May 16, 2012

May 16, 2012 | Fukushima Accident Updates

  • The story of the Oi town assembly approving nuke restarts continues. This marks the first local approval of restarting nuclear operations since the Fukushima accident. The decision was not made overnight. Oi officials have been meeting since May 7 to discuss the issue, so this cannot be called a hasty decision. After due deliberation, 11 of the 12 assembly members voted to approve the restarts. “The safety of the nuclear reactors has been confirmed using the safety standards presented by the central government based on the lessons learned from the Fukushima crisis,” one member said Monday’s. Another said, “The reactors’ prolonged suspension will reduce the town’s tax revenues from nuclear-related sectors, adversely affecting the local economy.” Mayor Shinobu Tokioka says he will await the prefecture’s independent nuclear safety committee decision before making recommendations to the Fukui governor. Sources indicate that the expert committee feels the new safety standards are appropriate and that it leans toward approving Oi unit #3&4 restarts. (Yomiuri Shimbun)
  • In another new source’s article, we get further information related to the Oi town’s decision. A weekend survey in and around Fukui Prefecture showed that 45% of respondents backed restarting reactors that are found to be safe, and an equal number were opposed. It is possible that the evenly-divided nature of public opinion combined with Oi town’s restart approval might give the Tokyo government confidence to allow Kansai Electric Co. to resume operations at Oi. Greenpeace says the government’s “reckless push” to get reactors back in service “has left many communities thinking they have to choose between risks to their health and safety, and risks to their jobs and prosperity.” (Japan Today)
  • Despite local approval of the Oi nukes, Fukui governor Issei Nishikawa remains critical of the Tokyo government with respect to the nuclear safety issue. ”We want (the government) to clearly show its stance and system (toward the nation’s nuclear policy) to citizens,” Nishikawa said. (Kyodo News)
  • One newspaper in Japan (Japan Times) says the current nuke restart issue might be no more than a political tug-of-war between Prime Minister Noda and Osaka mayor Toru Hashimoto. The editorial itself is groundless. In the first place, the debate was spawned by former PM (and avowed anti-nuke) Naoto Kan with his de-facto moratorium on nuclear plant operations after the Fukushima accident. Secondly, Prime Minister Noda is trying to keep the lights burning and industries churning come the long, hot summer. Nuke restarts can avoid summer power shortages, and he knows it. On the other hand, mayor Hashimoto is clearly using the current nation-wide level of distrust in the Tokyo government to spring-board himself into national political prominence. Hashimoto has everything to gain and nothing to lose by his effort. If Japan’s energy infrastructure fails this summer, Noda will be the scapegoat…not Hashimoto. If the Oi nukes restart and a national energy crisis is avoided, Noda will be attacked by Hashimoto for arbitrarily forcing the nation into un-necessary levels of nuclear risk. The Japan Times article fails to mention any of this. Their editorial isn’t worth the fonts it’s written with.
  • A group of Japanese municipal officials continues to fight to scrap all nuclear plants. 66 municipal heads (out of ~770 across Japan) have submitted a petition to Mitsuyoshi Yanagisawa, Senior Vice Minister for Industry, demanding all nuclear plants should be permanently shuttered as soon as possible. They also demand a full national commitment to an energy policy that does not include anything nuclear. The petition was submitted by Tokai mayor Tatsuya Murakami, who said the Fukushima accident needs to be taken seriously as a clear incentive to adopt a non-nuclear energy plan. However, Vice Minister Yanagisawa said nuke restart decisions must consider oil prices and seasonal electricity demand. (JAIF)
  • A new, prestigious study out of America concludes that low level radiation exposure over long periods of time may not be hazardous! One of the authors, Jacqueline Yanch, a senior lecturer in MIT’s Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering, reports “This paper shows that you could go 400 times higher than average background levels and you’re still not detecting genetic damage.” In other words, using the 1.5 mSv/yr estimate of Japan’s average natural background levels, one could be exposed to as much as 600 mSv/yr and not suffer genetic damage in excess of that which would occur without any additional exposure at all. I could go on, but I suggest reading the following, non-vested summary… http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120515181256.htm
  • More than 80% of the waste sludge in Fukushima Prefecture is not being disposed of for one reason…fear of radiation. About 18% of the sludge exceeds government standards for open disposal and must be handled as low level nuclear waste. The rest is well below the 8000 Becquerel/kg limit and can be buried or recycled in cement or fertilizer products without restriction. However, because there are detectable isotopes from the nuke accident in their make-up, more than 32,000 tons of sludge from waste processing is being stored in make-shift fashion across the prefecture. Why? Because local residents believe that any detectably level is too dangerous to consider. Don’t bury it or even think about shipping it off to be recycled because it’s…radioactive! (NHK World)
  • My friend and fellow blogger Will Davis has written a stern rebuff of the recent unconscionable speculations concerning the possibility of world-wide catastrophe from F. Daiichi spent fuel pool #4. I suggest everyone check it out and share it with anyone who cares… http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2012/05/16/spent-fuel-at-fukushima-not-dangerous/