The Japanese government is trying to calm fears about radiation levels and food safety in the region around the heavily damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power facility, even as it has raised the severity rating of the crisis to the highest possible level.
"Radiation is continuing to leak out of the reactors. The situation is not stable at all," says Dr. Michio Kaku, professor of theoretical physics at the City University of New York and the City College of New York, in an interview with Democracy Now! April 13. "The slightest disturbance could set off a full-scale meltdown at three nuclear power stations, far beyond what we saw at Chernobyl... you're looking at basically a ticking time bomb."
Dr. Kaku was very critical of the Japanese government response to the ongoing crisis.
Here is an except from the interview:
DR. MICHIO KAKU: Well, Tokyo Electric has been in denial, trying to downplay the full impact of this nuclear accident. However, there's a formula, a mathematical formula, by which you can determine what level this accident is. This accident has already released something on the order of 50,000 trillion becquerels of radiation. You do the math. That puts it right smack in the middle of a level 7 nuclear accident. Still, less than Chernobyl. However, radiation is continuing to leak out of the reactors. The situation is not stable at all. So, you're looking at basically a ticking time bomb. It appears stable, but the slightest disturbance -- a secondary earthquake, a pipe break, evacuation of the crew at Fukushima -- could set off a full-scale meltdown at three nuclear power stations, far beyond what we saw at Chernobyl.
DEMOCRACY NOW!'S AMY GOODMAN: Talk about exactly -- I mean, as a physicist, to explain to people -- exactly what has taken place in Japan at these nuclear power plants.
DR. MICHIO KAKU: Think of driving a car, and the car all of a sudden lunges out of control. You hit the brakes. The brakes don't work. That's because the earthquake wiped out the safety systems in the first minute of the earthquake and tsunami. Then your radiator starts to heat up and explodes. That's the hydrogen gas explosion. And then, to make it worse, the gas tank is heating up, and all of a sudden your whole car is going to be in flames. That's the full-scale meltdown.
So what do you do? You drive the car into a river. That's what the utility did by putting seawater, seawater from the Pacific Ocean, in a desperate attempt to keep water on top of the core. But then, seawater has salt in it, and that gums up your radiator. And so, what do you do? You call out the local firemen. And so, now you have these Japanese samurai warriors. They know that this is potentially a suicide mission. They're coming in with hose water -- hose water -- trying to keep water over the melted nuclear reactor cores. So that's the situation now. So, when the utility says that things are stable, it's only stable in the sense that you're dangling from a cliff hanging by your fingernails. And as the time goes by, each fingernail starts to crack. That's the situation now.
AMY GOODMAN: What about the food, the level of contamination of the food? They are increasingly banning food exports.DR. MICHIO KAKU: The tragedy is, this accident has released enormous quantities of iodine, radioactive iodine-131, into the atmosphere, like what happened at Chernobyl, about 10 percent the level of Chernobyl. Iodine is water soluble. When it rains, it gets into the soil. Cows then eat the vegetation, create milk, and then it winds up in the milk. Farmers are now dumping milk right on their farms, because it's too radioactive. Foods have to be impounded in the area.
And let's be blunt about this: would you buy food that says "Made in Chernobyl"? And the Japanese people are also saying, "Should I buy food that says 'Made in Fukushima'?" We're talking about the collapse of the local economy. Just because the government tries to lowball all the numbers, downplay the severity of the accident, and that's making it much worse.
AMY GOODMAN: What about the evacuation zone? Is it big enough?
DR. MICHIO KAKU: It's pathetic. The United States government has already stated 50 miles for evacuating U.S. personnel. The French government has stated that all French people should consider leaving the entire islands. And here we are with a government talking about six miles, 10 miles, 12 miles. And the people there are wondering, "What's going on with the government? I mean, why aren't they telling us the truth?" Radiation levels are now rising 25 miles from the site, far beyond the evacuation zone. And remember that we could see an increase in leukemia. We could see an increase in thyroid cancers. That's the inevitable consequence of releasing enormous quantities of iodine into the environment.
AMY GOODMAN: And you've been very outspoken when it comes to nuclear power in the United States. This, of course, has raised major issues about nuclear power plants around the world, many countries saying they're not moving forward. President Obama is taking the opposite position. He really is very much the nuclear renaissance man. He is talking about a nuclear renaissance and has not backed off, in fact reiterated, saying this will not stop us from building the first nuclear power plants in, what, decades.
DR. MICHIO KAKU: Well, there's something called a Faustian bargain. Faust was this mythical figure who sold his soul to the devil for unlimited power. Now, the Japanese government has thrown the dice with a Faustian bargain. Japan has very little fossil fuel reserves, no hydroelectric power to speak of, and so they went nuclear. However, in the United States, we're now poised, at this key juncture in history, where the government has to decide whether to go to the next generation of reactors. These are the so-called gas-cooled pebble bed reactors, which are safer than the current design, but they still melt down. The proponents of this new renaissance say that you can go out to dinner and basically have a leisurely conversation even as your reactor melts down. But it still melts. That's the bottom line.
AMY GOODMAN: And so, what do you think should happen? Do you think nuclear power plants should be built in this country?DR. MICHIO KAKU: I think there should be a national debate, a national debate about a potential moratorium. The American people have not been given the full truth, because, for example, right north of New York City, roughly 30 miles north of where we are right now, we have the Indian Point nuclear power plant, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has now admitted that of all the reactors prone to earthquakes, the one right next to New York City is number one on that list. And the government itself, back in 1980, estimated that property damage would be on the order of about $200 billion in case of an accident, in 1980 dollars, at the Indian Point nuclear power station.
For additional coverage on the nuclear crisis in Japan, visit Democracy Now!, click here. Join us on Facebook and share with a friend!
Follow Democracy Now! on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@democracynow
"I suggest that they (TEPCO) be removed from leadership entirely and be put as consultants. An international team of top physicists and engineers should take over, with the authority to use the Japanese military. I think the Japanese military is the only organization capable of bringing this raging accident under control. And that’s what Gorbachev did in 1986. He saw this flaming nuclear power station in Chernobyl. He called out the Red Air Force. He called out helicopters, tanks, armored personnel carriers, and buried the Chernobyl reactor in 5,000tons of cement, sand and boric acid. That’s, of course, a last ditch effort. But I think the Japanese military should be called out…"
Reference: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/11/nuclear-apologists-radiation
"But , as the US National Academy of Sciences BEIR VII report has concluded, no dose of radiation is safe [...]" Actually, it doesn't conclude this, it states that this can not be concluded because at low levels the statistical likelihood of radiation induced cancer cannot be separated from the background of naturally occurring cancers. It accepts the linear, no dose is safe, model as the safest assumption, not a fact. This assumption is not universally accepted by statisticians and biologists based on their own studies, but no one really disagrees that less is better and the least is best. (Which is why the EPA sets public exposure at about 1% the level at which an effect might be detected, and exposure for those working with radiation - not just nuclear - at about half or less of the level of possible detection.)
BEIR does conclude that no dose of radiation is safe. BEIR goes on to say that as the levels approach zero, there is statistical uncertainty.
Then there is the use of units such as becquerels. That tells you something about the quantity, but without knowing where it was measured, which isotopes were measured, and how old the measurement is, it is useless for determining the actual risk. It does make for a big scary number, however. Trillions of Bq sound bad, but if it is nitrogen-16, for example, it is safe in a matter of minutes.
For a more nuanced view, this MIT site is quite good: http://mitnse.com/
The latest Russian comprehensive study clearly states the true Chernobyl
toll at 986,000 up to 2005. Out of the 860,000 first responders and decon workers
125-157,000 were dead by 2005.
German statistics show 50-80,000 early cancer related deaths, Scandinavian
statistics 15-20,000.
Also the latest studies by the The Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP) research group
conducted in Dauphin County Pennsylvania show a significant hike in early deaths in the area.
Remember that place,
Its called
Three Mile Island.
The ethics of the International Commission on Radiation Protection's behavior is being questioned and debated in the scientific community, [37, 38] but there is enormous bureaucratic resistance to any change that would disturb the billions of dollars of research money and clean-up funding flowing as a result of the linear no-threshold myth. [40]
Most damaging is the public fear that this myth perpetuates, making it difficult for many scientists to present the real evidence of the beneficial effects of low-level radiation that have been observed on humans and other living things. It is, therefore, not surprising that the very important UNSCEAR 2000 Report received very little publicity. So, the myths about cancer and abnormal babies will continue, as scientists carry out more and more politically correct and politically funded research on the response of cells and mice to radiation."
http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Ingles2/Rad-1.html
I do have a beef about teh reports on radiation levels in the water. They really do no not indicate where the water was tested. Without that information, you can not assess what the risk is. For example, having sea water 100 times above accepted levels does not mean anything to me if fishing is not done in that area and if I do not drink sea water.
When examining the public statements, it is important to consider motivations. The Japanese leadership has begun to use the word "pragmatic" when discussing the dangers of the radiation now measured. Read: Japan cannot afford to abandon Tokyo, hence, whatever levels are measured will be the basis of a new definition of "safe radiation".
Even your link states the obvious that this "model" is not appropriate for the low level radiation exposure of the general population around Fukushima:
"It is not yet possible to estimate precisely the risk of cancer induction by low-dose radiation, because the degree of risk is so low that it cannot be observed directly and there is great uncertainty as to the dose-response function most appropriate for extrapolating in the low-dose region."
It's patently absurd to even consider abandoning Tokyo when the background radiation is still much lower than places like Denver, CO. And please explain why there are cities where background radiation level is extraordinarily high, such as Denver, but the cancer rates are particularly low?
LNT is appropriate for extremely high acute radiation doses from atomic bombs but totally inappropriate for low level radiation exposures for the general population around Fukushima.
Airborne measurements of radioactivity do not tell the whole story. The land, groundwater, and food chain have all been contaminated. Those who live in this environment get a cumulative exposure from all of these sources over the course of many years.
Here's a BBC counterpoint to the fear:
"Over-reaction
...On the 16th anniversary of Chernobyl, the Swedish radiation authorities, writing in the Stockholm daily Dagens Nyheter, admitted over-reacting by setting the safety level too low and condemning 78% of all reindeer meat unnecessarily, and at great cost.
Bottled water was handed out in Tokyo this week to mothers of young babies. Unfortunately, the Japanese seem to be repeating the mistake. On 23 March they advised that children should not drink tap water in Tokyo, where an activity of 200 Bq per litre had been measured the day before. Let's put this in perspective. The natural radioactivity in every human body is 50 Bq per litre - 200 Bq per litre is really not going to do much harm... '
For the full article, go to:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12860842
The report follows criticism, especially from South Korea and China, that Japan hadn't provided advance warning of its plans and that the release could pose environmental threats.
"We will make sure that detailed explanations will be provided to neighboring countries that have shown interest in the operation," said Hidehiko Nishiyama, director-general and spokesman of the NISA.
The report was also distributed to the three closest prefectures to the plant as well as to local fishing cooperatives, which had been sharply critical of the short notice given before the discharge began on April 4.
The decision to release the lightly irradiated water was taken in order to create room for the storage of highly toxic water that resulted from a spraying operation to cool down overheated reactors.
Some of the water also proved highly toxic, sometimes 100 million times more radioactive than the allowable limit. Preventing the leakage of the most toxic water became a top priority for Tepco and the government."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704628404576264714007348364.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
2) "cesium-134 and cesium-137 at lower but still elevated levels". It's a big ocean with lots of dilution water. There was millions of times more Cs-134 and Cs-137 released into the oceans from atomic bomb testing during the 60's and oceans have handled it pretty well don't you think?
3) "The decision to release the lightly irradiated water was taken in order to create room for the storage of highly toxic water ". If you're so worried about radiation, you should be applauding them for releasing the low activity water instead of the high activity water.
Editor's note: We will update our earthquake news as frequently as possible on AJW's Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/AJW.Asahi. Please check the latest developments in this disaster. From Toshio Jo, managing editor, International Division, The Asahi Shimbun.
Masataka Shimizu, the embattled president of Tokyo Electric Power Co., promised compensation to evacuees who fled the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, but he stopped short of providing specific amounts or a timetable.
"We will respond in a sincere manner based on the compensation system for damage from nuclear power plants after consulting with the central government," Shimizu said at a news conference Wednesday. "Because the evacuation has become a prolonged one, we want to make provisional payments as soon as possible. We still have to decide on a specific amount."
http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201104140123.html
TEPCO is responsible, to take care, of those people who develop cancer as a result of being exposed.
The radioactive half-life of some of these particles is 7 days, and others are 30 years, or 30,000 years.
To stop radioactive toxcity, some of the particles must undergo 10 half-lives, the affected areas will be no-man zones for decades or centuries.
Uranium-238, for instance, is a weak alpha particle emitter by the present standards, and therefore is not considered to cause great radiological harm (this also justifies the use of depleted uranium in munitions and armor). That's like saying the warmth you receive from warming your hands by the fire has the same type of effect on your body as EATING a red hot coal (analogy provided by Dr. Chris Busby, scientific secretary of the European Committee of Radiation Risk).
The basic point is that once radioactive particles of Cesium-137 or Radiodine-131 are INTERNALIZED through inhalation or ingestion they exert genotoxic and cytotoxic reactions several orders of magnitude beyond what is measurable through EXTERNAL radiation detectors and can be attributed to radiolytic decay alone. These adverse effects can be attributed to chemical as well as radiolytic processes. Dr. Chris Busby explains this through the phenomenon of "photoelectric enhancement" in the Uranium-238 model.
This page further explains this problem, as well as the evidence from the US National Library of Medicine on what natural radioprotective properties are available to us in order to take necessary precautionary steps against imminent exposure http://www.greenmedinfo.com/disease/radiation-disaster-associated-toxicity
Not one taxpayer dollar should be spent on it, nor loaned to it.