Writing History and the Legacy of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident
Official histories are always full of omissions and strategic ambiguities. History is, after all, written by those in power.
Howard Zinn, among many others, taught us (i.e., the governed or the “people”) the importance of documenting alternative histories that reflect the perspectives and empirical realities experienced by everyday people and by marginalized authorities whose unwillingness to parrot official narratives leads to their censure.
The official Fukushima narrative is predicated upon four assumptions, all of which I call false:
1. The plant is officially in cold shutdown and radiation contamination is contained
2. No one died from the disaster and long term deaths are likely to be trivial
3. Fukushima produced less environmental contamination than Chernobyl
4. The indisputable ocean contamination produced by Fukushima is now gone
Assumptions 2 and 4 are evident in this article published by the Japan Times declaring that the Pacific Ocean is back to “normal”:
Pacific Ocean radiation back near normal after Fukushima: study. AFP-JIJI Jul 4, 2016 http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/07/04/national/science-health/pacific-ocean-radiation-back-near-normal-after-fukushima-study/#.V3vWMKKYK5o
SYDNEY – Radiation levels across the Pacific Ocean are rapidly returning to normal five years after the crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant spewed gases and liquids into the sea, according to a study released Monday….
…Although no one is recorded as having died as a direct result of the nuclear accident, tens of thousands of people were uprooted, with many still unable to return home because of persistent contamination. Much could be said about this article but in this post I will focus on the assumption that levels of radioactivity in ocean water are returning to normal.
That statement can be both true and not-true simultaneously. The radionuclides may no longer be suspended in tested waters but that doesn’t mean they are gone and that the Pacific ocean eco-system has returned to “normal.”
In fact, it is empirically and logically impossible for most of the radionuclides from Fukushima in the ocean to have disappeared.
Radionuclides have a known decay pattern. Iodine-131 has an approximately 8 day half-life while Cesium-137 has an approximately 30 year half-life. Americium-241 has a 432 year half life.
While the Iodine-131 is probably gone, the Iodine-129 (with a 15.7 million half-life) is still there and contributing to radioactive contamination already present from dumping, atmospheric testing and nuclear accidents. As Wikipedia explains, “Most 129I derived radioactivity on Earth is man-made, an unwanted long-lived byproduct of early nuclear tests and nuclear fission accidents.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_iodine
Radionuclides with long half-lives contaminating the ocean are STILL THERE, still in the ocean, but perhaps they are no longer suspended in surface waters but rather have been absorbed by biological life or are suspended at lower levels in the water column.
BIOACCUMULATION
Official authorities can make the claim that the water has returned to “normal” (whatever that is after decades of dumping of waste and the effects of testing and accidents) because they are not examining how radionuclides have been sequestered in biological life.
In 2014, I conducted a historical search for bioaccumulation using the JSTOR index, focusing on the radionuclides known to present the majority sources of radiation derived from nuclear fallout: 241Am, 90Sr, 137Cs, 238Pu, 239Pu, and 240Pu (DOE, 1997, http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp156-c6.pdf).
Search results from the JSTOR index indicate that bioaccumulation was first studied in the late 1950s by scientists looking at the dispersion of radionuclides in the environment. They tended to be funded by government: for example, Oak Ridge National Laboratory funded research on bioaccumulation of radionuclides in “the marine environment.”
The research cited below finds clear evidence of bioaccumulation of a wide range of radionuclides by aquatic life: Marine organisms concentrate cesium 3-30 times over the levels in the surrounding water, although concentration can be much higher, by two or three orders of magnitude (Polikarpov 1966; Wolfe, 1971), especially in animals situated at the top of the food chain, as modeled by Alva and Gobas for killer whales (Hat Tip Enenews poster but forgot source [sorry]):
Alva, Juan & Gobas, Frank (2011, October 4). Modeling the Bioaccumulation Potential of Cesium-137 in a Marine Food Web of the Northwest Pacific, Canada[9080]. Paper presented at SETAC North America 32nd Annual Meeting in Session 498: Environmental Radiation: What Do We Know and What Should We Know for Assessing Risks http://www.researchgate.net/publication/233869698_Modeling_the_Bioaccumulation_Potential_of_Cesium_137_in_a_Marine_Food_Web_of_the_Northwest_Pacific_Canada
Other highly chemically and radiologically genotoxic radionuclides, such as Americium and Plutonium, are highly BIO-AVAILABLE. For example, research conducted by Fisher, Bjerregaard and Fowler (1983) found that Plutonium, Americium, and Californium concentrate readily in marine plankton:
Nicholas S. Fisher, Poul Bjerregaard and Scott W. Fowler (1983). Interactions of Marine Plankton with Transuranic Elements. 1. Biokinetics of Neptunium, Plutonium, Americium, and Californium in Phytoplankton. Limnology and Oceanography, 28(3) (May, 1983), pp. 432-447 Published by: American Society of Limnology and Oceanography. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2835825
“The results suggest that Pu, Cf, and Am would associate with marine particles which could transport them vertically, transfer them into the marine food web, or both”Page 445; Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that the reactive transuranic elements (e.g. Pu, Am, Co are likely to reach an equilibrium between surfaces of suspended particles and ambient seawater and that the adsorptive properties of particles scavenging these (and other) metals are governed by organic coatings (Balistrieri et al. 1981).
Phytoplankton particles with associated transuranics may sink slowly, transporting these elements to deeper waters and sediments (Bowen et al. 1980; Santschi et al. 1980), or they may be ingested by herbivores in surface waters. Once ingested, radionuclides may be assimilated into food chains (Lowman et al. 1971; Koide et al. 1981) or defecated in the form of fast-sinking fecal pellets (Higgo et al. 1977).
It is interesting that radionuclides such as Cesium and Americium bioaccumulate in different areas of organisms, and at different concentrations with Americium levels higher than Cesium, as illustrated by this study:
Metian, Marc, Warnau, Michel, Teyssie, Jean-Louis, Bustamante, Paco (2011) Characterization of Am-241 and Cs-134 bioaccumulation in the king scallop Pecten maximus: investigation via three exposure pathways. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 102(6), 543-550 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvrad.2011.02.008
[Abstract] In order to understand the bioaccumulation of Am-241 and Cs-134 in scallops living in sediments, the uptake and depuration kinetics of these two elements were investigated in the king scallop Pecten maximus exposed via seawater, food, or sediment under laboratory conditions. Generally, Am-241 accumulation was higher and its retention was stronger than Cs-134.
This was especially obvious when considering whole animals exposed through seawater with whole-body concentration factors (CF7d) of 62 vs. 1, absorption efficiencies (A(0l)) of 78 vs. 45 for seawater and biological half-lives (T-b1/2l) of 892 d vs. 22 d for Am-241 and Cs-134, respectively. In contrast, following a single feeding with radiolabelled phytoplankton, the assimilation efficiency (AE) and T-b1/2l of Cs-134 were higher than those of Am-241 (AE: 28% vs. 20%; T-b1/2l: 14 d vs. 9 d).
Among scallop tissues, the shells always contained the higher proportion of the total body burden of Am-241 whatever the exposure pathway. In contrast, the whole soft parts presented the major fraction of whole-body burden of Cs-134, which was generally associated with muscular tissues. Our results showed that the two radionuclides have contrasting behaviors in scallops, in relation to their physico-chemical properties.
Through absorption and adsorption radionuclides in the water column are readily assimilated by phytoplankton, whereupon they are either consumed – resulting in biomagnification – or fall towards the bottom of the ocean. A significant percentage (estimated at about a 1/2 of cellular load) of Pu and Am accumulated by plankton fall to intermediate depths, where they remain suspended, resulting in the “enrichment of waters of intermediate depth with Pu or Am lost from sinking algal cells” (Fisher et al, 1983).
In other words, the radioactive and chemically toxic radionuclides are still present but are not suspended in surface waters. They are interred in biological life!
FUKUSHMA IS A CONTAMINATED-WATER PRODUCING MACHINE AND IT AINT’ OVER YET
TEPCO has been dumping radioactive water deliberately for years. I have documented this claim in my 2013 and 2016 monographs (see Nadesan Fukushim and the Privatization of Risk 2013 AND Crisis Communication, Liberal Democracy, and Ecological Sustainability 2016).
Moreover, Fukushima is STILL leaking contaminated water into the ocean. That water is highly radioactive, as evidenced by rising ground water contamination at the plant. That is why TEPCO built the ice-wall, which has not been successful according to company officials.
You can see documentation of rising ground water contamination here:
http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2015/03/ground-water-contamination-rising-at.html
There exists good evidence that part of the reactor fuel from units 1-3 is located in the underground river that empties into the Pacific Ocean:
This scenario will result in endless contamination of the ocean with rising levels of Strontium contamination, according to the German Risk Studies.
The “German Risk Study, Phase B” found that a core meltdown accident could result in complete failures of all structural containment, causing melted fuel to exit the reactor foundation within five days (cited in Bayer, Tromm, & Al-Omari 1989).
Moreover, the study found that even in the event of an intact building foundation, passing groundwater would be in direct contact with fuel, causing leaching of fission products. Strontium leaches slower than cesium. A follow-up German study, “Dispersion of Radionuclides and Radiation Exposure after Leaching by Groundwater of a Solidified Core-Concrete Melt,” predicted that strontium contamination levels would rise exponentially years after a full melt-through located adjacent to a river (Bayer, Tromm, & Al-Omari, 1989).
The study’s experimental conditions are roughly similar to Daiichi’s site conditions, including groundwater emptying into an adjacent river, whereas Daiichi is physically situated above an underground river emptying into the sea.
The study predicted concentrations of Strontium-90 in river water would spike relatively suddenly, but maintain extraordinarily high levels of contamination for years: “The highest radionuclide concentration of approx. 1010 Bq/m3 is reached by Sr-90 after some 5000 days.”
CONCLUSIONS
The alternative narrative I have written here is precisely that, alternative. I am a peon. I have no authority to speak as a “social scientist,” as I have been reminded by trolls and certain polemical scientists over the last 5 years.
However, my lack of official expertise does not mean I am wrong.
The contradictions and elisions marring the official narrative will become more glaring with time, as Pacific life continues its inexorable collapse, offering fodder for those like myself who persist in challenging the genocidal authority of the nuclear-security state with alternative narratives, which lack official legitimacy but are no less true because of that deficiency.
REFERENCES
Bayer, A., Al-Omari, I., & Tromm, W. (1989). Dispersion of radionuclides and radiation exposure after leaching by groundwater of a solidified core-concrete (No. KFK-4512). Available http://www.irpa.net/irpa8/cdrom/VOL.1/M1_97.PDF
Gesellschaft fur Reaktorsicherheit (GRS) Deutsche Risikikostudie Kernkraftwerke, Phase B Report GRS-89 cited in Bayer, A., Al-Omari, I., & Tromm, W. (1989). Dispersion of radionuclides and radiation exposure after leaching by groundwater of a solidified core-concrete (No. KFK-4512). Available http://www.irpa.net/irpa8/cdrom/VOL.1/M1_97.PDF
“TEPCO Announced Record Cesium Level Found in Groundwater Beneath Fukushima Levee” The Asahi Shimbun (February 14, 2014): http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201402140041). The article said that cesium found in groundwater under a coastal levee near unit 1 spiked from 76,000 Becquerels per liter on February 12, 2014 to 130,000 Becquerels per liter on February 13, reaching the highest level of cesium ever detected at that location
Record strontium-90 level in Fukushima groundwater sample last July. (2014, February 7). The Japan Times. Available http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/02/07/national/record-strontium-90-level-in-fukushima-groundwater-sample-last-july/#.U2XIw17K3yh
Source : Majia’s Blog
https://majiasblog.blogspot.fr/2016/07/writing-history-and-legacy-of-fukushima.html
North Korea Accuses US Of Creating Nuclear War Threat Near Korean Peninsula
BY VISHAKHA SONAWANE @VISHAKHANS ON 07/05/16 International Business Times, North Korea Tuesday criticized the United States for its joint military drills with South Korea held between June 13 and 20. Pyongyang’s official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), in a commentary, held Washington responsible for nuclear war threat on the Korean Peninsula.
The U.S. sent two B-52 Stratofortress, which can be equipped with long-range nuclear air-to-ground missiles, to fly over the skies near South Korea during the exercises with the Japanese Air Self-Defense Force. KCNA said that Japanese planes that took part in the exercises targeting North Korea……http://www.ibtimes.com/north-korea-accuses-us-creating-nuclear-war-threat-near-korean-peninsula-2389291
USA nuclear bombers fly near South Korea
U.S. sends 2 nuclear bombers to fly in skies near S. Korea last month http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2016/07/03/33/0301000000AEN20160703004100315F.html SEOUL, July 3 (Yonhap) — The United States sent two B-52 nuclear bombers to fly in skies near South Korea last month, military officials said Sunday, a move seen as a display of force against North Korea.
The U.S. strategic bombers from Andersen Air Force Base in Guam conducted flights in skies near the Korean Peninsula and Japan between June 13 and 20, the officials said.
The move was part of the U.S. Air Force’s efforts to check its military capacity in the Asia-Pacific region, they added.
In January the U.S. flew its strategic bunker-busting B-52 bomber across the skies of South Korea in response to North Korea’s fourth nuclear test.
The B-52 Stratofortress, armed with long-range nuclear air-to-ground missiles, conducted a low-level flight over the U.S. Osan Base, some 55 kilometers south of the capital Seoul.
The June flight of the B-52 bombers appeared to be detected by North Korea.
Pyongyang insisted that a formation of B-52s was busy conducting a “nuclear bomb-dropping drill” on June 17.
On June 23, North Korea claimed the successful launch of what it called a Hwasong-10 intermediate range ballistic missile, known as the Musudan missile to other countries, saying that it has the capacity to strike U.S. forces in the Pacific region.
North Korea: United Nations human rights report on N.K. this week
U.S. State Department to release human rights report on N.K. this week WASHINGTON, July 5 (Yonhap) –– The U.S. State Department is expected to submit a report on North Korea’s human rights abuses to Congress this week, and the document is likely to name North Korean leader Kim Jong-un responsible for the situation, a diplomatic source said Tuesday.
Under the North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act enacted in February, the State Department is required to submit a specific report on Pyongyang’s human rights abuses within 120 days of enactment. That deadline passed on June 17.
The department is expected to submit the report this week as it is unable to delay any longer, and the report is expected to mention the North’s leader, the source said on condition of anonymity.
The report can be used as a basis for what would be the first-ever U.S. sanctions on the North over the country’s human rights record. News reports have said that the U.S. is expected to blacklist about 10 North Korean officials. Should Kim be included in the report, he is also expected to be blacklisted……..The U.S. has led the U.N. Security Council to adopt the toughest sanctions ever on Pyongyang while enacting its own unilateral sanctions on the communist nation in the wake of the North’s fourth nuclear test in January and a long-range rocket launch the following month.
Last month, the Treasury Department also designated the North as a “primary money laundering concern,” a powerful sanction designed to cut off the provocative regime from the international banking system for defiantly pursuing nuclear and missile development. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2016/07/06/52/0200000000AEN20160706000400315F.html
A Massive Campaign of Disinformation to Trivialize Fukushima Health Risks
I am being nice, I did not add a 4th monkey to this picture, to represent the selling-out “scientists”….
5 years have past, we are now submerged by a massive campaign of lies, spinned propaganda, that everything is now fine about Fukushima. Some articles spreading plain nonsense, lies without any fear to be accused to be lying. Some our friends even sharing those B.S. articles on their FB pages or FB group without even having the intelligence to write an introduction to those articles, exposing the lies of those articles.
As an example, this article “Scientists Find New Kind Of Fukushima Fallout” where they say: ““He cautions that any internal radiation from particles containing cesium-137 would be much less than the doses people got from external radiation, which would come from cesium-137 and other radioactive elements in the soil or the environment around them.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/samlemonick/2016/06/30/scientists-find-new-kind-of-fukushima-fallout/#636c0d6a4126
Which is absolute bullshit, nonsense, a lie, It completely ignores what science and multiple studies have already well established, that internal radiation is 100 times more harmful than external radiation.
Also the recently released report from the conclusions of a major 5 year review, with multi-international authors who are all working together as part of a Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR) Working Group. The report is being presented at the Goldschmidt geochemistry conference in Japan.
http://phys.org/news/2016-06-fukushima-oceans-years.html#jCp
Which says: ” Uptake by marine life. In 2011, around half the fish samples in coastal waters off Fukushima had radiocesium levels above the Japanese 100Bq/kg limit, but by 2015 this had dropped to less than 1% above the limit. High levels are still found in fish around the FDNPP port. High levels of 131I were measured in fish in April 2011, but as this has a short radioactive half-life, it is now below detection levels. Generally, with the exception of species close to the FDNPP, there seem to be little long-term measurable effects on marine life.”
It takes 12 years for the TRITIUM to lose half of its radioactivity and 120 years for it to lose it all, And 30 years and 300 years for CESIUM, and tens of thousands of years to the PLUTONIUM etc But according to their report the Pacific is now clean just after 5 years.
That report also says: “Risk to Humans. The radiation risk to human life is comparatively modest in comparison to the 15,000 lives were lost as a result to the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami. So far, there have been no direct radiation deaths. The most exposed FDNPP evacuees received a total dose of 70 mSv, which (if they are representative of the general population) would increase their lifetime fatal cancer risk from 24% to 24.4%. However, there are still over 100,000 evacuees from the Fukushima area, and many industries such as fishing and tourism have been badly hit.”
Thus that report is completely ignoring the well proven harmful effects of a constant low dose radiation on human life, and of course completely omitting to talk about the dangers of internal exposure by contaminated food and liquid for the Fukushima population.
When I shared this report on my blog, I wrote an introduction saying: “This report raises certainly a lot of questions about today’s scientific community unbiasedness and independance from governmental and corporated powers.”
A marine biologist came to argue with me on Twitter, reproaching me to not accept science. I answered to him that I do respect science but I won’t stand for bias, for that “science” which is being influenced, bought, twisted or silenced by financial and political interests.
Reuse of radioactive soil feared to trigger illegal dumping
Piles of black bags containing radioactive soil are seen at a temporary storage site in Minamisoma, Fukushima Prefecture, on June 11, 2016. The Environment Ministry is set to conduct a demonstration experiment there possibly later this year, in which radiation doses will be measured on mounds using soil generated from decontamination work.
Reuse of radioactive soil feared to trigger illegal dumping
An Environment Ministry decision to allow reuse of radioactively contaminated soil emanating from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in public works projects has prompted experts to warn against possible dumping of such soil under fake recycling.
The ministry formally decided on June 30 to allow limited use of soil generated from decontamination work after the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant disaster in mounds under road pavements and other public works projects, as long as the soil contains no more than 8,000 becquerels per kilogram of radioactive cesium. The decision was made despite questions raised during a closed meeting of the ministry over incompatibility with the decontamination criteria for farmland soil.
The Act on the Regulation of Nuclear Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors sets the safety criteria for recycling metals and other materials generated from the decommissioning of nuclear reactors at no more than 100 becquerels per kilogram, and requires materials whose radiation levels exceed that level to be buried underground as “radioactive waste.” The figure of 100 becquerels is derived from the International Commission on Radiological Protection’s standards that annual radiation exposure of up to 0.01 millisieverts poses negligible health risks.
However, the Fukushima disaster has disseminated radioactive materials outside the crippled nuclear plant across far wider areas than expected. Under the special measures law on decontamination of radioactive materials, which was fully put into force in January 2012, waste whose radiation levels top 8,000 becquerels per kilogram is called “designated waste” and must be treated by the government, while waste with radiation levels of 8,000 becquerels or lower can be treated in the same way as regular waste. The figure of 8,000 becquerels comes from the upper limit of annual radiation exposure doses for ordinary citizens under the reactor regulation law, which is set at 1 millisievert. Regarding the double safety standards of 100 becquerels and 8,000 becquerels, the Environment Ministry had earlier explained that the former is for “reuse” and the latter for “waste disposal.”
However, the recent Environment Ministry decision to allow the reuse of contaminated soil in public works projects runs counter to its earlier explanation. The ministry is trying to reconcile that difference by insisting that the radiation levels of tainted soil could be kept under 100 becquerels if mounds using such soil were covered with concrete and other materials to shield radiation. During a closed meeting of the ministry that discussed the matter, some attendants raised questions over inconsistencies with the decontamination criteria for farmland soil.
In April 2011, in the aftermath of the Fukushima meltdowns, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries restricted rice planting in paddies whose radiation levels topped 5,000 becquerels per kilogram of soil. While the restriction was effective for just one year, the same criteria has been in place for ensuing decontamination, where surface soil of more than 5,000 becquerels is removed and surface soil under that level is replaced with deeper layers.
It is inconsistent to strip away soil of more than 5,000 becquerels while recycling soil with the same level of radiation. However, attendants of the closed meeting never discussed the matter in detail, nor did the issue come up for discussion at an open meeting.
The radioactivity concentration of contaminated soil is higher than that of earthquake debris, whose treatment caused friction across the country on the heels of the Fukushima crisis. Therefore, officials attending an open meeting of the ministry discussed the introduction of incentives for users of tainted soil, with one saying, “Unless there are motives for using such soil, regular soil would be used instead.”
Kazuki Kumamoto, professor at Meiji Gakuin University specializing in environmental policy, criticized the ministry’s move, saying, “There is a high risk for inverse onerous contracts, in which dealers take on contaminated soil in exchange for financial benefits.” There have been a series of incidents involving such contracts, in which waste was pressed upon dealers under the guise of “recycled materials,” such as backfill material called ferrosilt and slag generated from iron refining.
“If contaminated soil was handed over under inverse onerous contracts, there is a risk that such soil could be illegally dumped later. Reuse of tainted soil would lead to dispersing contamination,” Kumamoto said.
http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20160705/p2a/00m/0na/012000c
How about a bit of Fukushima sake?
Cups of sake are distributed to visitors at a tourism facility in Fukushima on May 18, after Fukushima Prefecture won the most awards at the Annual Japan Sake Awards.
Nuclear disaster a ‘springboard’ for Fukushima sake brewers
FUKUSHIMA–After a change in preference among the nation’s imbibers, Fukushima Prefecture rapidly gained ground as the top sake-producing area in Japan.
And then the nuclear disaster struck in March 2011.
But the triple meltdown that forced entire towns to flee and scared consumers off Fukushima products ended up fueling the rise of sake brewers in the prefecture.
Using its traditional system of public-private cooperation, Fukushima Prefecture not only took over the sake-brewing crown from Niigata Prefecture, the northeastern prefecture has also widened its lead.
Any sympathy that sake brewers had for their Fukushima rivals after the nuclear disaster has now been replaced by competitive words in the field.
Inokichi Shinjo, 65, chairman of the Fukushima Prefecture Sake Brewers Cooperative, could not hide his delight on May 18 while seeing the results of the Annual Japan Sake Awards.
“This achievement will help establish Fukushima’s reputation as the best sake-producing area in the country,” Shinjo said.
In the contest, in which the quality of young sake is judged, 18 products from Fukushima Prefecture were among the 227 brands that won the gold prize for having exceptionally good quality.
It was the fourth straight year for Fukushima to be the top prefecture in terms of number of gold prize-winning products in the competition.
The Annual Japan Sake Awards started in the Meiji Era (1868-1912), and sake from Hiroshima and Hyogo prefectures, as well as other traditional sake-producing areas, dominated the competition until the 1980s.
In the 1990s, more consumers turned to “tanrei karakuchi” (clean and dry) sake. Niigata Prefecture, known for its tanrei karakuchi products, placed first for four consecutive years starting in 1998.
Most of the sake entered in the contest are specially brewed for the occasion. But Fukushima Prefecture has overwhelmed Niigata Prefecture in the Sake Competition, where commercially available sake are evaluated.
Last year, 20 breweries in Fukushima Prefecture entered the Sake Competition.
The prefecture topped the list, with 18 brands from Fukushima, including Aizu Chujo, Nagurayama, Sharaku, Aizu Homare and Hiroki, among the 103 products selected as winners. None of the products from the 13 breweries from Niigata Prefecture were chosen.
HOW DID FUKUSHIMA TOP NIIGATA?
Fukushima-brewed sake rose in popularity after drinkers switched to “hojun amakuchi” (mellow and sweet) sake, noted for a natural flavor of rice, from tanrei karakuchi.
The turning point came in 1994, when the Juyondai sake brewed in Yamagata Prefecture, north of Fukushima Prefecture, was marketed and introduced in a magazine. The sake immediately won high praise, and prompted many brewers to produce hojun amakuchi sake, particularly in other parts of the Tohoku region.
The “Fukushima-style” system, in which citizens and public officials work together, was established to improve the quality of sake through the effective use of advanced brewing technologies.
The characteristics of rice for sake change each year, depending on the climate.
Under the system, the Aizu-Wakamatsu technical assistance office of the prefecture-run Fukushima Technology Center analyzes the year’s rice in advance and advises each brewer on the best way to produce sake.
“The mechanism enabled breweries to produce high quality sake unlike in the past,” said Kenji Suzuki, 54, head of the office’s brewing and food division.
Kenji Hiroki, 49, president of the Hiroki Shuzo Honten brewing company in Aizu-Bange, which makes Hiroki, one of the most famous sake brands in Fukushima Prefecture, said the system has also helped to prevent a trend that has hampered other traditional businesses: a lack of successors.
“Young people in their 20s and 30s have returned to local breweries to take over their parents’ businesses,” Hiroki said.
He also noted that many sake products brewed in Fukushima used to be traded at very low prices.
“The trend encouraged brewers to share their techniques to improve their circumstances together,” Hiroki said. “Even the (2011) nuclear crisis worked as a springboard for us.”
NUCLEAR DISASTER EFFECT
After the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami triggered the disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, companies in the prefecture had difficulty selling products because of persistent fears of radiation contamination.
The prefecture’s sake brewers cooperative has been emphasizing the safety of Fukushima-made sake, saying “both rice for sake and water are carefully examined according to strict standards.”
Such thorough checks also helped to ensure the rice and water were top quality.
Noted Fukushima breweries started joint advertising campaigns to sell their products in Tokyo. The publicity not only helped to increase sales but also spread the word about high quality of Fukushima Prefecture’s sake.
Rivals in other parts of Japan have been inspired by the efforts of Fukushima sake makers.
“Brewers from Fukushima Prefecture always point out each other’s problems when they meet, and it provides me with a good stimulus,” said Tadayoshi Onishi, 41, president of the Kiyasho Shuzo brewery in Mie Prefecture, which produces the popular Jikon brand.
Although sake production has generally declined around Japan, Fukushima brewers’ production is 10 percent higher than the level before the nuclear accident.
Shuichi Mizuma, 66, representative director of the Niigata Sake Brewers Association, expressed confidence that his prefecture would reclaim the title of “the kingdom of sake.”
“The tide often changes,” he said.
Koichi Hasegawa, 60, president of Hasegawasaketen Inc., a major sake retailer in Tokyo, said Fukushima Prefecture’s top position is not secure.
“People will soon be fed up with hojun amakuchi sake,” he said. “Shochu recently made waves as well. And Japanese consumers are frighteningly swayed by the latest trends.”
http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201607050001.html
Mayor opposes reactor restarts in Saga; utility pushes ahead
Imari Mayor Yoshikazu Tsukabe
Mayor opposes reactor restarts in Saga; utility pushes ahead
IMARI, Saga Prefecture–The mayor of Imari expressed opposition to Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s plan to restart a nearby nuclear power plant, but the city in southern Japan has no legal authority to keep the reactors offline.
“I was worried about the ramifications on the local economy and the livelihoods of local residents when the Genkai nuclear plant suspended operations (after the Fukushima nuclear disaster),” Mayor Yoshikazu Tsukabe said at a news conference on July 4. “Five years on, there have been no large disruptions. The prevailing sentiment in this city is that the plant does not need to go back online.”
Tsukabe’s comments came after Michiaki Uriu, president of Kyushu Electric, told a June 28 news conference that the utility is keen to restart two reactors at the Genkai plant.
“We are aiming to reactivate them by the end of the current fiscal year,” he said.
Imari, a city of 57,000 people, lies within a 30-kilometer radius of the plant in the town of Genkai, Saga Prefecture.
That means Imari is required, under central government standards compiled after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident, to prepare an evacuation plan for a possible nuclear disaster at the plant.
However, the utility does not need the city’s permission to restart the reactors.
Kyushu Electric, a regional monopoly, has a nonbinding “safety agreement” with the Saga prefectural government and the Genkai town government, requiring their consent before the plant can be restarted.
The company must also obtain prior approval from the two governments for any change in its business plan under the pact.
Imari, which does not host the plant, has no such agreement with Kyushu Electric.
After long negotiations, Kyushu Electric in February did agree to provide Imari with full explanations about plans for the Genkai plant in advance and give due regard to the city’s stance on resuming reactor operations.
Imari also exchanged a memorandum with the prefectural government that said Saga Prefecture will give full consideration to Imari’s opinion in terms of carrying out the safety agreement with Kyushu Electric.
However, the prefectural government’s stance is that the memorandum does not cover reactor restarts.
Masahiko Ishibashi, an official in charge of prefecture’s department overseeing industry and labor, stopped short of taking a clear position on Mayor Tsukabe’s opposition to the resumption of the Genkai plant’s operations.
“We take it as an opinion,” Ishibashi said.
Tsukabe said he sees no reason for his city to actively cooperate with Kyushu Electric in its business plan.
“Imari residents do not need to bottle up their anxieties about the plant restart for the sake of a portion of Genkai’s economy,” he said.
Regardless of Imari’s opposition, Kyushu Electric will continue its preparations to restart the reactors at the Genkai plant, which is close to the final stage of safety screening by the Nuclear Regulation Authority.
The utility also operates the Sendai plant in Kagoshima Prefecture, the only nuclear power plant currently in service in the nation.
http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201607050064.html
Local mayor vows not to approve restart of Genkai nuke plant
IMARI, Saga — Imari Mayor Yoshikazu Tsukabe said on July 4 that he had no intention of approving a plan to restart the Genkai Nuclear Power Plant in Saga Prefecture.
The Saga Prefecture city of Imari falls within 30 kilometers from Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s Genkai nuclear power station. Imari Mayor Tsukabe said at a regular news conference, “I have no intention of giving consent to restarting (the nuclear plant).”
It is the first time for the head of a municipal government among eight municipalities in three prefectures of Saga, Fukuoka and Nagasaki that are within 30 kilometers from the Genkai nuclear plant to voice such opposition.
Tsukabe said, “If a nuclear accident occurs, we can’t recover from it,” adding, “I will state my opposition (if I am questioned by the prefectural government).”
http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20160705/p2a/00m/0na/004000c
Japanese photojournalist documents nuclear crises in Chernobyl, Fukushima
Ryuichi Hirokawa, a Japanese photojournalist, has documented the world’s two worst nuclear crises — in Chernobyl three decades ago, and the 2011 meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant.
With this year marking the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, Hirokawa, 72, has released a photo book titled “Chernobyl and Fukushima” compiling his reports on the lives of victims of the catastrophes.
After years of reporting on the two disasters, Hirokawa said he has concluded that nuclear power “is not something human beings can handle or control.”
Born in 1943 in a Japanese community in Tianjin, China, Hirokawa was the first non-Soviet journalist to enter the Exclusion Zone following the accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in April 1986.
He has since visited the area more than 50 times and established in April 1991 a foundation for children suffering from leukemia, thyroid cancer and other diseases caused by exposure to a high level of radiation, in response to requests from their mothers.
The foundation has provided these children with medicine and medical equipment and also built recuperation facilities in Ukraine and Belarus.
One of the photos from Hirokawa’s book shows a 14-year-old Ukrainian girl named Tanya lying on a bed at her home. She was 4 years old and lived in a town close to the Chernobyl plant when the disaster occurred.
A decade later, she suddenly felt agonizing pain all over her body. Her thyroid cancer had spread, including to her brain.
“I could do nothing for the girl. All I could do was watch her die,” Hirokawa said. “It was that feeling of helplessness that drove me to support sick children there.”
A quarter of a century later, another devastating nuclear disaster occurred at Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings’ Fukushima No. 1 plant.
When Hirokawa rushed to the scene shortly after the calamity started, the needle of his radiation detector went off the scale in surrounding areas, including in the town of Futaba and the village of Iitate.
“It was shocking because it never happened even in Chernobyl,” he said.
Maps comparing radiation levels in Chernobyl and Fukushima, which he attached at the end of his book, show that radiation levels detected in still inhabited areas in Fukushima are almost the same as those in ruined Chernobyl villages.
“I can’t tolerate the Japanese government’s policy of allowing children to stay in areas contaminated by such high levels of radiation,” he said.
He has also worked to halt operations of the Sendai nuclear plant in Satsumasendai, Kagoshima Prefecture, in the wake of a series of strong earthquakes in Kyushu in April.
Hirokawa sent a petition to Kyushu Electric Power Co. calling on the utility to immediately halt the Sendai plant, which is the only nuclear plant operating in Japan.
Tepco admits molten nuclear fuel is transferred in multiple places of Reactor 2
Tepco admitted the molten fuel is transferred to multiple places in Reactor 2 by 6/30/2016.
Tepco had been implementing the muon scanning investigation with KEK (High Energy Accelerator Research Organization).
Tepco describes the research result as it is highly likely that major part of the molten nuclear fuel remains in the bottom of the reactor with structures of the inside of the reactor. They also detected a part of the molten fuel on the wall of the reactor. This means the molten fuel was separated and remaining in different locations. Tepco did not mention the percentage of the detected fuel.
Tepco did not identify the location either so it is not clear if the fuel remains inside of the Reactor Pressure Vessel or its outer structure, Primary Containment Vessel.
http://nstimes.com/archives/64086.html
As Japan re-embraces nuclear power, safety warnings persist
An aerial view shows the No.1 (L) and No.2 reactor buildings at Kyushu Electric Power’s Sendai nuclear power station in Satsumasendai, Kagoshima prefecture, Japan, August 11, 2015, in this photo taken by Kyodo. REUTERS/Kyodo
Japan’s re-embrace of nuclear power, on display last week with the recertification of two aging reactors, is prompting some critics to warn that Tokyo is neglecting the lessons of Fukushima.
In the first such step since the 2011 disaster, Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) on June 20 approved Kansai Electric Power Co’s application to extend the life of two reactors beyond 40 years.
As it became clear the NRA was going to allow the extensions, a former commissioner broke a silence maintained since he left the agency in 2014 and said “a sense of crisis” over safety prompted him to go public and urge more attention to earthquake risk.
Kunihiko Shimazaki, who was a commissioner from 2012 to 2014, said a powerful quake in April that killed 69 on Kyushu island showed the risk to some of Japan’s 42 operable nuclear reactors was being underestimated.
“I cannot stand by without doing anything. We may have another tragedy and, if that happens, it could not be something that was ‘beyond expectations’,” he said, referring to a common description of the catastrophic chain of events after the earthquake and tsunami that led to the Fukushima meltdowns.
The NRA has said it would take into account Shimazaki’s position in some of its assessments.
Separately when asked about the operating extensions of the reactors, a spokesman for the regulator referred Reuters to remarks by agency chairman, Shunichi Tanaka, on the day of the extensions, when he said: “It does not guarantee absolute safety but it means the reactors have cleared the safety standards.”
According to the World Nuclear Association, an industry body, early reactors were designed for a life of about 30 years, while newer plants can operate up to 60 years.
A 2012 Japanese law also limits the life of all reactors to 40 years, allowing for license extensions only in exceptional circumstances.
TOUGHER REGULATOR?
The meltdowns five years ago at Tokyo Electric Power Co’s Fukushima Daiichi plant after an earthquake and tsunami – the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in 1986 – were blamed in an official report on lax oversight and collusion between operators and regulators.
Kyushu Electric Power is the only utility that has been cleared to restart two reactors at its Sendai plant, while other utilities have been blocked so far by legal action from nearby residents. One more reactor may restart later this month.
After Fukushima, Japan revamped its regulator and tasked it with implementing new standards that the NRA chairman has repeatedly said are among the world’s toughest.
But an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) review this year made 26 suggestions and recommendations to address shortcomings – such as a lack of communication between departments and agencies, and failures on basic radiation standards – and cited only two examples of good practice.
Tokyo is revising the law to ensure there can be unscheduled inspections of nuclear sites, a standard practice in many countries, according to a NRA document, and the regulator is taking steps to improve its internal processes.
A U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Japanese regulator was still young and it would take time to build up a strong safety culture.
But opinion polls show that more than 50 percent of Japan’s population remain opposed to nuclear power following Fukushima, even if using other fuels boosts electricity prices.
The NRA faces accusations that it is caving into pressure to quickly restart an industry that used to supply a third of Japan’s electricity.
“The regulator is the guarantor for the population, not the manufacturers or the utilities, and it is failing,” said Mycle Schneider, an independent analyst and one of the authors of an annual report on the world nuclear industry.
“The first level where the NRA is failing is every single day in their oversight of Fukushima,” he said.
This week a power failure at the Fukushima site knocked out radiation monitoring and the freezing of a so-called ice wall to isolate the damaged reactors. Cooling and water circulation to keep the reactors in a safe state were not affected.
A NRA spokesman said it had not issued instructions to Tokyo Electric or released a media statement because no law was broken.
The government is not pressuring the NRA to approve restarts or interfering in its operations, said Yohei Ogino, a deputy director for energy policy in the industry ministry.
But he said the government will encourage operators “to voluntarily beef up safety, as the country has lost faith in nuclear power.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-nuclear-regulation-idUSKCN0ZH4B3
Confusion on parties’ nuclear policies, as Japan’s election nears
Parties vague on atomic power pledges in run-up to Upper House election http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/07/03/national/politics-diplomacy/parties-vague-atomic-power-pledges-run-upper-house-election/#.V3mhNtJ97Gh
JIJI The election pledges issued by the top political parties show they are divided and uninformed about how fast Japan should reduce its dependence on atomic power and what its energy goals for 2030 should be.
As the pivotal July 10 Upper House election approaches, the parties clearly differ over the government’s fiscal 2030 energy mix, which states that Japan will be procuring 20 to 22 percent of its electricity from nuclear reactors by that time.
Five years after the Fukushima disaster shattered Japan’s nuclear safety myth, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party is promoting nuclear power as a stable, low-cost energy source, and says it intends to slowly reduce Japan’s atomic dependency.
Komeito, its coalition ally, pledges to create a society that does not rely on nuclear power. Although it is opposed to building new reactors, it won’t oppose the restarting of those idled in the wake of the triple core meltdown in Fukushima. Komeito also advocates a very gradual move away from nuclear energy.
The ruling coalition parties’ positions reflect the government’s goal: to lower Japan’s dependency on atomic power around 6 points from 28.6 percent — the level it was at before the Fukushima disaster hobbled the industry in March 2011.
Both aim to bring new and old reactors online if they pass the Nuclear Regulation Authority’s safety screenings, because more than 30 will be needed to achieve the government’s targeted energy mix.
In the opposition camp, the Democratic Party has vowed to rid Japan of nuclear reactors by the 2030s. While the top opposition party will accept reactor restarts, its policy is to strictly maintain the 40-year basic operating limit on reactors. The DP believes its goal will be achievable if no new reactors are built.
The Japanese Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party flatly oppose restarting any nuclear reactors.
Another, Osaka Ishin no Kai, says reactors should not be restarted unless local agreements are enshrined in law as a precondition.
All of the major parties, however, refuse to elaborate on how they will ensure the expansion of alternative energy sources, which are being choked off by Japan’s old and divided power grid.
In line with the government’s target, the LDP and Komeito have promised to almost double the proportion of renewable energy to 22 to 24 percent by fiscal 2030. The DP’s goal is 30 percent and the JCP’s goal is 40 percent.
Since no party has provided hard details on how to further the use of renewable energy and what that will cost, voters need to watch whether the parties will offer any convincing explanations about their pledges during the campaign for the Upper House election.
India’s nuclear insurance policy aims to transfer liability risk from nuclear suppliers
India’s first insurance cover to NPCIL aims to transfer liability risk from nuclear suppliers, International Business Times (IBT) July 3, 2016 By Prabha K S National Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL), the government-owned nuclear power generation company, received India’s first insurance policy that may offset liability risks seen as a bottleneck by foreign nuclear plant suppliers, reported IANS.
The policy, according to the report, will be applicable to all the plants of NPCIL. It covers their liability to the public in the event of accidents specified in the policy and the power plant’s “right of recourse against the equipment suppliers.”
The reinstatement premium will be decided after a claim is filed based on the insurer’s capacity to undertake further risks, said the official……He also added that the policy is devoid of ‘policy excess’, defined as the first amount uncovered by the policy and hence liable to be paid by the company……
The announcement comes after NPCIL paid Rs. 50,000 to each of the six workers who suffered burn injuries at the Kudankulam nuclear plant in May 2014 on successful intervention by National Human Rights Commission, as reported by the Indian Express.
NPCIL is currently mired in allegations of misleading people about the safety of the Kovvada plant in Andhra Pradesh.
Earlier, General Electric chairman Jeffrey Immelt also expressed reservations on building a nuclear plant in India, citing the liability law. http://www.ibtimes.co.in/indias-first-insurance-cover-npcil-aims-transfer-liability-risk-nuclear-suppliers-685317
New India Assurance Company Ltd to insure nuclear reactors
Nuclear plants insured http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/nuclear-plants-insured/article8804348.ece, 4 July 16 India’s first insurance policy covering public liability to an atomic power plant operator has been issued to Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) but the reinstat-ement of insurance value post a claim will be decided later, industry officials said.
“We recently got the insurance policy covering all our atomic power plants. The total premium came around Rs. 100 crore for a risk cover of Rs. 1,500 crore,” S.K. Sharma, Chairman and Managing Director, NPCIL, said.
The policy complies with all the provisions of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act (CLND), said a known insurance industry official.
The Central government had announced in June 2015 the setting up of the Rs. 1,500-crore India Nuclear Insurance Pool to be managed by national reinsurer GIC Re.
The insurance policy was issued by the country’s largest non-life insurer New India Assurance Company Ltd.
The policy would cover the liability towards public as a consequence of any nuclear accident in the plants covered under the policy and also the right of recourse of NPCIL against equipment suppliers. The insurance coverage will be for all the NPCIL’s plants— like a floater cover.
Queried about the reinstatement premium, the official said it would be decided post a claim based on the capacity — to underwrite the risk — available with the insurers.
Plutonium being collected in China and Japan? Fears of another nuclear arms race
Confronting plutonium nationalism in Northeast Asia, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,
Japan has already accumulated about 11 metric tons of separated plutonium on its soil—enough for about 2,500 nuclear bombs. It also plans to open a nuclear spent fuel reprocessing plant at Rokkasho designed to separate eight tons of plutonium—enough to make roughly 1,500 nuclear warheads a year—starting late in 2018. The Japanese plutonium program has raised China’s hackles. China’s new five-year plan includes a proposal to import a reprocessing plant from France with the same capacity as Rokkasho. Meanwhile, South Korea insists that it should have the same right to separate plutonium as Japan has.
Each of these countries emphasizes that it wants to separate plutonium for peaceful purposes. Yet in each country, there are skeptics who respond whenever this argument is made by a neighbor. China and South Korea suspect that Japan’s large stockpile of plutonium and its plans to operate the Rokkasho plant are designed to afford Tokyo some latent form of nuclear deterrence, i.e. a nuclear weapon option. A huge new Chinese commercial plutonium separation program could give Beijing an option to make far more nuclear weapons than it already has. It is unclear what Russia might make of all of this, or North Korea. One possibility is that either might use such “peaceful” plutonium production as an excuse to further expand its own nuclear arsenal. China might do the same as deterrence to Japan. If Seoul joined in, it would be even more difficult to cap North Korea’s nuclear program………
The Obama administration and Congress need to speak more clearly. As Countryman said, “(t)here is a degree of competition among the major powers in East Asia. It is a competition that in my view extends into irrational spheres…”
The United States can stop Japan from separating more plutonium and the spread of “plutonium nationalism” in East Asia only by bringing security issues to the front burner in politics and diplomacy. If the United States clearly announces that operations at Rokkasho constitute a security concern, Japan is almost sure to listen. Having the plutonium discussion between Japan and the United States is critically important; the Abe administration puts a high priority on security issues and is also very pro-United States.
Now is the time to speak clearly on these security issues—before China and Japan lock themselves into a plutonium production rivalry that will make cooperation between them and South Korea on pressing issues, including North Korea’s nuclear program, all the more difficult to secure. http://thebulletin.org/confronting-plutonium-nationalism-northeast-asia9617
1 This Month
PLEASE OPPOSE HR 8255 AND S.3639 – bills would accelerate satellite deployment, with no environmental review or safeguards – https://ncstd5li.quorum.us/campaign/169331/
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- October 2026 (40)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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
