Groundwater to be released into the sea on Monday
The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant plans to start releasing groundwater from around reactor buildings into the sea next Monday.
The government and the operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company, are to formally decide on the discharge date on Wednesday. The water has already been decontaminated.
Officials hope the move will help to curb the accumulation of radioactive wastewater in the reactor buildings. The contaminated water is increasing at a rate of 300 tons a day as the groundwater flows in.
The officials plan to first release some 4,000 tons of water pumped up from the wells around the buildings on a trial basis since August last year.
They say they will continue to pump up water and release it after removing radioactive materials.
Later this week, the utility also plans to resume the construction of steel walls along the coast to stop the groundwater seeping directly into the sea.
The construction work has been suspended until the release of the groundwater becomes possible.
Source: NHK
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/news/20150909_05.html
Can Towns Near Japan’s Fukushima Nuclear Plant Recover?
” There are more decontamination workers than townspeople. It’s like we’ve been taken over,” says carpenter Koichi Takeda, who evacuated to nearby Iwaki City and was in town to help a friend clean her house.
He has a number of clients renovating their houses in Naraha, but most of them are undecided about whether they will actually return. “It’s like keeping a vacation home here,” he said.”
A few signs of life are returning to this rural town made desolate by the Fukushima nuclear disaster four-and-a-half years ago: Carpenters bang on houses, an occasional delivery truck drives by and a noodle shop has opened to serve employees who have returned to Naraha’s small town hall.
But weeds cover the now rusty train tracks, there are no sounds of children and wild boars still roam around at night. On the outskirts of town, thousands of black industrial storage bags containing radiation-contaminated soil and debris stretch out across barren fields.
This past weekend, Naraha became the first of seven towns that had been entirely evacuated to reopen since the March 11, 2011, disaster, when a tsunami slammed into the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, causing meltdowns and a massive radiation leak.
The town’s viability is far from certain, and its fate will be watched closely by authorities and neighboring towns to see if recovery is indeed possible on this once-abandoned land.
Just over a tenth of Naraha’s population of 7,400 say they plan to move back soon, and only a few hundred have actually returned, most of them senior citizens. Schools won’t reopen for another two years, and many families with children are staying away due to concerns about radiation levels, which authorities say are below the annual allowable limit. Residents are given personal dosimeters to check their own radiation levels if they want.
One thing that won’t change is the town’s dependence on the nuclear industry — only this time it will involve dismantling damaged reactors, not building and running them.
An economic revival plan centers on a giant 85 billion yen ($700 million) facility that is being built on the edge of town to research, develop and test specialized robots and other technology — part of the government’s “Innovation Coast” plan to turn the disaster-hit region into a hub for nuclear plant decommissioning technology.
The complex will include mock-ups of sections of the wrecked Fukushima reactors to train workers on robot operations. Dismantling the Dai-ichi plant and removing its melted reactor cores will take about 40 years, the government estimates.
The facility is expected to draw hundreds of workers, and the town also seeks to host laborers to decontaminate buildings and outdoor areas in the area. Naraha is also home to a second nuclear power plant — Fukushima Dai-ni — that barely survived the tsunami but may be scrapped due to local opposition to its restart. So it may also be dismantled.
Returning residents are determined to make a go of it, but they wonder if the town will survive economically — and mourn that it will never be the same cozy place it was five years ago.
“There are more decontamination workers than townspeople. It’s like we’ve been taken over,” says carpenter Koichi Takeda, who evacuated to nearby Iwaki City and was in town to help a friend clean her house.
He has a number of clients renovating their houses in Naraha, but most of them are undecided about whether they will actually return. “It’s like keeping a vacation home here,” he said.
Source: ABC News
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/towns-japans-fukushima-nuclear-plant-recover-33597508
“Radiation is Good for You!” and Other Tall Tales of the Nuclear Industry
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering a move to eliminate the “Linear No-Threshold” (LNT) basis of radiation protection that the U.S. has used for decades and replace it with the “radiation hormesis” theory—which holds that low doses of radioactivity are good for people.
The change is being pushed by “a group of pro-nuclear fanatics—there is really no other way to describe them,” charges the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) based near Washington, D.C.
“If implemented, the hormesis model would result in needless death and misery,” says Michael Mariotte, NIRS president. The current U.S. requirement that nuclear plant operators reduce exposures to the public to “as low as reasonably achievable” would be “tossed out the window. Emergency planning zones would be significantly reduced or abolished entirely. Instead of being forced to spend money to limit radiation releases, nuclear utilities could pocket greater profits. In addition, adoption of the radiation model by the NRC would throw the entire government’s radiation protection rules into disarray, since other agencies, like the EPA, also rely on the LNT model.”
“If anything,” says Mariotte, “the NRC radiation standards need to be strengthened.”
The NRC has a set a deadline of November 19 for people to comment on the proposed change. The public can send comments to the U.S. government’s “regulations” website.
Comments can also be sent by regular mail to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. Docket ID. Needed to be noted on any letter is the code NRC-2015-0057.
If the NRC agrees to the switch, “This would be the most significant and alarming change to U.S. federal policy on nuclear radiation,” reports the online publication Nuclear-News. “The Nuclear Regulatory Commission may decide that exposure to ionizing radiation is beneficial—from nuclear bombs, nuclear power plants, depleted uranium, x-rays and Fukushima,” notes Nuclear-News. ”No protective measures or public safety warnings would be considered necessary. Clean-up measures could be sharply reduced…In a sense, this would legalize what the government is already doing—failing to protect the public and promoting nuclear radiation.”
In the wake of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. crash program during World War II to build atomic bombs and the spin-offs of that program—led by nuclear power plants, there was a belief, for a time, that there was a certain “threshold” below which radioactivity wasn’t dangerous.
But as the years went by it became clear there was no threshold—that any amount of radiation could injure and kill, that there was no “safe” dose.
Low levels of radioactivity didn’t cause people to immediately sicken or die. But, it was found, after a “latency” or “incubation” period of several years, the exposure could then result in illness and death.
Thus, starting in the 1950s, the “Linear No-Threshold” standard was adopted by the governments of the U.S. and other countries and international agencies.
It holds that radioactivity causes health damage—in particular cancer—directly proportional to dose, and that there is no “threshold.” Moreover, because the effects of radiation are cumulative, the sum of several small exposures are considered to have the same effect as one larger exposure, something called “response linearity.”
The LNT standard has presented a major problem for those involved in developing nuclear technology notably at the national nuclear laboratories established for the Manhattan Project—Los Alamos, Oak Ridge and Argonne national laboratories—and those later set up as the Manhattan Project was turned into the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
On one hand, Dr. Alvin Weinberg, director of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, declared in New Scientist magazine in 1972: “If a cure for cancer is found the problem of radiation standards disappear.”
Meanwhile, other nuclear proponents began pushing a theory they named “radiation hormesis” that claimed that the LNT standard was incorrect and that a little amount of radioactivity was good for people.
A leader in the U.S. advocating hormesis has been Dr. T. D. Luckey. A biochemistry professor at the University of Missouri-Columbia and visiting scientist at Argonne National Laboratory, he authored the book Hormesis and Ionizing Radiation and Radiation Hormesis and numerous articles. In one, “Radiation Hormesis Overiew,” he contends: “We need more, not less, exposure to ionizing radiation. The evidence that ionizing radiation is an essential agent has been reviewed…There is proven benefit.” He contends that radioactivity “activates the immune system.” Dr. Luckey further holds: “The trillions of dollars estimated for worldwide nuclear waste management can be reduced to billions to provide safe, low-dose irradiation to improve our health. The direction is obvious; the first step remains to be taken.” And he wrote: “Evidence of health benefits and longer average life-span following low-dose irradiation should replace fear.”
A 2011 story in the St. Louis Post Dispatch quoted Dr. Luckey as saying “if we get more radiation, we’d live a more healthful life” and also noted that he kept on a shelf in his bedroom a rock “the size of a small bowling ball, dotted with flecks of uranium, spilling invisible rays” It reported that “recently” Dr. Luckey “noticed a small red splotch on his lower back. It looked like a mild sunburn, the first sign of too much radiation. So he pushed the rock back on the shelf, a few inches farther away, just to be safe.”
At Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL), set up by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission in 1947 to develop civilian uses of nuclear technology and conduct research in atomic science, a highly active proponent of hormesis has been Dr. Ludwig E. Feinendegen. Holding posts as a professor in his native Germany and a BNL scientist, he authored numerous papers advocating hormesis. In a 2005 article published in the British Journal of Radiology he wrote of “beneficial low level radiation effects” and asserted that the “LNT hypothesis for cancer risk is scientifically unfounded and appears to be invalid in favor of a threshold or hormesis.”
The three petitions to the NRC asking it scuttle the LNT standard and replace it with the hormesis theory were submitted by Dr. Mohan Doss on behalf of the organization Scientists for Accurate Radiation Information; Dr. Carol Marcus of the UCLA medical school; and Mark Miller, a health physicist at Sandia National Laboratories.
The Nuclear Information and Resource Service points out that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or EPA is fully supportive of LNT.
The agency’s reason for accepting LNT—and history of the standard—were spelled out in 2009 by Dr. Jerome Puskin, chief of its Radiation Protection Division.
The EPA, Dr. Puskin states, “is responsible for protecting the public from environmental exposures to radiation. To meet this objective the agency sets regulatory limits on radionuclide concentrations in air, water, and soil.” The agency bases its “protective exposure limits” on “scientific advisory bodies, including the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the International Commission on Radiological Protection, the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Ionizing Radiation, and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, with additional input from its own independent review.” The LNT standard, he writes, “has been repeatedly endorsed” by all of these bodies.
“It is difficult to imagine any relaxation in this approach unless there is convincing evidence that LNT greatly overestimates risk at the low doses of interest,” Dr. Puskin goes on, and “no such change can be expected” in view of the determination of the National Academies of Sciences’ BEIR VII committee. (BEIR is for Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation.)
BEIR VII found that “the balance of evidence from epidemiologic, animal and mechanistic studies tend to favor a simple proportionate relationship at low doses between radiation dose and cancer risk.”
As chair of the BEIR VII committee, Dr. Richard Monson, associate dean of the Harvard School of Public Health, said in 2005 on issuance of its report: “The scientific research base shows that there is no threshold of exposure below which low levels of ionizing radiation can be demonstrated to be harmless or beneficial.”
A European expert on radioactivity, Dr. Ian Fairlie, who as an official in the British government worked on radiation risks and has been a consultant on radiation matters to the European Parliament and other government entities, has presented detailed comments to the NRC on the petitions that it drop LNT and adopt the hormesis theory.
Dr. Fairlie says “the scientific evidence for the LNT is plentiful, powerful and persuasive.” He summarizes many studies done in Europe and the United States including BEIR VII. As to the petitions to the NRC, “my conclusion is that they do not merit serious consideration.” They “appear to be based on preconceptions or even ideology, rather than the scientific evidence which points in the opposite direction.”
An additional issue in the situation involves how fetuses and children “are the most vulnerable” to radiation and women “more vulnerable than men,” states an online petition opposing the change. It was put together by the organization Beyond Nuclear, also based near Washington, D.C. It is headed “Protect children from radiation exposure” and advises: “Tell NRC: A little radiation is BAD for you. It can give you cancer and other diseases.” It continues: “NRC should NOT adopt a ‘little radiation is good for you’ model. Instead, they should fully protect the most vulnerable which they are failing to do now.”
How might the commissioners of the NRC decide the issue? Like the Atomic Energy Commission which it grew out of, the NRC is an unabashed booster of nuclear technology and long devoted to drastically downplaying the dangers of radioactivity. A strong public stand—many negative comments—over their deciding that radioactivity is “good” for you could impact on their positions.
INSIGHT: Failing to see dangers of nuclear power right under one’s nose
Fifty-three months after the fateful nuclear disaster, the Sendai nuclear power plant in Kagoshima Prefecture has become the first in Japan to resume after all were taken offline for safety inspections.
But the restart callously disregards the lives of so many people who were uprooted from their irreplaceable ancestral land, jobs, families and friends by the accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in 2011.
Inspections of nuclear facilities certainly became more stringent after the Fukushima nuclear disaster. But that is no guarantee of their safety. An “unforeseeable” event may occur at any moment, and the cost will be too tragically enormous for anyone to grasp.
Why does the government not want to face up to that fact in earnest? And what about the public, which is allowing the government to move in that direction? While I was furious about these issues, I had the chance to attend a preview of a movie. Seeing it was like getting smacked up the side of the head.
Titled “Tenku no Hachi” (The Big Bee), the action epic, which features an act of terrorism on a nuclear plant, is based on a work of fiction by Keigo Higashino, a best-selling author.
To my surprise, the work both fully and scrupulously presented all the major problems of nuclear power generation that came under the public spotlight after the Fukushima disaster, such as the vulnerability of spent nuclear fuel storage pools, the fictional nature of the safety myth about nuclear power and the merciless way nuclear plants are being forced on depopulated communities in exchange for subsidies.
The original book was written 20 years ago.
Higashino has commented on the work as follows: After his initial plan for it, he spent five years conducting a lot of research on the issue. He was filled with confidence when he finished writing the novel, but received no reaction at all. He thought that, obviously, his work was being ignored on purpose.
If somebody was purposefully “ignoring” the work, who was it?
I WAS PART OF ‘NUCLEAR VILLAGE’
I encountered the issue of nuclear power generation for the first time 27 years ago, when I was a reporter based in The Asahi Shimbun’s Takamatsu bureau in Kagawa Prefecture.
An “output modulation test” was staged at Shikoku Electric Power Co.’s Ikata nuclear power plant in Ehime Prefecture.
A nuclear reactor continues to generate electric power at constant levels day and night, so there is a nighttime surplus of electricity. The test was conducted to raise and lower output levels to enhance efficiency.
Opponents of nuclear power generation reacted angrily to what they argued was a “dangerous” experiment. Thousands of people arrived from all parts of Japan to stage a boisterous protest outside Shikoku Electric’s head office in Takamatsu on the day of the test.
A senior colleague of mine, who had been engaged in a student movement, appeared excited, as he said he was seeing a protest for the first time in a long while. However, local residents gave a chilly reception to the abrupt emergence of the hippie-like band of protesters, which was an uncommon sight.
“What are we supposed to do when all these outsiders suddenly show up and tell us this and that?” went the typical refrain.
I was, frankly, also fed up with the protesters.
The general thinking at the time was: “Japan has great technology. Speaking of possible accidents won’t get you anywhere. After all, modern life is impossible without nuclear power. ”
The anti-nuclear agenda was an unrealistic argument being made by only a few, and was less than catchy as far as news reporting was concerned.
No sooner did I write a halfhearted article about the protest than I returned to covering the police beat–making morning and evening calls to the homes of police detectives in a desperate bid to learn about hidden cases they were pursuing.
That was the way to scoop the competition and enhance my standing at the newspaper. I never attempted, then or afterward, to look into the dilemma of nuclear power generation, although I would have had access to, if only I had sought, a trove of public documents and other materials.
I didn’t even know how many nuclear reactors Japan had, and in which parts of the country, when I was confronted by the Fukushima disaster.
If our eyes are clouded and we are only eager to read the situation and act smartly, we don’t see anything even if something important is hanging right under our noses or if hints are tossed out in our direction.
We use the phrase “nuclear village” to refer to a community of people who rely on benefits generated by the nuclear power industry, which actually represents a major national project. It is exactly those people that created the safety myth and ended up causing the latest disaster. Higashino may have had the nuclear village in mind as the culprit for ignoring the presence of his book.
After all, I was also possibly a member of the nuclear village. I relied on the safety myth as an excuse for looking away from the sorrow and dilemma of those whom nuclear plants were being forced upon, taking the convenient availability of electric power for granted and continuing to scoff at a deluge of alarms.
I was part of the group of people who ignored Higashino’s work, which he had produced with all his might and competence.
LOOKING AT WHAT I SHOULD LOOK AT
One phrase has long stuck in my mind.
I visited a community last year that lies about a 10-kilometer radius from the disaster site. Its deserted landscapes that were frozen in time and were silently tumbling away appeared so eerie that a lump formed in my throat as I realized the exorbitant price of an affluent life.
I blurted out to a local resident who was guiding me around, “Can you forgive Japan for moving to restart its nuclear reactors, oblivious of a disaster of this magnitude?”
The resident remained silent for a while and then muttered, “If nobody changes, nothing will probably ever change.”
Will I be able to change? Will I be able to keep myself separate from the popular sentiment of the time, refuse to conform to the general trend, look at what I should look at and say what I should say?
Source: Asahi Shimbun
Overflowing from a Drainage Ditch into the Sea
Contaminated rain water overflowing from a drainage ditch into the sea at Fukushima Daiichi on September 7, 2015.
毎日新聞映像グループ
Evacuation order lifted for Fukushima town
The evacuation order has been lifted for the town of Naraha in Fukushima prefecture, allowing residents to permanently return to their homes there. Naraha, located within 20 kilometres of the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, is the first of seven municipalities that were fully evacuated to have its order removed.
The town’s entire population of 8011 people were evacuated on 12 March 2011, the day after a large earthquake and tsunami struck the nearby Fukushima Daiichi plant. The loss of power at the plant led to core meltdowns at three of the plant’s six units, resulting in the spread of radioactive materials across the area.
The municipality was redesignated as a zone being prepared for the lifting of the evacuation order in August 2012, which meant that residents were allowed to enter the town during daytime hours.
Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) announced that, following decontamination and reconstruction work, as of midnight on 5 September residents of Naraha were free to return to their homes.
The government aims to lift all evacuation orders by March 2017, except for certain areas where radiation levels are expected to remain high.
Source: World Nuclear News
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-Evacuation-order-lifted-for-Fukushima-town-0709154.html
Japan Reopens Town 12 miles from Fukushima Daiichi, Govt Says Radiation is at Safe Levels.
Noraha Mayor Yukiei Matsumoto, rear left, plants a tree with children of Naraha residents during an event in Naraha, Fukushima
More than four years after the 7,400 residents of the Japanese town of Naraha were evacuated after the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant melted down in the wake of a devastating tsunami, the government is allowing people to return.
Following several years of decontamination, Naraha is the first town in the area to allow residents to return. It was evacuated in March 2011 after the Fukushima plant was smashed by the magnitude-9.0 earthquake and tsunami near Sendai, setting off the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl.
The central government has said radiation is at safe levels.
“The clock that was stopped has now begun to tick,” Naraha Mayor Yukiei Matsumoto said at a ceremony attended by about 100 people. Naraha is “at the starting line at last,” he told reporters.
But, according to The Associated Press, a survey indicates that 53 percent of the evacuees from the town, about 12 miles south of the nuclear plant, “say they’re either not ready to return home permanently or are undecided. Some say they’ve found jobs elsewhere over the past few years, while others cite radiation concerns.”
The Japan Times reports: “To address lingering radiation concerns, dosimeters will be handed out and 24-hour monitoring will be conducted at a water filtration plant. Also, tap water will be tested at households worried about radioactive contamination.”
Source:
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/05/437792215/japan-reopens-town-shuttered-by-fukushima-nuclear-disaster
“Tainted Water Flows Into Sea For Sixth Time From Fukushima No. 1” : Wow, 6 times only? Do you believe this?
Tokyo Electric Power Co. said rainwater contaminated with radioactive substances flowed Monday into the Pacific Ocean from the Fukushima No. 1 power plant through a drainage ditch.
This is the sixth time that radioactive water has made its way into the sea from the plant, which was heavily damaged in the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
Tepco had raised the height of the weir in the ditch’s outlet from 70 cm to 85 cm, but it failed to prevent the latest outflow.
It occurred between 2:55 a.m. and 4 a.m., according to Tepco. The amount of outflow and the level of water contamination was unknown as of Monday evening.
Rainwater in the drainage ditch was to be transferred by pumps to a separate ditch leading to the plant’s port. Although eight pumps were operating at full capacity from 2:51 a.m., they were unable to catch up with the accumulation of rainwater due to heavy rain, allowing contaminated water to flow over the weir, Tepco said.
The company plans to complete its work by the end of March to close the drainage ditch’s outlet and make a new one inside the plant’s port.
Source: Japan Times
EDITORIAL: Each Fukushima water leak weakens faith in Japan’s food safety
Wholesalers check fish at a market in Iwaki, Fukushima Prefecture.
Japan’s dispute with South Korea over its import restrictions on Japanese seafood imposed after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster is now going to the World Trade Organization.
Following the accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, South Korea banned imports of some marine products caught in waters off Fukushima and seven other prefectures, mainly areas along the Pacific coast between Aomori and Chiba prefectures. Then in autumn 2013, Seoul expanded the scope of the ban to include all marine products from these prefectures.
The Japanese government responded to the move by criticizing the measure for “lacking a scientific basis.”
Tokyo has been demanding that the measure be withdrawn while cooperating with Seoul’s investigations. But the two countries have failed to resolve their disagreements, and Japan has asked the WTO to set up a dispute-settlement panel comprising experts from third countries to rule over South Korea’s import ban.
More than a dozen countries and areas have barred imports of all or part of Japanese-made foods, but the government has singled out South Korea because the country has expanded its restrictions.
The WTO tends to be regarded as dysfunctional because of the lack of progress in the global trade-liberalizing talks under its auspices. But the world trade watchdog has at least been performing its dispute-settling functions.
Japan has been making active use of the WTO’s ability to settle trade disputes.
Over the past several years, Tokyo has filed complaints with the WTO over China’s restrictions on exports of rare earth minerals and Ukraine’s emergency restrictions on automobile imports, for instance. These actions have produced certain positive results for Japan.
Japan’s diplomatic relations with South Korea remain strained over some long-standing territorial and history-related rows. But both countries should not allow these problems to affect the ways they deal with economic issues like trade disputes.
Tokyo and Seoul need to continue talks to seek an early solution to the dispute even while the WTO’s panel is hearing the case.
Four-and-a-half years after the accident, coastal areas of Fukushima Prefecture, where the disaster-stricken nuclear power plant is located, are still subject to restrictions on shipments of certain kinds of fish. Even for the fishes not covered, fishermen in these areas are allowed to catch and sell them only on a “trial basis.”
A system has been established to ensure that farm, forestry and fishery products made in areas directly affected by the disaster as well as surrounding regions are shipped only after they have passed the safety standards in radiation tests. But consumers have shown a tendency to avoid all food products from these areas.
In cases of fishery products, only small-scale fishing operations and limited sales of products have been conducted to gauge the reactions from consumers.
The South Korean government says it has expanded the import curbs in response to leaks of radiation-contaminated water from the Fukushima plant.
With the South Korean public deeply worried about food contaminated with radioactive materials, the step was aimed at preventing confusion among consumers in the country, according to Seoul.
The scope of the import restrictions and the means involved may be open to dispute. It should be noted, however, that in both South Korea and Japan, food safety from a scientific viewpoint doesn’t necessarily reassure consumers.
The Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant has been plagued by leaks of polluted water. Local fishermen have lodged protests every time such an incident occurs.
It must not be forgotten that every leak of contaminated water makes consumers even more unwilling to put their faith in the safety of products from the areas.
The only way to restore the public’s trust in the safety of food is to ensure there will be no more leaks of contaminated water nor any exacerbation of the nuclear accident. The food trade dispute with South Korea should serve as a reminder of the absolute need to achieve these most basic nuclear safety goals.
Source: Asahi Shimbun
Tepco Dumps Radioactive Water in Ocean To SAVE Ocean
Tepco Dumps 10,000 Bq Per Liter Tritium Ocean Release Ice wall 2015 https://youtu.be/0fP6iV0_47s
TEPCO releases statement saying they will pump up highly contaminated groundwater for release into the sea. Tepco will constantly check measurements while releasing minimally treated radioactive water into the ocean. The WHO standard says 10,000 BQ of “Tritium” Per Liter is OK. Tritium cannot be filtered or distilled. Half life like 12.5 years could be around 300 years to go back to barely detectable levels. It’s doubtful the Ice wall will ever create a seal to contain radioactivity.
Music: https://youtu.be/31Y103Q1lZs
Not to mention the tanks are not seismicly qualified and are only expected to last a short time. Many have already been leaking. They are running out of physical space to install more and more tanks.
Fukushima Daiichi NPS Prompt Report 2015
Fukushima Daiichi NPS Prompt Report (Sep 02,2015)
Recent topics: SUBDRAIN & GROUNDWATER DRAIN OPERATIONS SET TO BEGIN AT FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI, SHOULD LEAD TO FURTHER PROTECTION OF THE OCEAN
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-…
For more information about the operation of the subdrain and groundwater drain: http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/decommision…
For more information on the seaside impermeable wall: http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/decommision…
For more information on the landside impermeable wall (frozen soil wall): http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/decommision…
-The upper limit of radioactive concentration for Subdrain and Groundwater Drain:
Cs-134 1Bq/L, Cs-137 1Bq/L, Gross 3Bq/L, Tritium 1,500Bq/L
-(Reference 1) The upper limit of radioactive concentration for Groundwater Bypass:
Cs-134 1Bq/L, Cs-137 1Bq/L, Gross 5Bq/L, Tritium 1,500Bq/L
-(Reference 2) WHO Guideline for Drinking-Water Quality:
Cs-134 10Bq/L, Cs-137 10Bq/L, Gross 10Bq/L, Tritium 10,000Bq/L
Prof. Chris Busby at the European Parliament 2013 Radiation Risk ECRR vs. ICRP https://youtu.be/0jG4ePcUzqI
* ECRR-MODEL VS. ICRP *
The existentiality of the lawfuly acceptable amount of radionuclides in the environment is the core question for all life on Earth. This question is scientifically formulated as the intelectual battle between two scientific models on the risk of the radioactivity, the acceptable levels of radionuclides in the environment. The presently by the governments used ICRP-model, by the experts of this website is found guilty to be the cause of ongoing genetical annihilation of all life forms as it underestimates the risks thousands of times. The ECRR-model is suggested to be used.
ECRR-model http://www.euradcom.org
Recommendations of the ECRR http://www.euradcom.org/2011/ecrr2010…
ICRP-model http://www.icrp.org
Analyses of the ICRP model http://irpa11.irpa.net/pdfs/3a35.pdf
Enjoy the scientific battle of both directors of the two Radiation Risk models — J. Valentin and C. Busby, 22.03.2009, Stockholm
The recently resigned Scientific Secretary of the ICRP, Dr Jack Valentin , concedes to Pr. Chris Busby (ECRR) that the ICRP model can not be used to predict the health effects of exposures and that for certain internal exposures it is insecure by up to two orders of magnitude.
He also says that as he was no longer employed by ICRP he could agree that the ICRP and the United Nations committee on radiation protection (UNSCEAR) had been wrong in not examining the evidence from the Chernobyl accident and other evidence which shows large errors in the ICRP risk model.
Fukushima town facing population decline, lack of lifelines as evacuation orders lifted
Residents began returning to the Fukushima Prefecture town of Naraha on Sept. 5 as evacuation orders issued after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster were lifted, but the town’s revival is uncertain as residents fret over the scarcity of medical services and other lifelines.
To make Naraha residents’ return to their homes successful and to increase momentum for the reconstruction of additional towns, the national government is drawing up policies to provide assistance to local businesses.
In the district of Kamikobana, an area near central Naraha that is surrounded by forest, Noriko Sato, 53, smiled on Sept. 4 as she watched her 93-year-old mother-in-law tend to flowers in the garden of the family’s home, to which they returned after having evacuated to the Fukushima prefectural city of Iwaki.
“She is really happy to be back,” Sato said.
The women had participated in a program that began in April to allow temporary overnight stays, launched in preparation for the full lifting of the evacuation orders in Naraha.
Among the 18 households in the district, however, some 30 percent have built new homes in the areas where they evacuated — and though the evacuation orders have been lifted, hardly any of them plan to return anytime soon.
Sato says that she had also planned to resettle permanently outside of Naraha, but that she decided to return due to her mother-in-law’s desire to live in her hometown, which had been her residence for 70 years. Meanwhile, Sato’s 56-year-old husband has been living on his own in Niigata Prefecture, after the foodstuffs company where he works relocated there following the nuclear crisis. With their 28-year-old daughter living and working alone in the city of Iwaki, the family of four continues to live scattered apart.
In the meantime, Naraha residents are voicing their anxiety about life in the town following the lifting of the evacuation orders. For example, a high concentration of radioactive materials remains sunk at the bottom of a dammed lake within the town’s borders that serves as a local water source.
“It is only the elderly who wish to return here,” Sato noted. “In the future, the population will continue to decrease even further,” she added. “And if people don’t return here, places to shop and to seek medical treatment won’t be built. I really don’t know whether this town will make it or not.”
Farmer Tamio Watanabe, 68, spent time cleaning his home on Sept. 4 in preparation for moving back in together with his family, whose members span three generations. “This town is going to experience financial hardship at some point after the government has finished with its period of intensive reconstruction,” he commented worriedly. “The governmental services available here are likely going to decline as well.”
Prior to the meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co., the town did not receive local government tax allocations because it was receiving subsidies for hosting the Fukushima No. 2 Nuclear Power Plant. Now, the town is receiving tax allocations because its tax revenues have fallen to less than one-third of pre-disaster levels. Anticipated population declines also mean that predictions for the future there remain uncertain.
Sachio and Hiroko Watanabe, aged 56 and 61, respectively, say that with more than four years having passed since the disaster, life as evacuees has become the new norm.
The couple tore down their home in Naraha this year in February, and bought a 38-year-old home in the city of Iwaki, where Sachio’s company had relocated. “We will be watching what happens in Naraha from afar,” Sachio commented softly, an air of sadness about him.
According to prefectural estimates, populations of the 12 municipalities where evacuation orders were issued following the nuclear accident have decreased due to factors such as people relocating their residence registries to the areas where they evacuated.
As a consequence, eight towns and villages in the Fukushima prefectural county of Futaba are considering merging in the future.
Evacuation orders for six whole towns and villages in Futaba County are still in place. Among them, large areas in the three towns of Namie, Futaba and Okuma are designated as “difficult-to-return zones” where annual cumulative radiation exposure levels exceed 50 millisieverts.
The mayor of one of the municipalities in Futaba County commented, “Everyone here realizes that at some point, we will need to begin looking at the possibility of merging.” Meanwhile, a top prefectural official noted, “While we do not have the capacity to undertake such a merger at present, this will eventually be a discussion that we can no longer avoid.”
As evacuation orders were lifted in Naraha, the city of Minamisoma and the town of Kawamata, along with the village of Katsurao, began a program of provisional overnight stays on Aug. 31.
In Minamisoma, however, only 32 percent of residential neighborhoods and other areas where residents visit throughout the course of their daily activities had been decontaminated as of Aug. 7 although the municipal government is aiming to have evacuation orders for the city lifted by April next year.
“Decontamination is ongoing, and there is almost no one around,” commented Toshiyuki Kuroki, 66, a former agricultural cooperative employee who returned with his wife to their home in Minamisoma’s Odaka district.
“We are not yet receiving postal mail delivery, and life here is inconvenient, he added. “But at the place the authorities had rented (as a temporary housing unit for us), we could not work in the garden — and in fact, there was nothing to do at all. Here, at least things are better than they were there.”
Source: Mainichi
http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20150905p2a00m0na010000c.html
Long-time residents of Naraha facing dilemma with lifting of evacuation order
Shukan Sakanushi, head priest of the Dairakuin temple in Naraha, performs a ceremony on Sept. 5 praying for the rebuilding of his hometown.
With the lifting of the evacuation order for the Fukushima Prefecture town of Naraha on Sept. 5, Shukan Sakanushi, head priest of the Dairakuin temple in Naraha, decided to return home.
At midnight, he chanted Buddhist sutras in a ceremony praying for the rebuilding of the town.
“Those who live in temples have to go to where the people are,” Sakanushi, 44, said. “Today is a milestone of sorts. I will return to the temple from today.”
However, because only a small number of long-time residents have returned to Naraha, many parts of the town are quiet and lonely at night. Community bonds remain severed, making a return to Naraha difficult for former residents such as Teruyuki Ishizawa, 75, who now lives in temporary housing in Iwaki.
“I want to return but cannot,” he said. “The town is so dark that I cannot allow my wife to walk outside by herself.”
The lifting of the evacuation order for residents who fled in the wake of the accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant following the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami does not mean that all 7,400 residents can simply return home.
Some evacuees have established comfortable lives elsewhere and want to continue with that daily routine.
Others are discouraged by the likelihood that only a few neighbors will return to their communities even with the evacuation order lifted.
For Sakanushi, March 11, 2011, was a special day, but not because of the twin disasters that changed his life. That was the day he was officially appointed head priest of Dairakuin by the headquarters of the Buzan sect of Shingon Buddhism to which the temple belongs.
He intended to take over most of the duties performed by his father, Myokan, 78, who had served as head priest of Dairakuin for 50 years.
However, after the evacuation order was issued for Naraha, Sakanushi’s family of six moved away.
Sakanushi is also an employee of the Naraha town government. He temporarily moved to Aizu-Wakamatsu where he provided support to other evacuees. Subsequently, he moved to Kita-Ibaraki, Ibaraki Prefecture, where his wife, Chisaki, 39, daughter, Mayu, 11, and son, Homare, 7, had evacuated to. Sakanushi’s parents eventually settled in Iwaki, Fukushima Prefecture, after initially evacuating to Gunma Prefecture.
Although the evacuation order has been lifted, Sakanushi is now the only family member to return to Naraha.
No decision has yet been made about whether to have his two children return. The town government plans to resume the elementary and junior high schools in town from spring 2017. But Homare has no memories of life in Naraha, because he evacuated four and a half years ago.
“I do hold the feeling of wanting to live together as a family,” Sakanushi said. “However, the children have become accustomed to life in Ibaraki. I will think about whether we should all return by the time school resumes here.”
Many of his temple’s followers have also not returned to Naraha. Some are still concerned about the radiation, while others are worried about the inconveniences associated with returning to a community that has been deserted for more than four years.
Sakanushi plans to maintain the temple “annex” that was established in Iwaki, where about 80 percent of Naraha residents have evacuated to.
The tsunami and Fukushima nuclear accident have drastically altered the appearance of Naraha.
Homes along the coast remain flattened from the tsunami. Areas that once were rice paddies now are filled with black plastic bags holding dirt contaminated by radiation.
After the nuclear accident, lodging facilities and offices of companies involved in reactor decommissioning and decontamination work related to the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant have been constructed in Naraha. More than 1,000 workers now reside in Naraha, exceeding the number of long-time residents who returned. Those workers also frequent the temporary shopping arcade that has been set up in town.
A couple who now reside in Nagoya have all but given up hope of ever returning to Naraha.
Yoshiharu and Nobuko Matsumoto fled to Nagoya because their oldest daughter lives in Aichi Prefecture.
At first, Nobuko, 79, would say to Yoshiharu, 80, “We will return after a year or so.”
However, their lives as evacuees have now lasted for four and a half years.
Their oldest daughter, who returned temporarily to Naraha to sell off furniture and clean up, told them how their home has deteriorated.
Mold has grown on the house, which has also been damaged by rats. Shrubs have grown taller than the height of the Matsumotos.
This spring, the Matsumotos were told it would cost 10 million yen ($84,000) to repair the home.
That was when Nobuko decided, “I will remain in Nagoya.”
Yoshiharu was still determined to return to Naraha.
In early August, the entire family returned to Naraha with the intention of completing the clean-up work.
Even though he had back problems, Yoshiharu made the trip to Naraha, but he could not stop the tears from flowing when he saw his home for the first time in more than four years.
A next-door neighbor had begun destroying their home. The neighbor across the street had also decided to do the same. Of the family of five who used to live in the back of the Matsumoto home, only the grandmother in her 80s is planning to return.
In total, only one neighbor among their acquaintances was planning to return to Naraha.
“I want to return, but if I cannot farm and there are no friends, I would not be able to go on living there,” Yoshiharu said. “When I saw our home, I felt we had moved far away.”
He still has not decided whether to tear down the home because he fears that would anger his ancestors. Yoshiharu has asked his children to, at the very least, leave the family grave in Naraha.
Source: Asahi Shimbun
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201509060018
Radiation fears as report shows Fukushima fir trees to be growing strangely
TOKYO — Following the events of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami and the subsequent meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant complex, radiologists in Japan have been closely observing the area for potential changes. A new report by the National Institute of Radiological Sciences now suggests that the fir trees in Fukushima may be exhibiting strange growth patterns, with the radiation from the disaster being named as a possible factor.
The report, published on the organisation’s website on August 28, states that when comparing fir trees from within the affected zone to those from areas with lower radioactivity, the fir trees in the affected area were increasingly found to be stunted and exhibiting signs of morphological change, particularly bifurcation, the splitting of a body into two parts, i.e. “branching.”
Each year of a healthy fir tree’s growth sees it growing directly upward while also putting out two horizontal branches. Scientists have noted, however, that some of the trees in the affected areas are only branching off into two separate directions at the tip, and exhibiting lack of upward growth.
The changes can be identified in the images above left, which were included with the report. Image A shows a normal example of growth. Note the vertical central branch. Photo B shows a trunk which has entirely split into two, and photo C shows horizontal growth only, with a distinct lack of vertical growth. The red arrows indicate where bifurcation has occurred. You can see in image C how the central, vertical branch of the tree which should be growing upward is missing entirely.
The investigation was conducted in January of this year, with trees examined in Okuma, Fukushima (3.5 kilometres from the nuclear plant), and two locations in Namie, Fukushima (8.5 and 15 kilometres from the plant). Radiation levels in Okuma were recorded at 33.9 microsieverts, and in Namie, the levels were 19.6 and 6.85 microsieverts, respectively. These trees were compared against trees in the north of neighbouring Ibaraki Prefecture
from an area with a microsievert reading of 0.13.
Between 100 and 200 trees in each location were examined for changes, with the effect seen more often in the areas with higher levels of radiation. 90% of the trees examined in Okuma exhibited some degree of morphological change, a number which fell to 40% and 30% in Namie, and to less than 10% in northern Ibaraki Prefecture.
The correlation between the frequency of the morphological change and the proximity to the Fukushima Daiichi site/level of radiation recorded suggests that it is likely — but as yet not confirmed — that the changes are connected to the increase in background radiation.
However, the report notes that this particular morphological change has been identified in other areas and can be attributed to a range of other factors including environmental changes and as a result of pest damage. The report states that rather than attributing this change directly to the nuclear disaster, researchers are instead presenting evidence that proves that this change is seen more often when radiation is a contributing factor.
Source: Report on Morphological Changes to Fir Trees in Areas with High Radiation, National Institute of Radiological Sciences
Source: Japan Today
Japan lifts evacuation order for town near doomed nuke plant
NARAHA, Japan (AP) — Japan’s government on Saturday lifted a 4 1/2-year-old evacuation order for the northeastern town of Naraha that had sent all of the town’s 7,400 residents away following the disaster at the nearby Fukushima nuclear plant.
Naraha became the first to get the order lifted among seven municipalities forced to empty entirely due to radiation contamination following the massive earthquake and tsunami that sent the plant’s reactors into triple meltdowns in March 2011.
The central government has said radiation levels in Naraha have fallen to levels deemed safe following decontamination efforts.
According to a government survey, however, 53 percent of the evacuees from Naraha, which is 20 kilometers (12 miles) south of the nuclear plant, say they’re either not ready to return home permanently or are undecided. Some say they’ve found jobs elsewhere over the past few years, while others cite radiation concerns.
Naraha represents a test case, as most residents remain cautious amid lingering health concerns and a lack of infrastructure. In the once-abandoned town, a segment of a national railway is still out of service, with the tracks covered with grass. Some houses are falling down and wild boars roam around at night.
Only about 100 of the nearly 2,600 households have returned since a trial period began in April. Last year, the government lifted evacuation orders for parts of two nearby towns, but only about half of their former residents have returned.
Naraha Mayor Yukiei Matsumoto said that Saturday marked an important milestone.
“Our clock started moving again,” he said during a ceremony held at a children’s park. “The lifting of the evacuation order is one key step, but this is just a start.”
Matsumoto said he hoped Naraha could set a good example of a recovering town for the other affected municipalities.
About 100,000 people from about 10 municipalities around the wrecked plant still cannot go home. The government hopes to lift all evacuation orders except for the most contaminated areas closest to the plant by March 2017 — a plan many evacuees criticize as an attempt to showcase Fukushima’s recovery ahead of the 2020 Tokyo Summer Olympics.
Matsumoto said that fear of radiation and nuclear safety was still present, and that Naraha had a long way to go in its recovery. The town will be without a medical clinic until October, while a new prefectural hospital won’t be ready until February.
A grocery store started free delivery services in July, and a shopping center will open next year. Still, many residents, especially those who don’t drive, face limited options for their daily necessities.
Residents have been given personal dosimeters to check their own radiation levels. To accommodate their concerns, the town is also running 24-hour monitoring at a water filtration plant, testing tap water for radioactive materials.
Toshiko Yokota, a 53-year-old homemaker who had to leave her Naraha house after the disaster, said Saturday that she came back to attend the ceremony and clean her home, and that she eventually wants to move back with her husband. Their house was damaged by rats, bugs and rainwater leaks in their absence, and still needs to be fully renovated, but she hopes to return in a few years.
“My friends are all in different places because of the nuclear accident, and the town doesn’t even look the same, but this is still my hometown and it really feels good to be back,” said Yokota, who currently lives in another town in Fukushima prefecture.
“I still feel uneasy about some things, like radiation levels and the lack of a medical facility,” she said. “In order to come back, I have to keep up my hope and stay healthy.”
Source: AP
Japan census conducted every five years likely to show first population plunge since 1920
Japan will on Thursday kick off a national census conducted once every five years that is expected to be the first showing a drop in the nation’s population since the survey began in 1920.
The upcoming census, covering all residents and households in the country, regardless of nationality, will also be the first in which an online response system will be made available nationwide.
According to estimates by the internal affairs ministry, the nation’s population has fallen annually in recent years. Preliminary population figures based on the new census data are to be released in February.
The census “will provide basic data needed for various policies, including welfare services and disaster prevention, which are essential to the creation of Japan’s future,” a ministry official said, calling for cooperation in the survey.
The census will be taken household by household, covering the names, birthdays, occupations and other questions.
In the previous census, online responses were accepted only in Tokyo. This time, the ministry projects more than 10 million households will submit answers online, including via personal computers and smartphones.
If the number reaches the expected level, the census would be one of the biggest online surveys in the world that use similar techniques, the official said.
The forthcoming census will also be the first one since the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami and the subsequent atomic crisis at Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, both of which forced the evacuation of many people in the Tohoku region.
The survey is expected to help deepen understanding of population movements triggered by the disaster.
Source: Japan Times
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (82)
- April 2026 (356)
- 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)
-
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 