[Danny]

Radioactive Concrete Scare
January 16, 2012


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Danny]

First Video of Fukushima Reactor Interior
January 20, 2012


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[RBM]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Explanation by linker:

	Tokyo Gamma air-reading - 1 yr chart. Maybe next century it will be back down to near the pre-disaster baseline (currently still almost double original background).

Question about graph:

	What is the green shaded area supposed to represent?

Answer:

Well the bottom of the green shade is the old baseline minimum background reading of 0.028 microsievert per hour. The top of the green is the highest peak that had ever been recorded in Tokyo pre Fukushima (0.079 micro sieverts per hour). The daily average just before the disaster was 0.034. it was 0.053 yesterday (23rd Feb). Well that's about a 60% increase compared to 1 year ago, Not quite as bad as the near double I initially said. Of course in Fukushima City levels are still about 30 times last year's levels. Levels of up to 1.5 milli-sieverts per hour were recorded by journalists on a bus at the plant a few days ago. That's almost 50,000 times the pre-accident level and that was inside a sealed bus.

I wonder if this is so politically charged an issue, that the scientific community is only hitting the high points, or if they are doing a comprehensive recording job, but merely controlling data flow to the public.

[reckful]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
from today's Wall Street Journal on the ongoing risks posed by Fuel Pool #4.

But if you really like to worry, here's a recent post from the (at least) semi-respectable regions of the blogosphere:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


The second link suggests that there's a better-than-even chance of a substantial earthquake near Fukushima within a time frame that poses a far-from-insignificant risk of a Fuel Pool #4 catastrophe that could result in (for example) the evacuation of Tokyo and the exposure of large portions of the world's northern hemisphere to unhealthy levels of radiation.

Is this blogger's perspective overly alarmist? I don't claim to have the expertise to say.

My main reason for posting this second link is in the context of the many previous posts in this thread that have expressed disgust with the purportedly sensationalistic/fear-mongering/etc. coverage of Fukushima by "the media." I think it's worth noting that you'll pretty much search in vain if you try to find anything remotely resembling the linked blog post in mainstream media sources, and I'd suggest that anyone who thinks the mainstream media's approach to incidents like Fukushima is irresponsibly sensationalistic might want to ask themselves why, if that's the case, the vast majority of mainstream media sources have mostly been ignoring, rather than sensationalizing, the current dangers posed by Fuel Pool #4.

[RBM]

I'm no longer one to worry about such things, but I do think this is going to get worse. I've come across links on Pool #4, in my regular reading circles, so I've noted it's getting more media attention but no more mitigation attention.

[babsa]

I wonder if the recent catastrophe in Japan, as well as the caution that surrounds this new development will lead to more responsible placement of nuclear reactors? This may come as a large disadvantage to some countries and areas that are more likely to have natural disasters, but there should be less lenient risk assessment...

[RBM]

	Originally Posted by babsa To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I wonder if the recent catastrophe in Japan, as well as the caution that surrounds this new development will lead to more responsible placement of nuclear reactors? This may come as a large disadvantage to some countries and areas that are more likely to have natural disasters, but there should be less lenient risk assessment...

I don't have a clear picture about new development, but one example about old development is Germany in the case of them shutting down nuke energy sources.

I think the time passed since the Japan situation is to short as of yet. to make it clear about new development. Also it would most likely be a country be country case of circumstances.

[reckful]

Contrary to
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
that the Fukushima disaster was caused by a "biblical combination of earthquake and tsunami" and that attempts to assign substantial responsibility to human error amounted to a sensationalistic and ignorant "anthropomorphizing" of the incident, a
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
— following a six-month investigation that included 900 hours of hearings and interviews with more than 1,100 people — has concluded that the Fukushima incident was "a profoundly man-made disaster" resulting from "collusion" among TEPCO, regulators and the Japanese government, and that the disaster "could and should have been foreseen and prevented."

Originally Posted by NY Times

The report, released by the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, also warned that the plant may have been damaged by the earthquake ... even before the arrival of a tsunami — a worrying assertion as the quake-prone country starts to bring its reactor fleet back online. ... Tepco has asserted that the plant withstood the earthquake, ... instead blaming the disaster on what some experts have called a "once-in-a-millennium" tsunami that ensued. ... But by suggesting that the plant may have sustained extensive damage from the earthquake — a far more frequent occurrence in Japan — the report in effect casts doubts on the safety of Japan’s entire fleet of nuclear plants. ... [The report says that Tepco,] the government, and regulators ... all ... "betrayed the nation’s right to safety from nuclear accidents." "There were many opportunities for taking preventive measures before March 11. The accident occurred because Tepco did not take these measures," and regulators went along, the report said. For Tepco, new regulations would have made running its plants more expensive and cumbersome, and weakened their standing in potential lawsuits brought about by anti-nuclear groups, the report said. "That was enough motivation for Tepco to aggressively oppose new safety regulations and draw out negotiations with regulators," it said.

[Dung]

Originally Posted by reckful To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Contrary to To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. that the Fukushima disaster was caused by a "biblical combination of earthquake and tsunami" and that attempts to assign substantial responsibility to human error amounted to a sensationalistic and ignorant "anthropormorphizing" of the incident, a To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. — following a six-month investigation that included 900 hours of hearings and interviews with more than 1,100 people — has concluded that the Fukushima incident was "a profoundly man-made disaster" resulting from "collusion" among TEPCO, regulators and the Japanese government, and that the disaster "could and should have been foreseen and prevented."

It's a cover up from the start. I've said it all along by the way. Of course they didn't do the tsunami, but it was predictable, predicted and doomed to happen. Tepco knew, government knew and moderately reasonable people knew it too. Other plants will fuck up, too if we don't learn the lesson.

[Polymath20]

	Originally Posted by Dung To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	It's a cover up from the start. I've said it all along by the way.

I wouldn't say a "cover up" in the classical sense of the word. Japanese business principles are very much about scratching each others backs, and putting respect/honor above practicality, science, and reality.

You will respect my decision because I am in this lofty position and it is my duty to scratch the backs of those who got me here!

Japanese businessmen expect you to honor business relationships, even if they are unprofitable, as long as there is mutual respect. It's very mobster-esque, like "I'll look out for you, but you gotta look out for me sometimes too."

There's a bit about sumo wrestling in Freakonomics which covers the same cultural attitude. Sumo wrestlers are expected to take a dive if their position is already secure for the sake of their competitor.

[Traverser]

	Originally Posted by Dung To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	It's a cover up from the start. I've said it all along by the way. Of course they didn't do the tsunami, but it was predictable, predicted and doomed to happen. Tepco knew, government knew and moderately reasonable people knew it too. Other plants will fuck up, too if we don't learn the lesson.

The entanglement between the nuclear industry and government is sickening, especially given the risks nuclear power carries with it. Don't get me wrong; nuclear power has a place in the market, but bribing the government to, essentially, enable criminal behavior? That is, to get a free pass of destroying the properties, including health, of neighbors? Despicable.

[alt lit]

Intriguing 52-minute account of the Fukushima disaster, with original footage from inside the plant and interviews from major players, including Japanese Fukushima nuclear engineers and the Japanese PM at the time:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[RBM]

	Originally Posted by alt lit To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Intriguing 52-minute account of the Fukushima disaster, with original footage from inside the plant and interviews from major players, including Japanese Fukushima nuclear engineers and the Japanese PM at the time: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Thanks for the link. Frontline usually does high caliber work, and this seemed to be one more in that category.

The one comment that stood out to me, was early in the film. It was the fisherman who made the comment about the shoreline. He said something along the line of 'it was always known an earthquake here would mean a tsunami would happen next.'

It sounded like his culture had already figured out consequences to events.

[Dung]

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
- Article from The New York Times

[reckful]

^ Thanks for the link. Here's a bit of the article:

Originally Posted by New York Times

Though incomplete, the footage from a concrete bunker at the plant confirms what many had long suspected: that the Tokyo Electric Power Company ... knew from the early hours of the crisis that multiple meltdowns were likely despite its repeated attempts in the weeks that followed to deny such a probability. It also suggests that the government, during one of the bleakest moments, ordered the company not to share information with the public, or even local officials trying to decide if more people should evacuate. Above all, the videos depict mayhem at the plant, a lack of preparedness so profound that too few buses were on hand to carry workers away in the event of an evacuation.