Escape to Okinawa
Jane Barraclough
December 6, 2011
Okinawa refuge story.

Fukushima fallout refugees meet at Naminoue beach in Okinawa

As radiation hot spots emerge in Tokyo and nuclear contamination plagues the country, some Japanese are fleeing to the Okinawa island chain to avoid the fallout from Fukushima. But is it too late?

THREE days after Japan's biggest-ever earthquake and its colossal shock waves pummeled Fukushima's coast, reducing the TEPCO Daiichi nuclear plant to radioactive wreckage, Mari Takenouchi cycled frantically through East Tokyo with her baby strapped on her back.

The Tokyo-born translator had set aside a small window of time to do last-minute errands before she and her one-year-old son fled to the Okinawa islands – Japan's southernmost prefecture, 2000 kilometres south of the unfolding crisis. En route to the airport, she rushed to get to a dentist appointment, taking her baby with her.

Takenouchi, and millions of others, were unaware of the radiation cloud over the capital. Three full meltdowns had already happened — uranium-packed fuel rods had overheated and liquefied, triggering a series of blasts on March 12 and 14.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Okinawa refuge story.

Mari Takenouchi with son Joe.

“It was a fine day with some breeze. I'll never forget the wind hitting my face, while I was riding my bicycle with my baby on my back,� she says.

The cloud was at its thickest during the three hours Takenouchi and her son, Joe, spent outside before fleeing the mainland. According to the Tokyo metropolitan government's air samples, which were measured in Setagaya Ward, where Takenouchi was riding her bike, Joe was exposed to 145 times the normal level of background radiation in the city.

Kyoto University's reading was on par with that of hot spots in the deserted voluntary evacuation zone just 20-30 kilometres from the still-leaking plant.

“I really want to turn the clock backwards,� Takenouchi says. “Our flight was booked for the morning, but I moved it to 3pm so I could do some chores like getting my phone fixed and finishing off my dental work. Looking back, I probably could have done these things in Okinawa. But at that point, we were told Tokyo was a safe distance away.�

At that stage, Tokyo Electric Power Company was playing down the possibility of radiation being released from a major core meltdown. A government spokesman has since admitted to initially denying the extent of the crisis to prevent public panic — the three meltdowns were not fully acknowledged by Japanese authorities until June.

But the lack of alarm after the explosions kept Takenouchi and Joe in Tokyo half a day too long to dodge the fallout, which gradually dispersed in a cruel lottery of wind, rain and snow that contaminated homes, farms, wilderness, and eventually a schoolyard in Takenouchi's neighbourhood.

The Adachi Ward elementary school, where soil taken from a drainpipe emitted 16 times the level of radiation regarded as safe by the local government, is just one among a spate of radiation hot spots to emerge since March.

In the south of greater Tokyo, a Yokohama resident discovered sediment containing strontium-90 — which is linked to bone cancer — at nearly twice the levels of the highest traces mapped in Fukushima and more than 10 times that remaining from Cold War-era weapons testing.

But the main cause of radiation anxiety is caesium-137, which lingers in the environment for decades and can increase the risk of cancer if exposure exceeds certain levels. The total release from Fukushima of the long-lived radionuclide amounted to about 42 per cent of that emitted in the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, according to a new Norwegian study.
The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

Based on worldwide data from Nuclear Test Ban Treaty monitoring stations, the Norwegian research more than doubles the official Japanese government figure, which did not account for radiation spikes in other countries or in the ocean.

It also does not include radiation released in recent months, as workers have tried to stabilise the shattered plant and prevent nuclear fuel from melting into the ground.

An estimated 20 per cent of this initial fallout ended up on land — not just countryside but also in densely populated cities.

In the city of Kashiwa, caesium-laced late-March downpours were blamed for significant daily concentrations of ground-level radiation near a playground — levels comparable with having more than half the average person's yearly dose of natural background radiation.

While Takenouchi evacuated before the hot-spot scares, she still worries about damage to her child's health, damage she fears may be irreversible.

“No doctor in the world fully understands the effects of low-dose radiation on adults, let alone on young children. So how can the government say there is no health risk in Tokyo,� she says.

Coincidentally, on the eve of March 11, Takenouchi was putting the finishing touches to a Japanese translation of the Petkau effect — a controversial theory that claims even low levels of radiation can cause terminal diseases.

Scientists remain divided on the effects of low-dose radiation, but clusters of leukaemia, thyroid cancer, Down syndrome and birth defects in Chernobyl-exposed populations point to some of the known risks of the only other nuclear emergency rated on par with Fukushima.

“When I heard how high the radiation was that day, and I realised my baby could have breathed in those particles, exposing him to the risk of internal radiation as well as external, I was very angry that nobody warned us. That is what shocked me, not the accident itself — which had long been predicted."

Takenouchi first heard forecasts of an earthquake-triggered nuclear power blackout in Japan 10 years ago at a symposium of American nuclear safety experts. After that, she

earmarked Okinawa as a permanent getaway in the wake of a nuclear accident.

Within days of north-east Japan's natural and nuclear disasters, she traded her apartment in Tokyo for a boxy studio in

Naha, which is home to more than half of Okinawa's 1.5 million people.

A former trading empire with a distinct culture and language, the subtropical island chain is scattered between Taiwan and Kyushu in the East China Sea and is a popular holiday destination for Japanese, Taiwanese and Chinese tourists in summer.

In the main drag of her new inner-city neighbourhood of Kumoji, a backpacker and local activism hub, police calmly patrol what have become regular protests against the US military base located on Okinawa island. Now there is a new catch-cry —“no nukes�.

More than 200 people, mostly evacuees from the mainland, took part in a recent demonstration against nuclear power. The demonstrators are just some of the 17, 521 Japanese who migrated to Okinawa between March and August this year – a 12.3 per cent increase from the same period in 2010.

Okinawa prefecture is the largest region in Japan without nuclear plants.

Okinawa island, the largest in the group, has beautiful beaches, a slow-food subculture and thriving music and arts scenes. It attracts thousands of sea-changers every year, but only recently has this included

worried parents who would never have considered a move to Okinawa before the Fukushima disaster.

In a cheap-housing block in Naha, Takenouchi and 30 other refugees from around the mainland — mostly mothers with young children — share the same anxieties. They talk about bizarre rashes, high fevers, blood noses and government and industry failures “they can never forgive�.

Displaced by the March 11 tsunami, Sendai refugee Yuriko Tanaka chose to leave temporary accommodation on the north-west border of Fukushima prefecture because she did not believe her children were safe. And she was worried about a persistent rash on the body of her four-year-old son.

“It's been there since August and left scars all down his arms and hands. The doctor gave us steroid cream, which only made it worse,� she says. “My friend's child, who lives in the same area as us, got a similar rash mid-year.�

As it was difficult to prove whether something in Fukushima's fallout caused the skin reaction, Tanaka decided to take her own precautions and move to Okinawa.

Minaho Kubota is another parent who decided to seek refuge on the island. She says her life in Japan changed course the moment she heard news of the disaster .Until then, the mother of two had never even heard of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.

Her seven-year-old son, Daito, was playing outside when she turned on the the radio and heard about a series of nuclear explosions 190 kilometres north of her house in Mito City in Ibaraki Prefecture.

“I just cried,� she says. “Then Daito developed a rash on his neck.�

Four weeks later, when she was already considering leaving Japan, Kubota's baby son got his first-ever blood nose. “I decided to move as far away as possible within Japan, but it took two months to convince my husband it was a good idea.

“He thought there was no point worrying so much if there was nothing we could do about it.�

Like many of Kubota's neighbours and friends who treated Fukushima as a “taboo� subject, her husband did not like to talk about radiation.

Kubota told teachers at her son's school not to give him milk after batches with excessive amounts of caesium were recalled. The school ignored her requests.

“In the end I made up a story that he was allergic and they finally stopped giving him the milk.�

Kubota says she had “no choice� but to leave. I don't want to wait and see if my kids are part of future statistics on the consequences of Fukushima.�

Meanwhile, several NGOs have linked some people's health problems to fallout from Fukushima.

Thyroid abnormalities were found in 10 out of 130 non-evacuated Fukushima children who were exposed to excessive amounts of iodine-131 in March.

In June, door-to-door surveying in non-evacuated areas 60 kilometres from the plant revealed clusters of residents with persistent nose bleeding and diarrhoea. The same symptoms were also found among Tokyo residents.

Hiroshima survivor Dr Shuntaro Hida, who runs a non-profit hospital for Chernobyl and Hiroshima atomic bomb victims, assessed 50 patients at a one-off clinic in the middle of the year.

“People presented with purple spots, nose bleeding, high fevers, diarrhoea, aching bones, and extreme fatigue, � he says.

These symptoms appeared to varying degrees in people exposed to fallout from the Hiroshima bomb, which contained caesium and iodine but also high levels of strontium-90. Longer-term effects included malignant tumours, spinal problems, birth defects, leukaemia, breast cancer, thyroid dysfunction, radiation cataracts, and liver and heart diseases.

After seeing patients at the clinic with multiple radiation symptoms, Hida is concerned about radiation in Tokyo. While there is still no urgent public health threat in Japan, according to the World Health Organisation, he believes those people who fled to Okninawa are far from paranoid.

“It's a personal choice, as every individual has their own priorities and perceptions of the health risk. But as someone who has seen the delayed and immediate health impacts of nuclear fallout, I tend to err on the side of caution.�

Takenouchi, who helped translate one of Hida's books on Hiroshima victims, telephoned him when her son's temperature exceeded 38 degrees for the eighth time within two months of arriving in Okinawa.

“He told me that seeing I've already left the mainland, and can't take back those hours of exposure on March 15, the best thing I can do now is just keep on loving my child and try to give him a normal life here.�

Jane Barraclough is an Australian freelance journalist based in Japan.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world...3.html#ixzz1fryZ6bfW

Wednesday, Dec. 7, 2011

Cesium-laced baby formula sparks concern, but risk low
Distrust rife despite contamination levels well below government limit

By JUN HONGO and MIZUHO AOKI
Staff writers

Manufacturers and mothers with young children were quick in reacting Wednesday to news of cesium-tainted baby formula being sold in markets, even though the reported contamination levels were well below the government-set limit.

Although experts stressed that such levels would not harm the health of babies even if they continued drinking the contaminated dry milk product, Meiji Suteppu (Meiji Step), mothers with young children weren't ready to breathe a sigh of relief yet — instead expressing a sense of distrust in dairies.

"The amount of cesium may be small but babies drink such products every day, some more than five times each day," Ai Tatsuno, a mother of four — including a 2-year-old — told The Japan Times.

Tatsuno moved from Yokohama to Okinawa in April with her family following the meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. And now — with news of radioactive cesium of up to 30.8 becquerels per kilogram being found in the Meiji Co. baby formula — many questions are surfacing, Tatsuno said, including the level of cleanliness where such products are being made.

"I've been careful in purchasing baby formula manufactured before March 11. Now I might quit and use soy milk and other products for my children," Tatsuno said.

Meiji tested samples from 35 cans recently produced and found four of them to be contaminated with radioactive cesium-134 and -137 totaling between 22 and 30.8 becquerels per kilogram, a level below the government's allowable limit of 200 becquerels per kilogram.

"You don't need to feel stressed even if you gave your children this powdered milk," said Hirokazu Miyoshi, associate professor of radiation chemistry at the University of Tokushima.

The body of an adult male weighing 60 kg usually contains radioactive potassium-40 of 4,000 becquerels. Based on this figure, a 3-kg baby would always have roughly 200 becquerels of the same radioactive material in its body, Miyoshi said.

"Given that, you can say 30 becquerels per kilogram (in powdered milk) is small" and would pose no harm to a baby, Miyoshi said.

For babies 3 months or younger, the 30.8 becquerels of cesium would translate to roughly 0.0007018 millisieverts of exposure to radiation.

According to the International Commission on Radiological Protection, exposure to 100 millisieverts increases the cancer mortality risk by about 0.5 percent. This means the risk for babies that ingested the Meiji product is extremely small.

Talks to set a new limit for baby food products are ongoing in the health ministry, since infants and young children are especially vulnerable to effects of internal radiation exposure.

However, despite the limited risks, the news made headlines and fanned parents' fears. Manufacturers vowed to beef up the level of inspection in production lines to ease customers' worries.

Meiji has said there is a high likelihood that the products in question were contaminated when outside air taken in through filters was used to dry the skim milk at the factory in Kasukabe, Saitama Prefecture, from March 14-20.

The contamination "is considered a level that does not have an effect on health even if (the product) is used everyday," Meiji said on its website, pledging to conduct checks on their products every day, with updated results online. Production lines will be halted if high levels of contamination within the factory area are found, they said.

Wakodo Co., another major baby formula manufacturer, has posted a statement on their website assuring consumers that necessary tests — including the origins of milk and the level of water contamination — are being conducted to guarantee the safety of their products.

Norio Ishibashi, a spokesman for Japan Dairy Industry Association, said baby formula manufacturers generally use similar processes when making their products. However, he said, the radioactive contamination of Meiji products doesn't automatically mean other formulas may contain such materials as well, since multiple reasons, including geographical factors, could factor into the contamination.

"We will consider conducting regular screenings" throughout the industry following the contamination of Meiji's products, he said.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20111207x2.html

quote Originally posted by dennis_6: Its also fallacy to assume that because the human body has x amount of radiation normally, adding y amount won't harm it. If I can drink a fifth of whiskey and not pass out, then it should be fine for me to drink a additional half a fifth without passing out because thats a small amount relative to what my body already contains. This may very well be false, and illustrates the failure in that logic.

So now you are saying you think you are somehow smarter than the Wikipedia reference?

btw your wacko analogy isn't even close to what the Wikipedia story stated.

[This message has been edited by phonedawgz (edited 12-07-2011).]

Nuclear exports remain Japanese priority

07 December 2011
Japan's lower house has approved four international nuclear cooperation agreements in a sign of commitment to nuclear exports.

Emerging nuclear nations with export potential Jordan and Vietnam should soon begin trade of nuclear goods and services with Japan, while fully developed nuclear power users Russia and South Korea will renew old agreements. Four separate bills were approved by the lower House of Representatives yesterday and passed on to the upper House of Councillors where they are also expected to pass without problem.

Despite this clear support for nuclear trade and export, Japan itself is currently developing a completely new energy strategy, having torn up the previous one in reaction to the accident at Fukushima Daiichi. While nuclear energy has been noted to remain as one of four central pillars of policy (along with fossil fuels, renewables and efficiency improvements) the extent of the government's spoken commitment is likely to remain low for some time. Separately, approval to bring a number of operable reactors back from maintenance outages has been withheld, prolonging a nation-wide energy shortage.

In Jordan's emerging nuclear market, South Korea has been contracted for a major research reactor and begun developing proposals for a nuclear power plant, which could reduce energy imports and desalinate seawater. As yet, Japan has had little or no involvement with Canadian, South Korean, Belgian and Chinese firms taking visible roles.

In Vietnam, however, Japan has a higher profile and its companies are lined up to supply the country's second nuclear power plant. Russian contractors are slated to complete construction of the first in 2020, the Japanese plant starting up four years later.

Intergovernmental agreements for both of these projects were signed in October 2010. At that time Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, said that Japan Atomic Power Co. (Japco) and the International Nuclear Energy Development of Japan Co. Ltd. (JINED), would work with Vientamese state utility EVN on the nuclear power plant project. Japanese firms and agencies would finance up to 85% of the total cost.

In February 2011 Japco signed an agreement with EVN to advance the feasibility study, and in mid-2011 Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) confirmed that it would remain part of the Japanese project, despite the crippling effect of the Fukushima accident and subsequent government decisions on compensation.

Researched and written
by World Nuclear News

quote Originally posted by phonedawgz: My statement hold true - the baby formula has less radiation than the banana - ounce per ounce. Your story stated "Although experts stressed that such levels would not harm the health of babies even if they continued drinking the contaminated dry milk product" Are you saying the story you posted is wrong?

Your statement neglects to mention that the body gets rid of the extra radiation quickly, so the amount in the body remains a near constant. The radiation from the baby food is not removed the same way and adds up. You are distorting the truth again.

I wasn't giving a opinion on that story only your banana story. I post stories that are very pro nuke, along with anti nuke, so forum members can make up their own minds and not be spoon fed what to think.

[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 12-07-2011).]

Compare apples to apples next time.

Gov't to place TEPCO under its control in bid to split company
The TEPCO headquarters building, center. (Mainichi)
The TEPCO headquarters building, center. (Mainichi)

The government intends to place Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) under its control in a bid to take the initiative in reforming the crisis-hit utility and carrying through fundamental reform of its energy policy.

Specifically, the government is aiming to take the opportunity of revamping TEPCO's management to split power suppliers into power generation and transmission entities and nationalize the nuclear power generation business as part of its energy policy reform.

In restructuring TEPCO, the government intends to appoint outsiders to replace a majority of current members of its board led by Chairman Tsunehisa Katsumata in addition to providing the power supplier with an infusion of public funds.

TEPCO has been in a serious financial crisis since an accident at its tsunami-hit Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant on March 11. The government's Nuclear Damage Liability Facilitation Fund has effectively kept the company afloat in order to ensure a stable supply of electric power and payments of compensation to those affected by the nuclear crisis, and to avoid confusion in the market.

Still, the company's board is struggling to rehabilitate itself. It will be required to decommission and dismantle the crippled nuclear reactors and decontaminate areas tainted with radioactive substances leaking from the plant, which is estimated to cost the utility trillions of yen.

TEPCO is aiming to dispose of its assets, slash its personnel expenses, sharply raise its electricity charges and resume operations at its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant in Niigata Prefecture amid desperate efforts to secure enough profits to cover such expenses.
In this March 20, 2011 aerial file photo taken by a small unmanned drone and released by Air Photo Service, the crippled Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant is seen in Okumamachi, Fukushima prefecture. From top to bottom: Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3 and Unit 4. (AP Photo/Air Photo Service)
In this March 20, 2011 aerial file photo taken by a small unmanned drone and released by Air Photo Service, the crippled Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant is seen in Okumamachi, Fukushima prefecture. From top to bottom: Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3 and Unit 4. (AP Photo/Air Photo Service)

However, Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Yukio Edano, the regulator of the electric power industry, has voiced opposition to any electricity charge hike and reactivation of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant.

Since TEPCO cannot avoid operating losses without rate hikes or a resumption of operations at the nuclear power station, some TEPCO executives say the government's infusion of public funds is inevitable. Some financial institutions have also expressed their hope that the planned infusion of public funds will help TEPCO stay afloat.

Government organizations concerned have proposed a few options to split TEPCO. A panel of Cabinet ministers working on the reform of TEPCO and the electric power industry as a whole is calling for a split of the company's nuclear power division into a company responsible for compensation payments. Another plan calls for the split of TEPCO into a holding company, under which nuclear power generation, conventional power generation and power transmission companies would be placed.

However, as TEPCO has strongly resisted any move to split it, a fierce tug-of-war between the utility and the government is expected after the New Year's period. (By Nobuhiro Saito, Kohei Misawa and Daisuke Nagai, Tokyo Economic News Department)

(Mainichi Japan) December 8, 2011
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/pers...2a00m0na006000c.html

Wednesday, December 7, 2011
#Fukushima I Nuke Plant: Suppression Chambers of Reactors 1 and 3 May Be Also Broken

Not just the Suppression Chamber of Reactor 2, as even TEPCO admits is broken from unknown causes.

From Nihon Television News 24 (12/7/2011):

�島第一原�力発電所�事故�撮影�れ�水素爆発�瞬間�映�を分�������１�機�３�機�も�原�炉格�容器�圧力抑制室�破����る�能性��る�������。

Analysis of the hydrogen explosions at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident has revealed the possibility that the Suppression Chambers of Reactors 1 and 3 are damaged.

　ã�“ã‚Œã�¯ã€�秋田県立大学・鶴田俊教授ã�Œï¼—æ—¥ã€�横浜市ã�§é–‹ã�‹ã‚Œã�Ÿã‚·ãƒ³ãƒ�ジウムã�§ç™ºè¡¨ã�—ã�Ÿã‚‚ã�®ã€‚鶴田教授ã�Œåˆ†æž�ã�—ã�Ÿçµ�æžœã€�１å�·æ©Ÿã� ã�‘ã�§ã�ªã��３å�·æ©Ÿã�«ã�¤ã�„ã�¦ã‚‚ã€�爆発ã�®éš›ã�«æ ¸åˆ†è£‚生æˆ�物をå�«ã ‚“ã� é£½å’Œæ°´è’¸æ°—ã�¨ã�¿ã‚‰ã‚Œã‚‹ã‚‚ã�®ã�Œå»ºå±‹ã�®å¤–ã�«å‡ºã�¦ã�„ã‚‹ã�“ã�¨ã�Œã‚�ã�‹ã�£ã�Ÿã�¨ã�„ã�†ã€‚ã�“ã�®ã�“ã�¨ã�‹ã‚‰é¶´ç”°æ•™æŽˆã�¯ã€�水素爆発ã�«ã‚ˆã�£ã�¦åŽŸå­�炉格ç´�容器ã�®åœ§åŠ›æŠ‘制室ã�Œæ��å‚·ã�—ã�¦ã�„ã‚‹å�¯èƒ½æ€§ã�Œé«˜ã�„ã�¨åˆ†æž�ã�—ã� ¦ã�„る。

Professor Takashi Tsuruda of Akita Prefectural University reported in a symposium [Combustion Symposium] held in Yokohama City on December 7. According to the analysis by Professor Tsuruda, something that appears to be saturated steam that contains fission products is observed to escape from the reactor building after the explosions of Reactor 1 and Reactor 3. From this, Professor Tsuruda has concluded that the Suppression Chambers [for these reactors] are likely to have been damaged by the hydrogen explosions.

　鶴田教授「�れ���大��水��る所�����格�容器�圧力抑制室�水�ら���考��������

Professor Tsuruda says, "The water in the Suppression Chambers is the most likely source of this much water."

　鶴田教授��爆発�詳��状�を調�る�����実験�必���述���る。

He says a simulation experiment would be necessary to further examine the explosions.

From his profile, Professor Tsuruda's specialty is reaction chemistry, and the study of combustion in particular.
Posted by arevamirpal::laprimavera at 11:11 PM
Labels: Reactor No.1, Reactor No.3, Suppression Chamber
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/...ant-suppression.html

Japan
Dec 9, 2011


Share | More


Returnees fear Fukushima's invisible touch
By Donald Kirk

MINAMISOMA, Japan - The lugubrious notes of Silent Night wafted from an outdoor sound system on the near-empty main street to the station of this coastal city on the northern edge of the 20-kilometer "exclusion zone" around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. The doleful refrain set the tone for a community that exists in endless doubts about recovery from radiation nearly nine months after the tsunami of March 11 inundated the plant with torrents of sea water.

At a factory that salvages old and wrecked cars just outside the barriers on the road down the coast to the plant, a digital display in the office flashed the numbers -0.10 and 0.22 - highs and lows of micro-sieverts. "That’s well within the safety limit," a young woman in the factory's overseas marketing department assured me. "We are safe here."

For all such assurances, though, nobody really believes bad stuff

Dilbert

is no longer floating through the clear cold air or lapping up on the innocent looking shores beyond the concrete breakwater over which 40-foot waves surged that day, wiping out an entire district down the slope from the factory.

"It's invisible substances," said Sumiko Goto, a manager of a hotel filled with engineers, officials and construction workers who've been there for months cleaning up the wreckage that inundated everything within a kilometer of the shoreline. "It's in the air, in the river, on the walls," she said. "People are very anxious about the situation. Radioactive substances come from the ground, from the river bottom."

Uncertain reports daily fuel the fears. One day people hear of a leak through which radioactive water is pouring into the sea, poisoning the fish that are a staple of everyone's diet. Next, there are stories of emissions of radioactive xenon gas and then a reading of radioactive cesium in powdered milk - enough for the Meiji Company to recall 400,000 cans of it this week "so people can feel their infants are safe".

All the while officials talk of an imminent "cold shutdown" of the reactors, the stage at which at last the water for cooling the nuclear fuel rods is no longer boiling - and therefore not capable of reheating the fuel.

It's all very confusing, so much so that only 40,000 of the 70,000 people who once inhabited this city have returned. About 13,000 of them lived in a ward within the 20-kilometer zone, meaning they can't stay in their old homes and need permission to go back and retrieve their belongings.

At City Hall, Koshin Ogai, a young tax official, shared his fears. Ogai, originally from Osaka in western Japan, moved here a few years ago after marrying a local woman but sent his wife and their two children to his parents after explosions at the Fukushima first spread the fear of radiation. "I don't permit them to come back," he said. "I don't think the record here is safe."

But what about all those assurances about the levels of radioactivity having fallen well within safe limits, I asked him. His answer was prompt. "The government is a liar."

And how, I pressed, could he as a government employee, talk so frankly? "I work for the local government," he said, not the national government."

One reason Ogai does not hesitate to express such views is that his top boss, Mayor Katsunobu Sakurai, gained fame after the tsunami for pleading with the government to assist with food and medicine.

"We are left isolated," said Mayor Sakurai in a lengthy harangue, posted on You Tube in April with English subtitles. "We are facing difficulty of even distributing necessary goods ... Please support us. We ask for your help, volunteers to transport supplies." People were "drying up as if on starvation," he said. "We would like to ak for gas and petrol as well."

Most alarming, for the city's long-term future, was the fear of the unknown, of disease that might strike years later. "Local officials are now fighting the threat of radiation," the mayor said at the time. "Please give us your help to get over this extreme difficulty together."

By now the city is on its way to partial recovery. Shops have slowly come to life, schools reopened in October and rail services resumed this month going north. Encouraging though such signs may appear, they suggest only partial recovery. Business is slow. Only a few people drift in and out of food stores. A number of restaurants remain closed or on limited hours.

As for the railroad, the trains are not expected for many years to go south to Tokyo, once a three-hour run through a densely populated region. "The railroad fears radioactive substances passing by the Fukushima plant," said one person to whom I spoke. "They can't enter the area."

Going north, the trains can only go as far as Soma, about 30 miles up the coast. Beyond that, on the way to the important port city of Sendai, the tsunami tore up the tracks, flinging aside all the cars on a four-car train whose passengers had luckily evacuated after the earthquake but before the waves completed the damage.

Mayor Sakurai is still asking volunteers to help while accusing central government officials and contractors of moving too slowly. People say TEPCO, the Tokyo Electric Power Company, is slow to provide compensation.

Bicycling through a ravaged flatland up to the sea wall, I saw women carrying vinyl bags as they looked for whatever might remained of the slightest value. Bulldozers and cranes pushed up heaps of rubble, twisted bits of vehicles and shattered homes. At the base of the seawall, I saw frayed soccer balls and broken chairs for infants. I picked up a baseball whose cover had somehow been entirely torn off.

"Imagine, if your house were along the ocean, you would want to find something," said Sumiko Goto, the hotel manager who had rented me my bicycle, but I wondered how much of value could still be there. About 40 people died in that district on March 11 - a microcosm of the 20,000 dead or missing from the entire disaster, including 1,200 dead or missing from this city alone.

At City Hall, Ogai said no one will be able to rebuild so close to the sea even though a tsunami only occurs every few hundred years. "That's impossible," he said. "No one knows if a tsunami attacks again"

The lobby of the City Hall now is crowded with people looking for relief payments while Ogai fends off complaints about taxes the city is still levying on residents. "Many people call and ask, why do we impose taxes," he said. "My answer is the nuclear accident and the tax incident are separated." As a concession, he added, "We have a policy to reduce taxes."

Ogai may be more concerned about the expense of monthly flights from Sendai to Osaka to see his family. "I request compensation from TEPCO. I often call the call center of TEPCO." The operator says, 'I am not sure'," said Ogai. "That is always the answer" - about as vague as responses to when TEPCO will finish cleaning up the nuke plant or what will be the impact of radiation on people 10, 20 or 30 years from now.

Donald Kirk, a long-time journalist in Asia, is author of the newly published Korea Betrayed: Kim Dae Jung and Sunshine.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/ML09Dh01.html

Impacts of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants on Marine Radioactivity

* Abstract
* HTMLFull Text HTML
* PDFHi-Res PDF[3045 KB]
* PDFPDF w/ Links[787 KB]

* Supporting Info
* Figures
* References

Ken Buesseler†*, Michio Aoyama‡, and Masao Fukasawa§
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, United States
Meteorological Research Institute, Tsukuba, 305-0052, Japan
Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, Yokosuka, 237-0061 Japan
Environ. Sci. Technol., 2011, 45 (23), pp 9931–9935
DOI: 10.1021/es202816c
Publication Date (Web): October 20, 2011
Copyright © 2011 American Chemical Society
Phone 508-289-2309; fax 508-457-2193; e-mail kbuesseler@whoi.edu.
ACS AuthorChoice
CASSection:
Water
Abstract
Abstract Image

The impacts on the ocean of releases of radionuclides from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plants remain unclear. However, information has been made public regarding the concentrations of radioactive isotopes of iodine and cesium in ocean water near the discharge point. These data allow us to draw some basic conclusions about the relative levels of radionuclides released which can be compared to prior ocean studies and be used to address dose consequences as discussed by Garnier-Laplace et al. in this journal.(1) The data show peak ocean discharges in early April, one month after the earthquake and a factor of 1000 decrease in the month following. Interestingly, the concentrations through the end of July remain higher than expected implying continued releases from the reactors or other contaminated sources, such as groundwater or coastal sediments. By July, levels of 137Cs are still more than 10 000 times higher than levels measured in 2010 in the coastal waters off Japan. Although some radionuclides are significantly elevated, dose calculations suggest minimal impact on marine biota or humans due to direct exposure in surrounding ocean waters, though considerations for biological uptake and consumption of seafood are discussed and further study is warranted.

*
o Top of Page
o Introduction
o Data Sources
o Results and Discussion
o References

Introduction
As a result of the earthquake on March 11, 2011, and subsequent tsunami, water as high as 15 m inundated the Dai-ichi nuclear power plants (NPPs) causing loss of power and hence disruption of controls and failed cooling systems shortly after the earthquake. Venting of gases, hydrogen explosions, and the fire in the spent fuel pond of Unit 4 resulted in the primary atmospheric releases of Fukushima radionuclide contaminants, peaking around March 15, with a relatively high atmospheric release rate through March 24.(2) In addition to these atmospheric fallout pathways, the cooling of the reactors with fresh water and seawater, and release of highly contaminated water from the damaged reactor buildings led to radioactive discharges directly to the sea. Some of this was intentional (to leave space for more highly contaminated waters); some was unconstrained and likely resulted from contaminated groundwater discharges as well as direct runoff to the sea. Unlike Chernobyl, there was no large explosive release of core reactor material, so most of the isotopes reported to have spread thus far via atmospheric fallout are primarily the radioactive gases plus fission products such as cesium, which are volatilized at the high temperatures in the reactor core, or during explosions and fires. However, some nonvolatile activation products and fuel rod materials may have been released when the corrosive brines and acidic waters used to cool the reactors interacted with the ruptured fuel rods, carrying radioactive materials into the ground and ocean. The full magnitude of the release has not been well documented, nor is there data on many of the possible isotopes released, but we do have significant information on the concentration of several isotopes of Cs and I in the ocean near the release point which have been publically available since shortly after the accident started.

*
o Top of Page
o Introduction
o Data Sources
o Results and Discussion
o References

Data Sources
We present a comparison of selected data made publicly available from a Japanese company and agencies and compare these to prior published radionuclide concentrations in the oceans. The primary sources included TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company), which reported data in regular press releases(3) and are compiled here (Supporting Information Table S1). These TEPCO data were obtained by initially sampling 500 mL surface ocean water from shore and direct counting on high-purity germanium gamma detectors for 15 min at laboratories at the Fukushima Dai-ni NPPs. They reported initially results for 131I (t1/2 = 8.02 days), 134Cs (t1/2 = 2.065 years) and 137Cs (t1/2 = 30.07 years). Data from MEXT (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology—Japan) were also released on a public Web site(4) and are based on similar direct counting methods. In general MEXT data were obtained by sampling 2000 mL seawater and direct counting on high-purity germanium gamma detectors for 1 h in a 2 L Marinelli beaker at laboratories in the Japan Atomic Energy Agency. The detection limit of 137Cs measurements are about 20 000 Bq m–3 for TEPCO data and 10 000 Bq m–3 for MEXT data, respectively. These measurements were conducted based on a guideline described by MEXT.(5) Both sources are considered reliable given the common activity ratios and prior studies and expertise evident by several Japanese groups involved in making these measurements. The purpose of these early monitoring activities was out of concern for immediate health effects, and thus were often reported relative to statutory limits adopted by Japanese authorities, and thus not in concentration units (reported as scaling factors above “normal�). Here we convert values from both sources to radionuclide activity units common to prior ocean studies of fallout in the ocean (Bq m–3) for ease of comparison to previously published data.

*
o Top of Page
o Introduction
o Data Sources
o Results and Discussion
o References

Results and Discussion
We focus on the most complete time-series records from the north and south discharge channels at the Dai-ichi NPPs, and two sites to the south that were not considered sources, namely the north Discharge channels at the Dai-ni NPPs about 10 km to the south and Iwasawa beach which is 16 km south of the Dai-ichi NPPs (Figure 1). The levels at the discharge point are exceedingly high, with a peak 137Cs 68 million Bq m–3 on April 6 (Figure 2). What are significant are not just the elevated concentrations, but the timing of peak release approximately one month after to the earthquake. This delayed release is presumably due to the complicated pattern of discharge of seawater and fresh water used to cool the reactors and spent fuel rods, interactions with groundwater, and intentional and unintentional releases of mixed radioactive material from the reactor facility.
figure

Figure 1. Map of Fukushima sampling locations at the Dai-ichi NPP (1F- yellow dot as indicated). Red dots N and S of the Dai-ichi NPP are discharge channels where samples were collected. Samples were also collected by TEPCO at the Dai-ni NPP (2F- yellow dot as indicated) with sampling indicated from shore near Dai-ni NPP and Iwasawa Beach (blue triangles). Also shown are sampling locations by MEXT 30 km offshore (green squares). For scale, 30 km radius around Fukushima is shown on land. More detailed sampling maps available at TEPCO and MEXT Web sites.(3, 4)
figure

Figure 2. Surface ocean concentrations from March 21 to July 31, 2011 of 137Cs in Becquerels per cubic meter (Bq m–3) for two sites near the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant (red circles, north (filled) and south (open) discharge channels(3)), Dai-ni NPPs (10 km to the south of Dai-ichi, blue filled triangles(3)), Iwasawa Beach near Dai-ni (16 km south of Dai-ichi, blue open triangles(3)), and 30km off-shore (green squares, stations 1–8 in original MEXT data(4)). These are compared on the lower X-axis (1960–2010) to the historical record of 137Cs off the east coast of Japan (brown circles) and to Chernobyl influenced waters in 1986 in the Baltic and Black Seas.(13, 14)
During the first month of release data, 134Cs/137Cs activity ratios were one (0.99 ± 0.03 for Dai-ichi north and south discharge channels) and extremely uniform (Supporting Information Figure S1). This makes the tracking of Fukushima derived radionuclides in the ocean quite straightforward, since given its relatively short 2 year half-life, the only source of 134Cs in the North Pacific at this time would be the Dai-ichi NPPs. Hence in addition to the elevated Cs activities, the presence of 134Cs is a unique isotopic signature for tracking these waters and calculating mixing ratios. This ratio of Cs isotopes is determined by reactor design and fuel cycle and age. Interestingly a 134Cs/137Cs ratio of 1.0 here is considerably higher than 25 years ago when a ratio of 0.54 ± 0.04 was reported in Chernobyl fallout.(6) In the oceans, the behavior of cesium is thought to be conservative, i.e. it is soluble (<1% attached to marine particles) and is carried primarily with ocean waters and as such has been used as a tracer of water mass mixing and transport.(7-9) That being said, even a small fraction at such a high activity release point is a large number, thus the concentrations of Cs in sediments and biota near the NPPs may be quite large, and will continue to remain so for at least 30–100 years due to the longer half-life of 137Cs which is still detected in marine and lake sediments from 1960s fallout sources.
There was considerable attention given to 131I releases due to its relatively high activities and tendency to accumulate in the human thyroid if ingested via land-based food supply or if bioconcentrated by seaweeds and consumed as part of the Japanese diet. We can see that the ocean release ratio of 131I/134Cs must have been relatively constant, with the highest measured activity ratios near 20–30 on March 22 followed by a predictable decrease due to the radioactive decay of 131I with its 8 day half-life (which would plot as straight line in Figure 3). Assuming the source ratios of Cs and I were fixed when the fission process stopped on March 13, the initial source ratio would have been a factor of 2 higher. Reported atmospheric 131I/137Cs ratios showed somewhat higher variability early in the releases, ranging from around 10–80 during the period of maximum atmospheric release between March 15 and 242. Some of the ocean data fall off of this ocean decay trend, indicating perhaps different sources (e.g., higher values around April 19–23 at Dai-ichi NPPs, Figure 3), but the general consistency of this decay pattern in waters both at Dai-ichi NPPs and further south indicates that overall the I and Cs sources can be considered uniform even if several reactors and events contributed to the releases.
figure

Figure 3. Activity ratio of 131I/137Cs at the same four sites at Dai-ichi, Dai-ni and Iwasawa Beach as in Figure 2 plotted on a log activity ratio (y-axis) vs time through May 30 (x-axis). Solid black line is the decay trend expected for the activity of an isotope with 8 day half-life such as 131I.
Ocean currents off Japan would lead to both southward transport of water along the coast via the Oyashio current, and northward driven diversions due to surface wind shifts.(10, 11) Clearly the waters 10 km south along the shore at the Dai-ni NPPs were initially lower in overall activity, but rapidly reached activities more similar to the source at Dai-ichi. Coastal water concentrations decreased by close to a factor of 1000 in the month following peak releases (Figure 2). This is a consequence of ocean mixing and a primary radionuclide source that has dramatically abated. Unlike contamination of soils on land, vertical and horizontal mixing rates in the ocean are fast, diluting the primary contaminant signal quite rapidly, particularly in the energetic coastal waters off Japan where the Oyashio waters move south and interact with the rapidly flowing and offshore meandering of the Kuroshio Current. These currents, tidal forces, and eddies mix the waters quite rapidly offshore. Such physical transport and mixing processes can be modeled, but thus far there are no published models that include Fukushima ocean data for comparison (see for example Fukushima fallout predictions in ref 12).
Sampling immediately off shore was sponsored by MEXT in Japan, and we have summarized here the first month’s data at eight stations along a transect 30 km offshore from the Fukushima NPPs (along 141° 24′ E. Longitude between 37° 00′ and 37° 40′ N Latitude; Figure 1). From the first measurements on March 22 until about March 28, activities decreased. This decrease can be explained if the initial data reflect elevated 137Cs from direct Fukushima fallout deposition earlier in March,(2) followed by dilution. The waters 30 km offshore increased after March 28 in parallel with the coastal waters at Dai-ni. The offshore waters have roughly 1000 times lower activities during the period of peak discharge in early April and remain at least 10 times lower later in April. The grid sampled by MEXT expanded considerably in April to include additional stations between the coast and 30 km, but after about April 20, the reported MEXT data fall largely below their minimum detectable limit, which was 10 000 Bq m–3 for 137Cs.
If the source at Fukushima had stopped abruptly and ocean mixing processes continued at the same rates, one would have expected that the 137Cs activities would have decreased an additional factor of 1000 from May to June but that was not observed. The break in slope in early May implies that a steady, albeit lower, source of 137Cs continues to discharge to the oceans at least through the end of July at this site. With reports of highly contaminated cooling waters at the NPPs and complete melt through of at least one of the reactors, this is not surprising. As we have no reason to expect a change in mixing rates of the ocean which would also impact this dilution rate, this change in slope of 137Cs in early May is clear evidence that the Dai-ichi NPPs remain a significant source of contamination to the coastal waters off Japan. There is currently no data that allow us to distinguish between several possible sources of continued releases, but these most likely include some combination of direct releases from the reactors or storage tanks, or indirect releases from groundwater beneath the reactors or coastal sediments, both of which are likely contaminated from the period of maximum releases.
It is prudent to point out though what is meant by “significant� to both ocean waters and marine biota. With respect to prior concentrations in the waters off Japan, all of these values are elevated many orders of magnitude. 137Cs has been tracked quite extensively off Japan since the peak weapons testing fallout years in the early 1960s.(13) Levels in the region east of Japan have decreased from a few 10s of Bq m–3 in 1960 to 1.5 Bq m–3 on average in 2010 (Figure 2; second x-axis). The decrease in 137Cs over this 50 year record reflects both radioactive decay of 137Cs with a 30 year half-life and continued mixing in the global ocean of 137Cs to depth. These data are characteristic of other global water masses.(14) Typical ocean surface 137Cs activities range from <1 Bq m–3 in surface waters in the Southern Hemisphere, which are lower due to lower weapons testing inputs south of the equator, to >10–100 Bq m–3 in the Irish Sea, North Sea, Black Sea, and Baltic Seas, which are elevated due to local sources from the intentional discharges at the nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities at Sellafield in the UK and Cape de la Hague in France, as well as residual 137Cs from Chernobyl in the Baltic and Black Seas. Clearly then on this scale of significance, levels of 137Cs 30 km off Japan were some 3–4 orders of magnitude higher than existed prior to the NPP accidents at Fukushima.
An additional comparison can be made, not just to current global ocean 137Cs levels, but to what was measured immediately following the Chernobyl accident in 1986. An increase in 1986 in waters off Japan is barely seen in the time-series record off Japan, but in the Baltic and Black Seas they peaked in 1986 in the 10–1000 Bq m–3 range (Figure 2). This is thus well below activities of 137Cs immediately at the discharge point or even the initial 30 km monitoring line of MEXT. As such, despite some uncertainty over the total releases from Fukushima vs Chernobyl to both land and sea, the accidental releases from Fukushima are a larger source to the ocean. That should not be surprising as fallout deposition in general decreases with distance from the source (both in air and ocean). Since the Dai-ichi NPPs are directly adjacent to the ocean and Chernobyl was 500–600 km from the closest ocean bodies of the Baltic and Black Seas, Fukushima has become the largest accidental source of radionuclides to the ocean in terms of measured radionuclide concentrations.
Finally though, while the Dai-ichi NPP releases must be considered “significant� relative to prior sources off Japan, we should not assume that dose effects on humans or marine biota are necessarily harmful or even will be measurable. Garnier-Laplace et al.(1) report a dose reconstruction signal for the most impacted areas to wildlife on land and in the ocean. Like this study, they are relying on reported activities to calculate forest biota concentrations, and TEPCO ocean data for the expected concentration in the ocean and by calculation in marine sediments and the doses to benthic biota. By this calculation the dose effect due to forest soils on land ecosystems were small, 2–6 mSv d–1 (converted here from Gy using a relative biological effectiveness factor of 1, appropriate for doses due to I and Cs isotopes, so 1 Sv = 1 Gy). In contrast, these authors report much higher doses for marine benthic biota and ocean birds, in the range of 210–4600 mSv d–1. These authors conclude that impacts to the marine biota would be severe, including marked reproductive effects and possibly mortality due to direct dose effects. While these effects were carefully defined as maximum dose rates (for activities at equilibrium), Figure 2 makes it clear that for the oceans even at the discharge point, there were >1000 times lower radionuclide activities as quickly as one month after peak releases and even lower activities off shore, which would bring these doses to levels quickly below where there is any effect for ecosystems (defined as 0.24 mSv d–1 by these authors; see also ref 15).
With respect to dose effects on humans, at a level approaching 100 000 Bq m–3 for 134Cs and 137Cs found at the Dai-ichi discharge channels in June the dose due to direct exposure during human immersion in the ocean can be calculated to be 1 μSv d–1, and would be at least a factor of 10 lower if on a ship above and not in direct contact with the water. This is insignificant relative to the average dose from all sources to the Japanese population of about 1.5 mSv yr–1. This low dose should not be surprising, as levels of the most abundant naturally occurring radionuclide in the oceans, potassium-40, are comparable to 137Cs offshore, with typical ocean value of 12 000 Bq m–3. Levels of 137Cs in June and July at Dai-ni and Iwasawa Beach of 4000 to 10 000 Bq m–3 were comparable to permissible drinking water limits for 137Cs, which in the US are 7400 Bq m–3 (EPA limit of 40 μSv yr–1 calculated here for 1 L per day consumption) and 10 000 Bq m–3 recommended by the World Health Organization. Thus even at the observed concentrations at the discharge channels in June and July there will be no significant direct dose effect on humans, and only a short distance away, 137Cs concentrations would be below drinking water limits for Cs isotopes.
This dose assessment does not, however, consider bioaccumulation and consumption of seafood and seaweeds and possible impacts on humans. The waters immediately adjacent to Japan remain a continued source of radionuclides that is keeping the discharge waters elevated in 137Cs, and thus likely other Fukushima-derived radionuclides that have not yet been reported. Locally elevated marine sediment concentrations are expected and this would imply possible additional pathways for assimilation in biota near shore by filter feeding shellfish and benthic marine biota. Brown seaweeds are of particular concern as they are a major crop in Japan and highly efficient at concentrating 131I (concentration factors of 10 000), though with an 8-day half-life, the 131I activities have rapidly declined (Figure 3). The provisional regulatory value in fish established by the Fisheries Agency of Japan is 500 Bq kg–1 for radioactive Cs. Early reports off Japan’s coast suggest that the only seafood concentrations above safety limits were for sand eels, though a few seafood samples above these levels continue to be found (see for example the July 2011 Japanese Fisheries Agency report(16)). With a Cs concentration factor of 100 for fish,(17) one would approach unacceptable levels of Cs in fish if in equilibrium with ocean activities>5000 Bq m–3 for combined Cs isotopes, which we see at the discharge point in July. Also specific pathways such as preferential uptake of 90Sr (not yet measured) in fish bones will need to be considered if whole small fish are consumed. Continued monitoring and bans on fishing in Fukushima impacted waters is thus warranted given the steady elevated levels near the NPPs. Given that Japan has the highest seafood consumption rate in the world, understanding concentrations and assimilation in marine biota is an important task.
Japanese authorities raised the severity of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant incident to level 7, the highest level on the international scale and comparable only to the Chernobyl incident 25 years ago. With respect to the oceans, however, the impact of Fukushima exceeds Chernobyl if measured by the changes in radionuclide activities in the surface ocean. However, a decrease in Fukushima activities by a factor of 1000 since its peak in early April and dilution off shore greatly lessens direct impacts to humans and marine biota. That being said, it is important to note that we still do not have sufficient field data to estimate the ocean radionuclide inventories, the full range of isotopes released, the aerial extent of contamination, the fraction delivered as coastal runoff vs atmospheric fallout, the sedimentary burden near the Dai-ichi NPPs, and the biological uptake in the marine food chain beyond a limited number of plankton samples and monitoring of the food supply. Given that this is the largest accidental source of radionuclides to the ocean, it is encouraging to see that international collaborations for comprehensive field measurements are beginning, though it will take some time before results are available to fully evaluate the impacts of this accident on the ocean.

*
o Top of Page
o Introduction
o Data Sources
o Results and Discussion
o References

Acknowledgment

We report here on data that were collected under difficult circumstances by many Japanese scientists and their staff, and we are indebted to them for their efforts and for freely sharing of these results. Discussion of these data has involved many of our colleagues in Japan, including M. Uematsu (Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute, University of Tokyo), M. Honda and T. Kawano (Research Institute for Global Change, Japan Agency for Marine Earth Science and Technology) and D. Tsumune (Environmental Science Research Laboratory, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry). We also gratefully acknowledge H. Nies, I. Osvath, E. Bosc, and M. Eriksson (International Atomic Energy Agency, Environment Laboratories in Monaco), S. Clifford and S. Jayne (Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution) and K. Higley (Oregon State University). Funding for this work to KOB is from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation as well as the Chemical Oceanography Program of the US National Science Foundation.
Supporting Information

Figure with 134Cs/137Cs release data for first month at Dai-ichi (Figure S1) and Table S1 with complete TEPCO data selected for discussion in this manuscript. This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

*
o Top of Page
o Introduction
o Data Sources
o Results and Discussion
o References

References

This article references 17 other publications.

1. 1.
Garnier-Laplace, J.; Beaugelin-Seiller, K.; Hinton, T. G.Fukushima wildlife dose reconstruction signals ecological consequences Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45 ( 12) 5077– 5078
[ACS Full Text ACS Full Text], [PubMed], [CAS]
2. 2.
Chino, M.; Nakayama, H.; Nagai, H.; Terada, H.; Katata, G.; Yamazawa, H.Preliminary estimation of release amounts of 131I and 137Cs accidentally discharged from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the atmosphere J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. 2011, 48 ( 7) 1129– 1134
[CrossRef], [CAS]
3. 3.
TEPCO. T. E. P. C. TEPCO News Press Releases http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/index-e.html (accessed July 31, 2011).
4. 4.
Ministry of Education, C., Sports. Science and Technology—Japan MEXT Readings of environmental radioactivity level (English version). http://radioactivity.mext.go.jp/en/ (accessed July 31, 2011).
5. 5.
Ministry of Education, C., Sports. Science and Technology—Japan MEXT. Sample Treatment on Emergency Measurements by Gamma-Ray Spectrometry; 2011.
6. 6.
Aarkrog, A.The radiological impact of the Chernobyl debris compared with that from nuclear weapons fallout J. Environ. Radioact. 1988, 6 ( 2) 151– 162
[CrossRef], [CAS]
7. 7.
Bowen, V. T.; Noshkin, V. E.; Livingston, H. D.; Volchok, H. L.Fallout radionuclides in the Pacific Ocean: Vertical and horizontal distributions, largely from GEOSECS stations Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 1980, 49, 411– 434
[CrossRef], [CAS]
8. 8.
Buesseler, K. O.; Livingston, H. D.; Casso, S. A.Mixing between oxic and anoxic waters of the Black Sea as traced by Chernobyl cesium isotopes Deep-Sea Res. 1991, 38 ( Suppl. 2) S725– S745
[CrossRef]
9. 9.
Aoyama, M.; Fukasawa, M.; Hirose, K.; Hamajima, Y.; Kawano, T.; Povinec, P. P.; Sanchez-Cabeza, J. A.Cross equator transport of 137Cs from North Pacific Ocean to South Pacific Ocean (BEAGLE2003 cruises) Prog. Oceanogr. 2011, 89 ( 1–4) 7– 16
[CrossRef]
10. 10.
Yasuda, I.Hydrographic Structure and Variability in the Kuroshio-Oyashio Transition Area J. Oceanogr. 2003, 59 ( 4) 389– 402
[CrossRef]
11. 11.
Shimizu, Y.; Yasuda, I.; Ito, S.-i.Distribution and circulation of the coastal oyashio intrusion J. Phys. Oceanogr. 2001, 31 ( 6) 1561– 1578
[CrossRef]
12. 12.
Dietz, H.; Kriest, I.Tracer distribution in the Pacific Ocean following a release off Japan- what does an oceanic general circulation model tell us? Ocean Sci. Discuss. 2011, 8, 1441– 1466
[CrossRef]
13. 13.
Aoyama, M.; Hirose, K.Artificial radionuclides database in the Pacific Ocean: Ham database TheScientificWorldJournal 2004, 4, 200– 215
[CrossRef], [PubMed], [CAS]
14. 14.
Buesseler, K. O.; Livingston, H. D., Natural and Man-made radionuclides in the Black Sea. In Radionuclides in the Oceans, Inputs and Inventories; Guéguéniat, P.; Germain, P.; Métivier, H., Eds.; Institut de Protection et de Surete Nucleaire: Cherbourg, France, 1996; pp 199– 217.
15. 15.
Real, A.Effects of ionising radiation exposure on plants, fish and mammals: Relevant data for environmental radiation protection J. Radiol. Prot. 2004, 24 ( 4A) A123
[CrossRef], [PubMed], [CAS]
16. 16.
JFA, J. F. A.Results of the inspection on radioactivity materials in fisheries products. http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/e/inspection/index.html (accessed July 25, 2011).
17. 17.
IAEA, I. A. E. A. Sediment Distribution Coefficients and Concentration Factors for Biota in the Marine Environment; International Atomic Energy Agency: Vienna, Austria, 2004; p 103.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es202816c

“Everything is out of control�
Posted by Mochizuki on December 8th, 2011 · No Comments

Actual Fukushima worker “Mr.Happy� confesses what is in his mind, more honestly than ever.

Happy20790 �ッピー
ã�Ÿã� ã�„ã�¾ã�£(^O^)今日もコツコツ作業ã�—ã�Ÿã�§ã�—。今日ã�¯æ—©ã��帰ã�£ã�Ÿã�‹ã‚‰ã�„ã�£ã�±ã�„ã�¤ã�¶ã‚„ã��ã�§ã�—。今日ã�‹ã‚‰1å�·æ©Ÿã�®ã‚¬ã‚¹ç®¡ç�†ã‚·ã‚¹ãƒ†ãƒ ã�Œè©¦é�‹è»¢ã�«å…¥ã‚Šã�¾ã�—ã�Ÿã€‚2å�·æ©Ÿã�¨1å�·æ©Ÿã�¯ãƒ¡ãƒ¼ã‚«ãƒ¼ã�Œé�•ã�†ã�®ã�§ã‚¹ãƒ šãƒƒã‚¯ã�Œé�•ã�†ã�‹ã‚‰1å�·æ©Ÿã�¯æ™‚é–“ã�‹ã�‹ã�£ã�Ÿã‚“ã� ã�‘ã�©ã€�ã‚„ã�£ã�¨å®Œæˆ�ã�—ã�¾ã�—ã�Ÿã€‚

Today the gas (mainly hydrogen gas) control system at reactor 1 has finally got into the test drive mode. The makers are different from reactor 2, so it took us time to build it for reactor 1.

続ã��1:次ã�¯ï¼“å�·æ©Ÿã�®äºˆå®šã�ªã‚“ã� ã�‘ã�©ã€�ã�¾ã�šã�¯ã‚¿ãƒ¼ãƒ“ン建屋ã�®ã‚¯ãƒ¬ãƒ¼ãƒ³ã‚’使ã�ˆã‚‹ã‚ˆã�†ã�«ã�—ã�ªã��ゃã�§ã�™ã€‚年内ã�¯ç„¡ç�†ã�‹ã�ªã��…。今週ã�¯ç�¾å ´ã�«ç§»å‹•ã�™ã‚‹6å�·ç·šã�«ç‰›ã�®ç¾¤ã‚Œã�Œå¤šã�„ã�§ã�—(*_*)本格的ã�ªå†¬ã�«å� ‘ã�‘ã�¦ç‰›ã‚‚移動ã�—ã�¦ã‚‹ã�®ã�‹ã�ªã��…。一昨日ã�¯2Fã�‹ã‚‰ã�®å¸°å®…時ã�«ç‰›ã�«æ­£é�¢è¡�çª�ã�—ã�¦è»Šã�Œå…¨ç„¼ã�—ã�Ÿã�—ã�­ã€‚

The next step is to build another gas controlling system for reactor 3, but we need to fix the crane first. Maybe we can’t get it down by the end of this year..
This week we’ve seen so many wild cows (Cows at farms were released after 311 and they live in the wild now.) on route 6, where is for the Fukushima plants. I guess cows are moving to somewhere warm toward winter .. The day before yesterday, a car from Fukushima Daini crashed into a cow and had the car burnt completely.

続�2:夜��黒�牛�見��ら����。昨日も今日も群れ�移動������…。�ん�ん����るよ��気��るん�。牛�20Km�外�出よ����ら検�所�機動隊����るん��?

It’s hard to see black cows at night. I saw group of cows moving today and yesterday. feel like they are moving to south gradually. I wonder what the police does if they reach to the boarder of 20 km area.

続�3:今週�大��プロジェクト作業�始���発表�る�����������…��れ�？�����る人������ら�ょ�������る�ら計画練り直���るん���。21日� �始�る�����らも��ょ��待������。

Today they were supposed to announce a “big project�, but they didn’t. I asked someone “why�, he said there were some troubles to solve so it’s taking time. They are re-making the plan again.
They say it’s going to start at 12/21/2011.

続ã��4:自衛隊も除染拠点作りã�«æ˜¨æ—¥ã�‹ã‚‰å…¥ã�£ã�¦ã��ã�¾ã�—ã�Ÿã‚ˆã€‚楢葉ã€�富岡ã€�浪江ã�Œå¯¾è±¡åœ°ã�§ã‚ªã‚¤ãƒ©é�”ã�¯å�—å�´ã�®æ¥¢è‘‰ã�¨å¯Œå²¡å�´ã�—ã�‹ã‚�ã�‹ã‚“ã�ªã�„ã�‘ã�©ã€�çµ�構自衛隊ã�®è»Šã�Œèµ°ã�£ã�¦ã‚‹ã‚ˆã€‚オイラ自衛隊ã�®è» Šã�¿ã‚‹ã�¨äº‹æ•…当時ã�®é›°å›²æ°—ã‚’æ€�ã�„出ã�—ã�¡ã‚ƒã�†ã‚“ã� ã‚ˆã�ªã��…。

Self defense force entered Fukushima plants area since yesterday. They came to decontaminate. They are planning to make bases at Naraha, Tomioka, and Namie. I saw numbers of their cars. Self defense force cars remind me of when 311 happened.

続�5:16日�第2ステップ完了宣言�る�����。�場����る通�点���毎日�作業�何�変化も��ん�。���何故第2ステップ完了宣言を騒���…？�れ�国�第2ステップを何 ��年内�完了���難準備区域��民を帰宅�������警戒区域�縮�を����ら�ん�。

Government seems to plan to declare “Step2 is accomplished� on 12/16/2011 but actually nothing changes at the plants.
Government wants to declare the complete of step 2 during this year to pull back the residents to the planned evacuation zone and minimize the alerting area.

続ã��6:ã� ã�‘ã�©å‰�ã�«é�¿é›£æº–備区域ã�®è§£é™¤ã�—ã�Ÿæ¥¢è‘‰ã‚„広野ã�®äººé�”ã�¯æœªã� ã�«å¤§å�Šã�¯æˆ»ã�£ã�¦æ�¥ã�¦ã�ªã�„ã�—ã€�学校もå†�é–‹ã�—ã�¦ã�ªã�„ã�®ã�Œç�¾çŠ¶ã€‚ã�„ã��ら国ã�Œå®‰å…¨å®£è¨€ã�—ã�¦ã‚‚ä½�æ°‘ã�¯ç°¡å�˜ã�«æˆ»ã�£ã�¦æ�¥ã�ªã�„ã‚ˆã€‚å®‰å…¨å® £è¨€ã�—ã�Ÿç¦�島ã�®ç±³ã� ã�£ã�¦â€¦ã€‚æ—©ã��安心ã�•ã�›ã�Ÿã�„æ°—æŒ�ã�¡ã�¯ã‚�ã�‹ã‚‹ã�‘ã�©ã€�ç°¡å�˜ã�«å®‰å…¨å®£è¨€ã�ªã‚“ã�¦ã�—ã�¡ã‚ƒãƒ€ãƒ¡ã�ªã‚“ã� ã€‚

However, Naraha and Hirono, where the government lifted the evacuating area, haven’t had more then half of the population come back. Schools are still closed too. Government can’t pull people back to the zone even if they declare the safety.

Fukushima local government declared safety about “rice� but every time they did more radioactive rice was found. They mustn’t declare safety so easily.

続ã��7:冷温å�œæ­¢ã�—ã�¾ã�—ã�Ÿã€�水素爆発ã�—ã�¾ã�›ã‚“ã€�放射性物質拡散ã�¯å¤§å¹…ã�«æ¸›å°‘ã�—ã�¾ã�—ã�Ÿã€‚ã�£ã�¦è¨€ã�£ã�¦ã‚‚実際ã�®è�½ã�¡ã�Ÿç‡ƒæ–™æ¸©åº¦ã‚’計ã�£ã�¦ã�ªã�„ã�—ã€�水素濃度も安定ã�—ã�ªã�„ã�—ã€�外部ã�®æ”¾å°„性物質拡散ã� ¯æ¸›å°‘ã�—ã�Ÿã�¨è¨€ã�£ã�¦ã‚‚毎時0.6億ベクレル出ã�¦ã‚‹ã�—ã€�æµ·ã�«ã�¯æœªã� ã�«æ±šæŸ“ã�Œæµ�ã‚Œã�¦ã‚‹ã�—…。

Even though they “declare� the cold shut down, no risk of hydrogen explosion, massive decrease of radiation, nobody can actually measure the temperature of dropped nuclear fuel, and hydrogen level is not stable. Radiation is still emit by 60 million Bq/h, sea contamination is ongoing..

続�8:全�����完全�コントロール�れ���状��ん�。 国�原発������全力を尽����言�������れ�全力�����…？�電�1兆円�支��請�����国も金を出��ら�電任�������も建設的��見や案も出���� ��。

The situation is totally out of control. Government has been stating they were going to make the best to settle it down, but it doesn’t seem to be their “best�. Tepco requested 1 trillion yen of financial support from government. Now that government is a sponsor of Tepco, they should take more lead of them.

続ã��9:今ã�®ã�¾ã�¾ã�˜ã‚ƒæœ¬å½“ã�«ãƒ¡ãƒ¼ã‚«ãƒ¼ã‚„å�”力ä¼�業ã�¯æ’¤é€€ã�«è¿½ã�„è¾¼ã�¾ã‚Œã‚‹ã€‚未ã� ã�«å·¥äº‹ä»£é‡‘ã�¯ã�»ã�¨ã‚“ã�©æ”¯æ‰•ã�„ã�—ã�¦ã�ªã�„ã�—ã€�ã��ã‚Œã�©ã�“ã‚�ã�‹ã��れ以å‰�ã�®å·¥äº‹ä»£é‡‘も支払ã�„ã�•ã‚Œã�¦ã�ªã�„ã‚“ã� ã�‹ã‚‰ã€‚今ã€�å¤§åœ °éœ‡ã‚„大津波ã�Œæ�¥ã�Ÿã‚‰å®Œå…¨ã�«ã‚¢ã‚¦ãƒˆã� ã‚ˆã€‚ã� ã�‹ã‚‰ä»Šã�®ã�†ã�¡ã�«æ—©ã��ã�—ã�ªã��ゃã�ªã‚‰ã�ªã�„事ã�Œæ²¢å±±ã�‚ã‚‹ã‚“ã� ã€‚

Tepco still hasn’t paid their sub-contract companies or makers for the past / current construction cost. Most of the stakeholders will have to withdraw soon. If major earthquake or tsunami hit the plants, it will be the real catastrophe. That is why we need to be in hurry.

続ã��10:ã�‚ã�®é˜²æ½®å ¤ã�˜ã‚ƒã‚‚ã�Ÿã�ªã�„ã�—循環ホースã�ªã‚“ã�‹å�ƒåˆ‡ã‚Œã�¦ã�©ã�£ã�‹è¡Œã�£ã�¡ã‚ƒã�†ã�—建屋ã� ã�£ã�¦å´©å£Šã�—ã�ªã�„ã�£ã�¦ã�„ã�ˆã�ªã�„ã�—。ã�„ã��ら電æº�確ä¿�出æ�¥ã�¦ã‚‚è‚�心ã�®ç‰©ã�Œã�ªã��ã�ªã�£ã�Ÿã‚‰æ„�味ã�ªã�„。もã�£ã�¨å…¨å Š›ã�§è€ƒã�ˆã�ªã�„ã�¨å‘¨ã‚Šã�®åœ°åŸŸé™¤æŸ“より根æº�ã‚’ã�ªã‚“ã�¨ã�‹ã�—ã�ªã��ゃ除染も無æ„�味ã�ªå¾’労ã�«ã�ªã‚‹ã�¨æ€�ã�†ã‚“ã� ã€‚

The coastal levee is not endurable enough, the pipes of water purifying system will be cluttered everywhere. The buildings may fall apart. Even if they keep the emergency power, it will be nothing if they lose the buildings.

Because the core problem has not been solved, decontamination will be a total waste of energy. We need to think more about how to solve the problems.
http://fukushima-diary.com/...28Fukushima+Diary%29

Predicted response by phonedawgz:
Mr. Happy the workers chosen handle will be attacked,
The worker will be called a idiot wacko,
and I will be a idiot wacko for even posting the story.

Friday, December 9, 2011
"Baseless Rumors": Japanese Twitterers Do Not Believe Yoshida's Cancer is in the Esophagus

Partly because of distrust of anything that comes out of the mouth of any TEPCO/government person, but also because of a TEPCO video in which Yoshida appeared to explain to the viewers the then-current situation at Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant.

They think they see a bulge on the left side of his neck, and they think it is either thyroid or lymph node. Here's one of the threads captured at "Hanayu" blog.

Here's the screen capture of the video:

About the 70 millisievert radiation exposure that Yoshida allegedly had: It was April 30 that TEPCO finally announced the result of the internal radiation measurement of the plant workers using the whole body counter at J-Village, because the WBCs at Fuku-I coudn't be used because the background radiation was too high. Besides, the whole body counter cannot measure alpha and beta rays.

Also, he slept at the plant in the early days of the accident, and the radiation inside the building was particularly high back then, with radioactive materials thick in the air from the hydrogen explosions because the doors and windows didn't close well.

This tweet has a photograph of a thyroid cancer patient at the Organization of National Hospitals.

http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/...e-twitterers-do.html

Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Professor Yukio Hayakawa of Gunma University Is Under Attack

from his own university.

He was reprimanded by the university president for his "insensitive and inappropriate" remarks about "disaster victims" in Fukushima on his Twitter and blog, and is threatened with "disciplinary measures" that include termination from his position.

There are four types of "disciplinary measures" for public employees like Hayakawa: termination, suspension without pay, pay cut, and reprimand. He already got the last one.

He is the one who put out the radiation contour map from the very early days of the disaster. He is very much politically incorrect, not afraid to say things as they are.

Professor Hayakawa tweeted the entire reprimand live, after warning the university that he was tweeting live.

Hayakawa decided to hold a press conference this afternoon (December 8), changed his mind and decided to have an open lecture instead and booked the classroom. The school disallowed his booking, because the reservation didn't go through the proper channel. So he decided to have an open house in his office.

Then the head of the department came and forbid him to have an open house in his own office, but somehow that must have gotten resolved, and Professor is speaking with the media.

Tokyo Shinbun, Kyodo News, Yomiuri, TBS, and IWJ (Yasumi Iwakami) are there right now, live on USTREAM, here.
http://ex-skf.blogspot.com/...yakawa-of-gunma.html

Long and tough road ahead for work to decommission Fukushima nuclear reactors

It is expected to take more than 30 years to decommission crippled reactors at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant, and workers tasked with the difficult mission would have to venture into "uncharted territory" filled with hundreds of metric tons of highly radioactive nuclear fuel, experts say.

After the expert committee of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission (JAEC) compiled a report on procedures to decommission the No. 1 to 4 reactors at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant on Dec. 7, the actual work is expected to move into high gear after the turn of the year. As in the case of the 1979 Three Mile Island accident, the workers would try to remove melted nuclear fuel after shielding radiation with water, a technique called a "water tomb." But the work would have to be done in a "territory where humans have not stepped into before," said a senior official of Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), the operator of the troubled Fukushima nuclear power station. The work is so difficult that it is expected to take more than 30 years to finish decommissioning the reactors.

The key part of the decommissioning work is to remove a total of 1,496 fuel rods from the No. 1 to 3 nuclear reactors and 3,108 fuel rods from nuclear fuel pools of the No. 1 to 4 reactors. The government and TEPCO are expected to start decommissioning the reactors early in the New Year after unveiling detailed plans around Dec. 16 that the nuclear plant has been brought under control by achieving a stable state called a ''cold shutdown.''
In this March 24, 2011 file aerial photo, taken by a small unmanned drone and released by Air Photo Service, the damaged Unit 4 of the crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant is seen in Okumamachi, Fukushima prefecture, northern Japan. (AP Photo/ Air Photo Service)
In this March 24, 2011 file aerial photo, taken by a small unmanned drone and released by Air Photo Service, the damaged Unit 4 of the crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant is seen in Okumamachi, Fukushima prefecture, northern Japan. (AP Photo/ Air Photo Service)

According to experts, filling the containment vessels with water completely to shield radiation is the "foremost and biggest hurdle." In order to carry out the task, it is necessary to spot and repair damaged parts in the containment vessels. But it is not an easy task. Up to about 5,000 millisieverts per hour of radiation -- lethal levels -- have been detected in the reactor building of the No. 1 reactor.

In the work schedule announced in April, TEPCO said it would bring the nuclear plant under control by filling the reactors with water. But subsequent analysis of the accident suggested that the No. 1 and 2 reactors had holes of up to 50 square meters caused by hydrogen explosions and the like. In the work schedule announced in May, TEPCO said it had scrapped its plan to repair the containment vessels and suspended the work to fill them with water.

Moreover, workers have been fighting an uphill battle to remove crumbled fuel. The reactors had been running without cooling water for a long time, and most of the fuel melted and apparently dropped into the containment vessel from the bottom of the pressure vessel at the No. 1 reactor.
In this Friday, March 18, 2011 satellite image released by DigitalGlobe, the Fukushima Dai-ichi is shown. (AP Photo/DigitalGlobe)
In this Friday, March 18, 2011 satellite image released by DigitalGlobe, the Fukushima Dai-ichi is shown. (AP Photo/DigitalGlobe)

A single fuel rod contains about 170 kilograms of uranium, and a simple calculation suggests that about 254 tons of uranium in the reactors alone must be recovered. The distance between the upper lid and the bottom of a containment vessel is up to 35 meters. From that far away, the work has to be done to chop off and recover melted and crumbled fuel by using remote controlled cranes. Furthermore, the melted fuel is mixed with metal from fuel pellets and reactor parts.

"The decommissioning work should be moved up and finished promptly," said Fukushima Gov. Yuhei Sato. He submitted a 6-item statement to the JAEC's expert committee. But at the meeting on Dec. 7, the expert committee did not give any in-depth response but simply added to its report that "We will urge people concerned to realize it as soon as possible." Kyoto University professor Hajimu Yamana, who heads the expert committee, said on Dec. 7, "Because no one has seen the inside of the nuclear reactors, the timing of starting the work to recover nuclear fuel mentioned in the report is only a nonbinding target."

(Mainichi Japan) December 8, 2011
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnn...2a00m0na016000c.html

[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 12-09-2011).]