August 3, 2015

Aug 3, 2015 | Fukushima Accident Updates

  • Recent scientific reports find that the major nuke accident health issues are psychological. The studies, published in the Lancet science journal, point to mental stressors as the only actual health damage following the Fukushima accident. Nuclear accidents can have a “devastating” impact on people’s lives that has nothing to do with the effects of radiation. One of the most vital lessons is the importance of preventing needless fear and panic after a radiation release. One point that should be stressed in the event of a nuke crisis is that very few people are exposed to a life-threatening dose of radiation. Further, mandated evacuations should be based on actual exposure readings, managed carefully, and that physicians should be trained in these matters. The Fukushima evacuations of 2011 failed on all three accounts. Fukushima surveys showed that the proportion of psychologically distressed evacuees was almost five times higher than it was in the general population. Akira Ohtsuru of Fukushima Medical University said, “In most nuclear accidents very few people are exposed to a life-threatening dose of radiation.” Dr Koichi Tanigawa, Fukushima Medical University, said: “Although the radiation dose to the public from Fukushima was relatively low, and no discernible physical health effects are expected, psychological and social problems, largely stemming from the differences in risk perceptions, have had a devastating impact on people’s lives.” Stress issues have been amplified by the large number of families separated due to the prolonged evacuation. Sir Simon Wessely of Kings College, London, said the studies show “the psychological and social consequences of nuclear accidents are more profound, long-lasting, divisive, and difficult to manage than the more direct consequences of radiation leaks. In future, far more attention needs to be given to community engagement and choice, and less to the extreme risk-aversion which currently dominates thinking.” Professor Geraldine Thomas of London’s Imperial College says, “These papers however suggest that the measures that we put in place (long term evacuation, & etc.) to protect ourselves from what may be a health risk, which is not definable at low doses, may be creating a greater health risk, unrelated to the dose of radiation, but related to our human responses to the situation. The major effect on health of the general population from both Chernobyl and Fukushima is not related to the actual effects of radiation, but the fear of radiation.” She adds that mixed messages about the severity of the accident and “restriction of information … might further increase public anxiety, leading to distribution of inaccurate information and public distrust.” As a result, screenings for radiation exposure (e.g. child thyroid scans) added stress rather than relieving it. Dr. Thomas concludes, “An over-reaction can produce risks in its own right that may be greater than the health risks posed by the accident itself.” http://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/news/13521509.Psychological_fall_out_of_nuclear_accidents__most_serious_public_health_issue_/ — http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/07/31/national/science-health/major-nuclear-disasters-mental-health-key-casualty-studies-find/#.VbvQwZAw8dW — http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/health-fallout-from-fukushima-mainly-mental-studies?utm_campaign=jt_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=jt_newsletter_2015-07-31_PM [Comment – I have found links to two of the reports that are not behind pay walls… http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)61106-0/abstract (free registration for open access) and http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)61436-2/fulltext?rss=yes]
  • Canada’s Fukushima InFORM reports that radioactivity in fish should not be a matter of concern. Dr. Jay Cullen says, “Given the amounts of 90Sr released to this point by the disaster there is likely to little in the way of measurable impact on levels in seawater or fish in the eastern Pacific.” Cullen says he is responding to criticisms concerning the lack of Strontium testing being done with fish caught off the coast of North America. He points out that “as of April-June 2015 none of the fish caught in Fukushima Prefecture waters exceeded the stringent 100 Bq/kg Japanese safety standard. Across the Pacific, we have yet to detect Fukushima derived radiocesium in salmon and steelhead trout.” Cs-137 combined with Cs-134 are the indicator isotopes for Fukushima-sourced contamination.  http://fukushimainform.ca/2015/07/30/radioactive-strontium-and-cesium-in-fish-from-the-harbor-at-the-fukushima-dai-ichi-nuclear-plant/#more-1301
  • The extraction of the unit #3 fuel handling machine (FHM) occurred on Sunday. This was the largest and most complex piece of rubble to be removed, to date. The FHM moved new and used fuel bundles between the reactor and spent fuel pool (SFP) prior to the hydrogen explosion of March 14, 2011. The blast dislodged the machine and it eventually fell into the SFP. Sunday’s extraction took between 60 and 90 minutes (depending on the news source) and placed the FHM on the ground next to the unit #3 building. This clears the way for removal of all other rubble, working towards the transfer of the 514 used fuel bundles stored in the SFP. After removing debris from the pool, Tepco will install equipment on to lift out the stored fuel assemblies, perhaps as early as January, 2018. Chief Decommissioning Officer Naohiro Masuda said, “The successful completion of this complex task is a credit to the hard work and collaborative spirit of many people from many organizations who have worked together. It paves the way for continued progress and is a milestone in reducing the risk of removing spent fuel assemblies. The workers should take satisfaction in this accomplishment even as we continue the work of decommissioning.” No changes in area radiation levels occurred during the operation.  http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/2015/1256671_6844.html — http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/2015/1256671_6844.html — http://jen.jiji.com/jc/eng?g=eco&k=2015080200139 — http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201508020026
  • A hearing on the injunction against operation at the Shika nuke station is being held. The station is owned by Hokuriku Electric Company. The company says the Nuclear Regulation Authority conclusion that a fault running under unit #1 is seismic is “based only on inference”. It further states the NRA’s view was “based on limited information, including a sketch and pictures of trial trenches made during investigations when Unit 1 was being built.” The company concludes that the sketch was not from an active fault but “created by erosion by the sea,” and stated that the “fault cannot be active in the future.” http://www.jaif.or.jp/en/shika-lawsuit-hokuriku-electric-power-says-suspicion-of-fault-activeness-is-merely-inference/
  • Three former Tepco executives will have to stand trial after being forcibly indicted. The Tokyo No. 5 Committee for the Inquest of Prosecution overturned prior decisions by the Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office to not indict Tsunehisa Katsumata, 75, chairman of Tepco at the time of the accident, and two former vice presidents. The prosecutor’s office ruled against indictment in September of 2012, with respect to a citizen’s group filing that 42 Tepco officials and Prime Minister Naoto Kan were negligent. The plaintiffs appealed, and were again rebuffed last year. Under Japanese law, plaintiffs are allowed to request further examination of the case by the citizen’s panel. The (above) panel voted on the request for indictment two times, and both times at least eight of the 11 members voted to have the case formally prosecuted. The panel’s statement said, “Those in responsible positions in nuclear power generation are responsible for preparing measures by taking into consideration every possibility of a serious accident being caused by tsunami.” The report suggested that F. Daiichi should have never been running on 3/11/11, “If the operation had been suspended, the disaster could have been avoided.” Plaintiff spokesperson Ruiko Muto hailed the decision, saying that having the former executives face a criminal trial will help create a society in which people can live in peace.  The plaintiff’s lawyer, Hiroyuki Kawai, said, “If this had ended with a decision not to indict, the real truth about the accident would have been forever buried in darkness,” in an appeal to cover-up rumors fomented by antinuclear groups and conspiracy theorists. Fisheries official Yuichi Manome stated the rumor that Fukushima has been forgotten by the rest of the world, “Despite the magnitude of the accident, no one has been asked to take responsibility. That leads to the thinking that perhaps the accident never happened in the first place.” In an attempt to inject some needed objectivity, the Japan News (Yomiuri Shimbun) pointed out that the evidence might be insufficient for prosecution, “Under the criminal code, individuals are charged with criminal responsibility, not businesses. To file a charge for professional negligence resulting in death and injury, it is necessary to prove that the accused was guilty of negligence evidently while recognizing concrete dangers, not just having a vague sense of alarm.”  http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20150731p2g00m0dm078000c.html — http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0002328110 — http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/news/20150731_80.html — http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201508010032
  • The NRA’s Radiation Council proposes raising emergency radiation exposures to 250 millisieverts. The current limit is 100 mSv. The recommendation is but half of the international emergency standard of 500 mSv (ICRP). The new cap should become law in April, 2016, after revisions are made to nuclear regulatory law and the Industrial Safety and Health Law. The new limit will be used when certain emergencies arise. Affected parties include employees of utility companies and their contractors, inspection officers from the Secretariat of the NRA, and other emergency workers. The company owning a facility having an emergency must gain consent of workers before asking them to exceed the old 100 mSv limit, properly train the employees, and give them follow-up medical checks for cancer and other radiation-related health issues after exposure. http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201507310057