May 23, 2012

May 23, 2012 | Fukushima Accident Updates

  • The World Health Organization says all Japanese Fukushima exposures to the public will not cause cancer. WHO adds that international exposures are so close to natural background that increases in cancers or other health effects are unlikely. WHO used the most conservative (cautious, sensible) analytic methods possible to reach their conclusion. The lowest conservative threshold for cancer induction is 100 millisieverts, but the highest public exposures near F. Daiichi were in the 10-50 mSv range – well-below the threshold. The majority of the public exposures in the Tohoku region were in the 1-10 mSv range, at least 10 times less than the threshold. The early evacuation of those within 3km of the accident kept exposures below the cancer threshold for everyone. (Reuters)
  • Japanese scientists estimate that the water level in the room immediately below the Reactor Vessel (pedestal) of F. Daiichi unit #1 is 40 centimeters. Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization researchers have used more than a year of temperature and pressure data to make their pronosticationt. Unlike the previous pedestal water level measurement for unit #2, no actual visual inspection is possible for unit #1 because of extreme radiation levels immediately outside the primary containment. Regardless, the water level suggested for unit #1 is well below the previous estimate of a 2 meter depth reported by Tepco last year. JNESO says that despite the less-than-expected depth of the water, the solidified corium from the meltdown of March 11-12, 2011, is being sufficiently cooled. The assessment further indicates there might be a leak from inside the pedestal and into the pressure suppression tank (torus) room surrounding the pedestal. (NHK World)
  • The Tokyo government seems to have no interest in Osaka mayor Hashimoto’s recent Oi restart suggestion. Hashimoto said the Oi nukes should only be run when actually needed to avoid power shortages in the region, if restarts are approved by Tokyo. If they are not needed, he wants the reactors to remain shuttered. The government is set to reject Hashimoto’s suggestion, according to government sources. Chief Cabinet Secretary Osamu Fujimura made a statement which did not deny the possibility, “Tight electricity supply and demand is not the only factor we are considering in regard to resuming reactor operations.” Meanwhile, Kyoto Gov. Keiji Yamada questioned Fujimura’s remarks, “Wasn’t the government supposed to make a decision about reactivation based on safety, not economic efficiency? It’s inconsistent.” (Yomiuri Shimbun)
  • Can Japan thrive without nuclear power? That’s the question asked by an editorial in MIT’s Technology Review. The underlying issue is the level of reliance Japan now faces with respect to foreign oil imports, 85% of which is Middle Eastern. In 2011, Japan increased its oil import costs $50 billion, $30 billion of which was for thermal plants to off-set shuttered nukes. Unless idled nukes are restarted, Japan will spend an additional $60 billion on oil in 2012. With the nation’s economy teetering, the possibility of fiscal failure increases every day. http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/40436/page2/
  • A Japanese Industry Ministry panel is preparing a report on future energy mixes. Sources say it will present four-possibilities… 1) the ratio of nuclear power in relation to the nation’s total power generation in 2030 should be reduced to zero at an early date from 26 percent in fiscal 2010; 2) the ratio should gradually be reduced to 15 percent; 3) the ratio should remain at certain levels between 20 and 25 percent; and 4) no numerical targets should be set. A “35% nuclear” proposal was dropped for fear that the public would not stand for it. Also, independent economists have turned away from the METI forecast because they feel any such estimate will necessarily be wrong, especially when it is projected nearly two decades into the future. There are simply too many unforeseeable variables. Regardless, it will be interesting to see how options 2-4 (if any are accepted) will be juxtaposed with the pending 40 year limit on nuclear plant operations. (Mainichi Shimbun)
  • A quasi-formal tribunal concerning the Fukushima accident has found Tepco and the government guilty of negligence. The ruling states, “They shirked their responsibility by intentionally ruling out a situation they should have been prepared for.” The court also said that charges of crimes against humanity ought to be formally pursued.  The “defense” lawyers countered, “The accident was beyond their ability to foresee and avoid its consequences.” Organizing head Professor Narihiko Ito of Chuo University said, “The past tribunals tried war crimes. This is the first time to hold a tribunal on nuclear power.” He added that because people died due to the forced evacuations and a scarcity of adequate medical facilities, the formation of a tribunal was warranted. The results of the tribunal are not legally binding, but the organizers seem to have gone to great lengths to simulate what might be the case if the hearing were in-fact lawful. The group intends to promote pursuit of criminal charges against Tepco and the government under Naoto Kan. (Asahi Shimbun)