of iron-clad declarations from Tepco and government regulators that contaminating the ocean will be safe. The plan to add more radioactive poisons to the Pacific in order to save money has also been approved by the U.S. government and the UN International Atomic Energy Agency.
John LaForge is a Co-director of Nukewatch, a peace and environmental justice group in Wisconsin, and edits its newsletter.
The Fukushima controversy.
A well written article. Dr Imran Khalid raises all the important points. Definitely a must read!
Dr Imran Khalid March 04, 2023
The world is watching Japan with bated breath as the country contemplates a controversial move to dump nuclear wastewater from its Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean. This decision has generated intense opposition from neighbouring countries, including China and the 17-member Pacific Islands Forum – turning what was once an “internal” issue into a global concern. The potential hazards posed by radioactive water to marine ecology and marine biology in the Pacific Ocean have now become a matter of global concern. Earlier this year, Japan announced plans to discharge over 1.3 million metric tons of contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean. This decision was met with serious concerns from stakeholders due to the potential for irretrievable damage to marine life. The nuclear waste is a product of the meltdown of the Daiichi nuclear reactors in March 2011. The disaster was caused by a massive earthquake, which triggered a tsunami that inundated the reactors. The resulting nuclear waste was being stored in around 1,000 tanks, which have been reaching their storage capacity limit. The decision to discharge this contaminated water into the ocean is a cause for concern for several reasons. Firstly, it has the potential to cause irreparable damage to the marine ecology and marine biology in the Pacific Ocean. The risk of contamination spreading beyond the Pacific Ocean also means that this issue is not just a local or regional one. It has the potential to impact global ecosystems and biodiversity. Radioactive contamination can have long-term effects on marine life, which could impact entire ecosystems. This could have knock-on effects that would be felt for years to come. Secondly, this decision sets a dangerous precedent that could lead to similar actions being taken in other parts of the world. Thirdly, there are concerns that the decision to discharge the contaminated water into the ocean has been taken unilaterally, without proper consultation with stakeholders. This raises questions about transparency and accountability, and it could undermine efforts to promote responsible environmental management practices. Safe and effective alternatives for disposing of water contaminated by nuclear material from the Fukushima nuclear power plant exist, including evaporation or underground storage. However, the Japanese government has chosen to discharge the water into the ocean, which is the “least expensive” but speedy solution. This decision suggests that Tokyo’s primary focus is not on preventing or minimising harm to human health and the environment.
Moreover, it is essential that there is proper consultation with stakeholders about the best way to manage this situation. This includes engaging with local communities and inhabitant groups in the Pacific Islands, who may have unique perspectives on the potential impacts of this decision. This issue highlights the importance of responsible environmental management practices and the need for greater transparency and accountability in decision-making processes. The decision to discharge contaminated water into the ocean has caused outrage among the international community. Ironically, Japan announced its plans to discharge the contaminated water into the ocean while the IAEA task force was about to visit Japan for a review. This decision has raised concerns about Japan’s transparency and accountability in addressing the issue. Proper consultation and engagement would ensure that all stakeholders are heard and that the most responsible and sustainable solution is chosen. This issue highlights the importance of responsible environmental management practices and the need for greater transparency and accountability in decision-making processes.
The lack of independent verification of data and evidence provided by Japan also raises concerns for the Pacific islands and international organisations regarding the dumping of nuclear wastewater into the ocean. Japan’s disregard for an opposition is a significant concern, as the lack of criticism from the US and the West emboldens Japan to ignore the concerns of its people and the international community. The delegation of the Pacific Island Forum (PIF) Secretariat recently met with Japanese officials to discuss Tokyo’s plan to release contaminated wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear power station. While Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs assures that the water has been treated to meet regulatory standards, Pacific Island countries are deeply concerned about the potential consequences of this release. The Pacific Islanders’ connection to the ocean is fundamental to their way of life. It has molded the cultural and historical essence of their communities, and there exists an indissoluble bond between the ocean. As a result, they feel a strong sense of guardianship over the Pacific Ocean and are rightfully alarmed by Japan’s plan to release contaminated water into it. The same is the case with China and South Korea who have been continuously pursuing this issue and putting all kinds of diplomatic pressure on Tokyo to desist from such a controversial step.
The potential long-term impacts on the marine environment and human health must be considered. Therefore, Japan must get the disposal of the Fukushima wastewater right. Pacific Islanders do not want the dumping of nuclear wastewater into the ocean to become the norm. Japan must take its reservations seriously, given that even its own fishing industry is deeply concerned about the current release plan.
https://www.nation.com.pk/04-Mar-2023/the-fukushima-controversy
Scientists: Fukushima’s nuclear wastewater capable of producing cancers after release
A general view shows storage tanks for contaminated water at the Tokyo Electric Power Company’s (TEPCO) Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, in Okuma of Fukushima prefecture, January 20, 2023.
March 3, 2023
Treated nuclear wastewater from Japan’s damaged Fukushima power plant, which, if released into the Pacific Ocean as planned, will ultimately reach the High Seas, is “capable of producing cancers,” New Zealand scientists said on Friday.
Japan has planned to release treated nuclear wastewater from the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean.
Jamie Quinton, head of the School of Natural Sciences, Massey University, said that in this original unprocessed wastewater, radioactive isotopes of concern were iodine-131 and caesium-137, and that they being used in nuclear medicine radiotherapy means that they have sufficient energy to cause cell death and mutation.
“In other words, they are capable of producing cancers,” Quinton said.
International law expert Duncan Currie addressed that Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) treatment, at best, does not remove tritium, and there is next to no scientific information of the effects of tritium on the marine environment, including on different species.
Currie noted that the planned target in treating Fukushima nuclear wastewater is to remove other radioactive isotopes to “regulatory,” rather than detectable, levels.
Tests of ALPS treatment systems have not been encouraging, Currie said.
“There were several other radioactive products in the unprocessed water that is hazardous to live species and ecosystems. As organisms consume other organisms, more of these radioactive products accumulate in their bodies, which can, in turn, end up in humans. So these radioactive elements must be kept out of natural ecosystems as much as possible, especially the ocean,” Quinton said.
David Krofcheck, senior lecturer in Physics at the University of Auckland, agreed by saying the danger of indiscriminately releasing nuclear fission products into the ocean is that the products can find their way into the food chain.
“Once in the food chain, the long-lived nuclear fission heavy nuclei like cesium-137, strontium-90, and iodine-131 tend to concentrate in human muscle, bones, and thyroid, respectively. Cancers can be the result,” Krofcheck said.
New Zealand should be concerned over nuclear wastewater effects on the Pacific, Currie said, citing modeling that shows the movement of radioactive water to the North Pacific, including, for instance, through uptake in highly migratory fish and marine mammals.
Currently, an independent panel of global experts on nuclear issues is supporting Pacific Islands Forum nations in their consultations with Japan over its plans to discharge treated nuclear wastewater into the Pacific Ocean.
Quinton noted that if the release of wastewater into the ocean is to proceed, “getting the process correct and within regulations is of particular importance to Japan’s aquaculture-based industries.”
He said that it is in Japan’s economic interest to ensure that waterways remain below internationally acceptable levels for background radiation so that food safety is assured and their capacity for international trade remains unaffected.
Ministry to delay trial on reusing Fukushima soil in Kanto areas
Residents in Tokyo’s Shinjuku Ward on Dec. 21 protest the Environment Ministry’s plan to reuse soil from Fukushima Prefecture at a site in Shinjuku Gyoen National Garden.
March 2, 2023
Local opposition has forced the Environment Ministry to delay the start of a trial on reusing soil that had been contaminated with radioactive fallout from the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, sources said.
The ministry wanted to begin the trial within this fiscal year, which ends at the end of this month.
Under the plan, soil collected in Fukushima Prefecture during decontamination work following the triple meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant would be distributed to three sites in the Kanto region.
The government’s policy is to reuse the soil if its radioactivity level clears the safety threshold of 8,000 becquerels per kilogram to reduce the mountains of soil that will undergo final disposal.
As of the end of January, around 13.41 million cubic meters of soil had been transported to interim storage facilities in the towns of Okuma and Futaba in Fukushima Prefecture after decontamination work.
A law dictates that the soil must undergo final disposal outside Fukushima Prefecture by 2045.
Sites for the final disposal have not been decided.
The ministry decided to conduct the trial of reusing such soil on the premises of ministry-related facilities in Tokyo, Saitama Prefecture and Ibaraki Prefecture.
However, local residents expressed strong opposition to the plan at the ministry’s explanatory meetings in Tokyo’s Shinjuku Ward and Saitama Prefecture’s Tokorozawa in December.
In Tokorozawa, a neighborhood association consisting of residents living near the site of the trial adopted a resolution to oppose the plan.
The Tokorozawa mayor has also shown reluctance to accept the plan.
Asked if the ministry would go ahead with the trial despite the local opposition, an official at the ministry’s environmental restoration and resources circulation bureau said: “We will continue explaining the project by, for example, answering questions from local residents.
“We don’t plan to go through a process to gain an agreement with local residents about the project, so the ministry will make the final decision.”
Sources said the ministry has already decided to postpone the trial. It will continue holding explanatory meetings for residents in the three areas.
Fukushima plant head: Too early to predict decommissioning
In this photo provided by the Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings (TEPCO), Akira Ono, President of Fukushima Daiichi Decontamination and Decommissioning Engineering Company, speaks during an online interview with the Associated Press in Tokyo, on March 1, 2023. The head of Japan’s tsunami-wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says details of the damages inside reactors are only beginning to unravel 12 years after the meltdowns, making it difficult to foresee what the place looks like even 30 years from now.
By MARI YAMAGUCHIMarch 3, 2023
In this photo provided by the Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings (TEPCO), Akira Ono, President of Fukushima Daiichi Decontamination and Decommissioning Engineering Company, speaks during an online interview with the Associated Press in Tokyo, on March 1, 2023. The head of Japan’s tsunami-wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says details of the damages inside reactors are only beginning to unravel 12 years after the meltdowns, making it difficult to foresee what the place looks like even 30 years from now. (TEPCO via AP)
TOKYO (AP) — The head of Japan’s wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant says details of the damage inside its reactors are only beginning to be known 12 years after it was hit by a massive earthquake and tsunami, making it difficult to foresee when or how its decommissioning will be completed.
The most pressing immediate task is to safely start releasing large amounts of treated but still radioactive water from the plant into the sea, Akira Ono said in an interview with The Associated Press.
The March 2011 earthquake and tsunami damaged cooling systems at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, causing three reactors to melt and release large amounts of radiation. The operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc., has been able to stabilize the plant to the point where the company can better plan a decommissioning strategy, expected to be lengthy and exceedingly challenging.
“Going forward, we have to face unconceivably difficult work such as retrieving the melted debris” from inside the reactors, said Ono, who heads the plant and is president of Fukushima Daiichi Decontamination & Decommissioning Engineering Co.
Earlier this year, a remote-controlled underwater vehicle successfully collected a tiny sample from inside one of the three melted reactors — only a spoonful of about 880 tons of highly radioactive melted fuel and other debris that must be safely removed and stored.
The status of the debris in the primary containment chambers of the Unit 1, 2 and 3 reactors remains largely unknown, Ono said.
Removal of melted debris is set to start in Unit 2 sometime after September this year following a nearly two-year delay. The removal of spent fuel in the Unit 1 reactor’s cooling pool is set to begin in 2027 after a 10-year delay because of the need to dismantle parts of the building damaged by hydrogen explosions.
The plant should be ready for workers to finally concentrate on removing the melted debris from the reactors after all spent fuel is taken out of the cooling pools by 2031, Ono said.
The government is maintaining its original goal of completing the plant’s decommissioning by 2051. But some experts say removing all of the melted fuel debris by then is impossible and suggest a Chernobyl-style entombment of the plant, an option that could help reduce health risks while the plant’s radioactivity gradually decreases.
“I still consider this goal as a major guidepost,” Ono said. “We can’t say what will happen in 30 years. We can’t say, but roughly imagining the next 30 years, I believe that it is necessary to carefully and precisely build up the current plan in order to safely, steadily and quickly proceed with the decommissioning.”
Before that, however, the biggest issue is the disposal of large amounts of treated but still radioactive water from the plant, he said.
Water used to cool the three damaged reactors has leaked into the basements of the reactor buildings and has been collected and stored in about 1,000 tanks that cover much of the plant’s grounds.
The government and TEPCO say the tanks must be removed so facilities can be built for the plant’s decommissioning. The tanks are expected to reach their capacity of 1.37 million tons later this year.
Most of the radioactivity can be removed from the water during treatment, but tritium cannot be separated, and low levels of some other radionuclides also remain. The government and TEPCO say they will ensure the water’s radioactivity is far below legal limits and will dilute it with large amounts of seawater before its planned discharge into the ocean.
Local fishing communities have fiercely objected to the plan, saying their already damaged business will suffer more because of the negative image caused by the water release. Neighboring countries, including China and South Korea, and Pacific Island nations have also raised safety concerns.
TEPCO plans to finish construction of the facilities needed for the water discharge in the spring and then receive safety approval from nuclear regulators. A final inspection and report by an International Atomic Energy Agency mission are expected before the release begins.
The operator still needs to work on an “easy to understand” explanation and scientific evidence to help people understand the release, Ono said.
“The decommissioning of Fukushima Daiichi itself is based on the understanding and trust of everyone in society,” he said.
CNIC Statement: We Protest the Cabinet Decision on the Nuclear Power Promotion Bundle Bill
by Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center · February 28, 2023
Today the Kishida Cabinet made a cabinet decision to proceed with a bundle of bills (the GX Decarbonization Power Supply Bill), including legislation to extend the operational periods of nuclear power plants and to promote the use of nuclear power. We firmly protest this decision, which totally disregards the lessons of Fukushima.
What “careful explanation”?
The Government has repeatedly stated that it will make “careful explanations” to address the public’s concerns regarding the utilization of nuclear power plants since the GX policies were announced. However, this bill seeks to amend the Atomic Energy Basic Law, the Electricity Utilities Industry Law, the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law, the Reprocessing Law and the Renewable Energy Special Measures Law all at once. How can so many revisions with so many points of contention possibly be “carefully explained”? Even at the stage of deliberations leading up to the drafting of the bill, discussions were hasty to say the least. Why must nuclear policy be changed immediately? The situation in Ukraine and resource prices are cited as reasons, but these have nothing to do with extending the operational period or building new nuclear power stations, let alone restarting them. We can only assume that the government are trying to take advantage of the crisis to promote their nuclear policy.
Safety in the back seat
There are a number of problems with each of the bills. For example, the revision bill for the Atomic Energy Basic Act states that “safety first “ should be the approach for the use of nuclear energy and that the value of nuclear energy use, such as its contribution to stable supply and green transformation, will be clarified. We disagree that nuclear power is useful for stable supply and decarbonisation, but before that, there is a serious problem. The proposed revisions transfer the regulation of the operation period of nuclear power plants from the Reactor Regulation Act to the Electricity Business Act, and also changes the operation period from 40 years in principle, allowing a maximum of 20 years extension on a one-time basis of the operation period, which is supposed to adjust for shutdown periods.
While assuring “safety first”, the government is trying to transfer the operation period regulation, a safety regulation introduced based on the lessons learnt from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, from the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law, which is under the jurisdiction of the regulatory authority (the Nuclear Regulation Authority-NRA), to the Electricity Utilities Industry Law, which is under the jurisdiction of the utilizing authority (the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry-METI). This in itself can only be described as a setback for nuclear safety regulation. Furthermore, METI’s Nuclear Energy Subcommittee’s summary also contemplates allowing further extensions in the future. Such discussions would not be possible if utilization did not take precedence over regulation.
The proposed revision to the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law will also legislate on the assessment of ageing nuclear power plants, which was previously a rule of the NRA. The Government and the NRA state that this will lead to stricter regulations, but that the substance of these stricter regulations will be discussed in the future. This in itself is a clear indication of the government’s attitude that nuclear power must be promoted according to their timetable and compared to this, nuclear safety is of secondary importance.
The NRA explains that the degradation status of a reactor can be assessed at any point in time. However, there are no nuclear power plants in the world that have been in operation for more than 60 years to begin with, and the older a reactor gets, the more its operating history will differ from the deterioration state of the reactor due to the characteristics of the materials. Even if an inspection is carried out, it is only an inspection at that point in time and cannot be said to prove safety in the future. In fact, on 30 January this year, Takahama Unit 4 automatically shut down due to a problem, but on 25 November last year, Kansai Electric Power Company had just announced that it had carried out an equipment integrity assessment (number of devices covered: approximately 4,200 devices/units) based on the assumption of a 20-year extension and ‘confirmed that there were no problems’.
Blurring the lines between operators and regulators
A major lesson of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster was that the operators of nuclear power plants must be separated from those who regulate them. Twelve years after the accident, this separation is now in great danger. We believe that the right option is to move away from nuclear power, but strict regulation is a minimum requirement for both the operation and the decommissioning of nuclear power plants. However, the regulations which are supposed to be enforced by the NRA, are limited by the framework of promoting the use of nuclear energy. In recent times, very few suspension orders have been issued and no reactor licenses have ever been revoked. Remedies are also sought through “guidance and suggestions” from the reviewing authority. With such a form of regulation and the integration of regulation and promotion, is there any hope for strict regulation? Although it is said that deterioration can be assessed at any point in time, there are no clear boundaries in the deterioration of nuclear power plants. We can only make engineering decisions under great uncertainty. Under these conditions, can the regulations be trusted to always side with the safer option?
In the current nuclear policy changes, regulation and promotion have been shown to be one and the same. Several members of the NRA have expressed their discomfort that the discussions had to conform to a fixed schedule.
Before discussing the issue of extension of the operating period, it is the state of nuclear regulation that must be questioned. If the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident is the starting point for nuclear policy, the GX Decarbonisation Power Supply Bill must be scrapped, and we must consider how to ensure that nuclear regulation and promotion are kept totally separate, and how strict regulation can be achieved. Without this, we can never put an end to the “safety myth” and it will be impossible to realize the most basic condition for the use of nuclear power.
Source: https://cnic.jp/english/?p=6521
“I started prioritizing treatment over my dreams for the future”: Public testimony of a young woman diagnosed with thyroid cancer after Fukushima disaster
by Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center · March 2, 2023
On January 27, 2022, a group of six young men and women from Fukushima Prefecture filed a class action lawsuit against Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), claiming that the thyroid cancer they had developed was linked to their exposure to radioactive contamination from the Fukushima nuclear disaster of 2011. The plaintiffs, who were aged 6 to 16 at the time of the disaster, are among the growing number of young people from Fukushima Prefecture who have been diagnosed with thyroid cancer or suspected thyroid cancer. According to the legal counsel, this rate of diagnosis—293 cases as of April 2022—is many tens of times higher than would be expected; pediatric thyroid cancer is very rare. Despite this, the Japanese government and TEPCO continue to deny the possibility of a causal connection between radiation exposure from the nuclear accident and rising cancer rates, instead claiming that an excess of cases has only been detected due to large-scale screening with advanced technology. For more detail and background on the 311 Children’s Thyroid Cancer Trial, read lead attorney Ido Kenichi’s statement here.
The first oral arguments were heard on March 26, 2022, at the Tokyo District Court. The following is the public testimony of one plaintiff, a young woman in her 20s, who was diagnosed with thyroid cancer when she was in high school. She describes the sobering trajectory of her life after diagnosis, from traumatic surgery and treatment to interrupted dreams of college graduation and employment. A recording of her testimony (in Japanese) can be heard on the website of Our Planet TV here.
Translated by Elicia Cousins
“It was my middle school graduation ceremony that day. “This is it, isn’t it!” My friends and I sat around chatting and taking lots of pictures with our digital cameras. I think it was snowing a bit at that time.
When the earthquake hit, I was video chatting with another friend about the graduation ceremony. At first, we casually noted that an earthquake was happening, but then the shaking suddenly got stronger and a ballpoint pen fell onto my head from somewhere. “Oh no!” (Yabai!) I heard someone say, and the call dropped.
My house is going to get crushed, I thought. The shaking continued for what felt like a hellishly long time.
I became aware of the nuclear accident when the actual explosion happened. I heard a rumor that radiation would turn the sky pink, but because that didn’t happen, I didn’t develop a sense of crisis.
March 16 was the day that that high school entrance exam results were posted. The trains were stopped because of the earthquake, so I heard the results at my middle school instead. I walked to school, and after seeing the results, I stood outside talking to my friend for a long time before walking back home again. I had no idea that radiation levels were very high that day.
My thyroid cancer was detected through the prefectural health survey.
I still have a very clear memory of the moment I found out. That day, I was wearing new clothes and sandals. My mom drove me to the examination.
There were several doctors involved in the examination process. Did the exam take a long time? Or was it quick? Now I’m not so sure. I can’t be certain, but I think that the moment the doctor took the ultrasound scan of my neck, their face clouded a bit. The examination was extensive.
People who had been called up after me were already finished with their exams. “You’re the only one who took longer,” my mom said. “Maybe you have cancer,” she joked as we left the venue. In that moment, I never suspected that I’d need a more detailed follow-up examination.
There were a lot of people at the hospital where I got my next examination. This time, I started to feel a bit uneasy. I got a blood test and another ultrasound. Something was wrong after all. Even I had realized that much. It was then decided that I’d need to do a fine needle aspiration cytology test. At that point, I was pretty sure that I had thyroid cancer.
In my case, the cluster of cells that needed to be sampled had hardened, so it was difficult to extract the sample. The terror of having a long needle going into my neck only grew, as did the feeling of just wanting to get it all over with. It finally worked after the third try.
Ten days later, the examination results came out. The results from that cytology test. Once again, there were a lot of people at the hospital. I found out that I had thyroid cancer.
But the doctor didn’t actually say that I had thyroid cancer, and instead told me in a roundabout way by explaining that I’d need surgery. I’ll never forget the shock of being told, “If you don’t get surgery, you’ll only live until age 23.”
The night before the surgery, I couldn’t sleep at all. I was filled with worry, and even though I felt like crying, there were no tears. But I thought, if this is what it will take to heal… so I went ahead with the surgery.
Things were way worse after the surgery.
When I came to, I felt fatigued and feverish. The anesthesia didn’t work well for me, I often threw up in the middle of the night, and I felt sick and nauseous. To this day, I can clearly remember how excruciating that experience was. I sometimes have nightmares about the surgery, hospitalization, and treatment.
After the surgery, my voice was gone, and I could hardly speak for three months.
I ended up enrolling at a university in a neighboring prefecture rather than my top choice school in Tokyo, partly because my family was worried about my illness. But I couldn’t even go to that school for very long, because my thyroid cancer came back.
The recurrence was detected at the very first health checkup I had after enrolling in college, and I had no choice but to quit. I hadn’t healed after all. And the cancer has even metastasized to my lungs. The feelings were unbearable. I didn’t heal. I didn’t know where to channel my emotions. This time, I really might not be able to live much longer, I thought.
Since I now knew how difficult surgery was, I became depressed thinking about having to go through it all over again. The second surgery ended up taking longer than expected, and because the cancer had metastasized to my lymph nodes quite a bit, the cut on my neck got bigger.
Once again, the anesthesia didn’t sit well with me and I threw up in the middle of the night. Having to suction phlegm out of my chest was particularly painful. After the second surgery I lost all sensation around my clavicle, and it still feels strange whenever I touch that area.
I’ve had people say some shockingly heartless things about my surgical scars. Like when someone asked if they were the result of a suicide attempt. People have said things that never would have crossed my mind. These surgical scars will never go away. Now I always pick clothing that will cover them up.
After the surgery, I had to get isotope treatment for the lesions caused by the lung metastasis. This is a treatment where you take concentrated radioactive iodine pills in order to expose the cancer cells to radiation.
I did outpatient treatment for the first and second round. For this treatment, since you’re ingesting radioactive iodine, you end up becoming an exposure risk to the people around you. After I got my dosage at the hospital I’d go home and isolate myself, but I was worried about exposing my family to radiation. I drank the iodine twice, but the cancer didn’t go away.
For the third round I needed to take a larger amount of iodine, so I had to stay at the hospital. My room at the hospital was at the end of a long, white hallway and through several doors. There were yellow and red signs pasted everywhere, warning of radiation. It was a hazardous area despite being inside a hospital. As for the room itself, you can only bring in previously approved items. That’s because anything you bring in becomes contaminated.
Nurses don’t come into that hospital room. The doctor just comes in once a day to do an examination. I felt bad that the doctor had to come in knowing that they’d be exposed to radiation. I didn’t want anyone to have to sacrifice themselves because of me.
Two or three doctors came into my room with the medicine. The medicine was in a cylindrical plastic case.
Drinking the medicine was a race with time. One doctor took the white capsule out with tweezers, placed it in a paper cup, and handed it to me.
They then immediately left the room, closing the lead door behind them and then instructing me through the speakerphone to drink the medicine. I quickly gulped down the medicine with some water.
After I swallowed, they checked the inside of my mouth through the door. They then held a radiation-monitoring device over my stomach to confirm that the capsule got there, and then I was instructed to lay down on the bed. The doctor then told me over the speakerphone to change the orientation of my body every 15 minutes.
As for food, I was first shown a meal on the TV screen in order to make sure that I could eat all of it without leaving anything on my plate. They didn’t want to give me any more than I could eat, so as to minimize the amount of contaminated waste.
That night, a wave of nausea suddenly came over me. I felt so sick. The feeling wouldn’t go away so I panicked and pressed the button to call the nurse, but the nurse didn’t come. I thought I’d better not throw up on the bed, so I rushed to the bathroom.
When I later told the nurse that I’d thrown up, they just prescribed some anti-nausea medicine. By then it was already past 2am, and I couldn’t sleep very well.
The next day onward, I completely lost my appetite, and I usually had them bring me just medicine and not meals. I threw up once or twice on the second day too.
Until then, I’d almost never thrown up in my life. I ended up bursting a blood vessel in my eye because of the strain of throwing up, and my eye became bright red. Through the door, the nurse checked my condition, and prescribed some eye drops.
I felt sick for the rest of the time I spent in that room. I was just waiting for the time to pass.
In that room, there was a square radiation monitoring device attached to the wall near the ceiling. It looked like an air conditioner. On the bottom right of the device was a display window that would show the radiation measurement. When I stepped closer to it, the number would shoot up, and when I stepped away the number would go down again.
I spent three days like this, and finally it became time to leave. I had to throw away everything I’d been wearing, like my pajamas, into a garbage can made of lead. I changed into the clothes I’d stored in a locker, opened the lead door, and walked with the nurse down the long hallway and through multiple doors.
After this treatment, one of the side effects I had to deal with was that I couldn’t produce saliva normally. It became difficult to swallow food with a low water content, and my sense of taste changed.
That hospitalization experience was the harshest yet. I don’t want to have to go through it again.
I went through such a painful experience, and yet the treatment didn’t work that well. It didn’t do what it was supposed to, and I ended up feeling like it was all a waste. Before, I was motivated to get treatment with the assumption that it would cure me. Now, I just think, I hope this treatment at least slows down the progression of my illness.
After becoming ill, I’ve started prioritizing cancer treatment over my dreams for the future. Because of treatment, I’ve given up on everything—college, the studies I’d been focusing on in order to pursue the career I wanted, and even going to concerts I’d been so excited for.
Of course, I didn’t actually want to give up on college. I wanted to graduate. I wanted to graduate and start working in a field I’m good at. I wanted to do the job hunt process (shukatsu) as a new graduate. I wanted to be carefree and chat with my friends, asking each other, “how was shukatsu?” I wanted to experience college life. These are all dreams that didn’t come true, and it’s hard to let them go.
The friends I went to middle and high school with have already graduated college, started working, and are leading stable new lives. I can’t help but look at them with envy. It’s hard, because I don’t want to feel this sort of resentment toward them.
It’s painful to see medical students at the hospital who are about the same age as me. I end up thinking, I should be a college student too.
Every time I go to the hospital, I think, I hope the tumor marker value hasn’t gone up. But lately, the value is higher every time, and I get crushed—what did I do wrong? Why is the number higher?
My overall health has been declining, and I struggle with sore shoulders, lower back pain, fatigue, and hands and feet that quickly go numb. I’m not sure if it’s because of the excessive amount of medicine I have to take, but I sometimes get heart palpitations or feel like I’m suffocating. The area of my neck where I got surgery also cramps very easily, and when that happens, I have to just endure the pain until it subsides.
I feel bad whenever I think about how much I’ve burdened my family and how much I’ve made them worry because of my illness. I don’t want to cause them any more pain.
I want to return to my old body. But as much as I pray for that, I will never get it back. Through this trial, I hope that thyroid cancer patients are able to get proper compensation.”
Source: https://cnic.jp/english/?p=6524
Is Fukushima’s processed nuclear-contaminated water truly safe?
By Deng Zijun and Xu Zihe Published: Feb 27, 2023
Radioactive water generated by Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear plant 1.37 million tons.
It is still increasing at a rate of more than 100 tons per day.
About 70% of the treated water stored in tanks still exceeds regulatory standards and needs re-purification, according to Tokyo Electric Power Co.
Some radionuclides in the water cannot be fully removed by treatment.
Fighting for Earth
Feb 28, 2023
South Korean civil groups gather in Seoul to protest Japan’s plan of dumping Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea on February 28, 2023. The South Korean government has expressed its concerns over the potential release of radiation-contaminated water from the Fukushima plant into South Korean waters.
1.This Month
29 April – 2 May Ottawa Events – NOT THE NUCLEAR LOBBY returns to Parliament Hill
Monday, April 29, 6:30 PM (pay what you can)
Film Screening Radioactive – The Women of Three Mile Island
Tuesday, April 30, 7 PM (free)
Workshop reading of the play The Children
Wednesday, May 1, 7 PM (free)
Community Forum: Canada’s Nuclear Future – Renaissance or Relic?
Small Nuclear Reactors Education Task Force: https://stop-smrs.weebly.com/bulletins.ht
30 April – 1 May INTERNATIONAL URANIUM FILM FESTIVAL MARATHON ACROSS NORTH AMERICA more https://uraniumfilmfestival.org/en
LAS VEGAS (NV)
April 30 & May 1, 2024 The Beverly Theater, 3 pm to 10 pm
www.thebeverlytheater.com(link is external)
This event benefits Pooha-Bah and is hosted by the Native Community Action Council (Nevada is Not a Wasteland).
Supporter: Beyond Nuclear.
Local organizer and sponsor: Principal Man Ian Zabarte
Western Bands of the Shoshone Nation of Indians
Treaty of Ruby Valley (Consolidated Treaty Series Vol. 127 1863
12 April INTERNATIONAL URANIUM FILM FESTIVAL MARATHON ACROSS NORTH AMERICA SANTA BARBARA (CA)
April 12
University of California (UCSB), 8 pm
Coordinator: Amanda M. Nichols, Ph.D
with the participation of Libbe HaLevy,
producer of the weekly radio show Nuclear Hotseat(link is external) and Ambassador of the IUFF to the USA.
Entry Free! Donations are welcomed!
Finkelstein: Israel Is Prepared to Drag the Rest of the World Down with Them
The video on Palestine that got Yanis Varoufakis BANNED from Germany
PETITION.
Petition demanding broader consent for nuclear waste storage. Closed for signature May 3, 2024
-
Archives
- April 2024 (333)
- March 2024 (335)
- February 2024 (345)
- January 2024 (375)
- December 2023 (333)
- November 2023 (342)
- October 2023 (366)
- September 2023 (353)
- August 2023 (356)
- July 2023 (363)
- June 2023 (324)
- May 2023 (344)
-
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
- 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
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 