November 12, 2015

Nov 12, 2015 | Fukushima Accident Updates

  • Test fishing near F. Daiichi shows little or no radioactive Cesium. An independent Iwaki group of aquarium employees have been running an independent monitoring program for Fukushima isotopes in fish caught as close to F. Daiichi as the law allows. Junichi Yagi, Iwaki aquarium worker, has been catching and testing fish for radioactivity since the nuke accident. But, he was not finding the contamination levels reported in the Press. He began a group effort in 2013, explaining, “I had been frustrated over my inability to counter an argument with data we took on our own that the sea we loved has been contaminated.” They have one fishing excursion every month, weather permitting. In August, 21 people participated. They first stopped 1.5km from the nuke station to gather sea-bed samples, but no fish were caught due to a pact made between Tepco and the local fisheries in 1966. They then moved to the allowed 2km distance and threw their lines in the water. The group caught several species, including flounder and rock trout. After catching a sufficient number for analysis, they returned to the Iwaki facility; Aquamarine Fukushima. Rock trout is a species currently prohibited from being marketed, but the ones caught on this day had no detectible radioactive contamination in them. One white rockfish measured the highest at 59 Becquerels per kilogram, which is below the national standard of 100 Bq/kg. The entire process was open to the public, and some locals were there to check things out. A mother from Nagano Prefecture was visiting the aquarium with family and said, “I now know that its sea is gradually recovering. Seeing with my own eyes the contamination level of the fish checked convinced me of this.” Yagi says he hopes the team’s efforts will help people understand the actual situation with fish caught off Fukushima Prefecture. http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201511100001
  • The workman’s compensation award to an F. Daiichi welder is affecting other nuke workers. The award criterion of 5 millisievert exposure in a year has caused some current and former nuclear workers to question the safety of their 50 mSv/year and 100 mSv/5-years occupational limits. A 65-year-old Minamisoma decontamination worker said, “I was shocked when I heard the decision to recognize the disease as work-related. Although up to 50 mSv a year is said to be safe, the criterion for recognizing [exposure] as an industrial accident is five mSv a year. The gap, a difference of 10 times, makes me anxious about whether the exposure limit is correct. I want the government to explain in a way that is also understandable for workers at the sites.” When criteria for recognizing work-related diseases and injuries were established in 1976, there was virtually no scientific data in Japan about the long-term effects of low-dose radiation exposure. In other words, the radiation exposure criterion was essentially a speculation written into the statute. Kunio Sakai, a professor emeritus of radiology at Niigata University, says, “The criterion does not mean that people will surely develop leukemia if they are exposed to five mSv or higher a year. It is unlikely that the same kind of cases will occur one after another in the future.” Since 3/11/11, the government has extended special monitoring of the health of workers who have had greater than 50 mSv exposure…a total of about 900 individuals. The Yomiuri Shimbun says the government needs to inform workers at nuclear facilities of the system in order to prevent future workman’s comp awards from causing needless fear and confusion. http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0002538165
  • The children of quake and tsunami victims have their education paid through donations. The funds are being disbursed in three prefectures; Miyagi, Iwate, and Fukushima. The prefectures began a fund-raising drive soon after the massive natural calamity, hoping to raise about 3.5 billion yen each. They have actually accrued much more than that. Miyagi alone has nearly 9 billion yen (~ $70, million) from 12,700 donations. Children who were orphaned or lost one parent in the natural disaster are eligible to receive a monthly cash payment as a scholarship grant. Each elementary and junior high student gets 10,000 yen per month, high schoolers 20,000 yen/month, and college students get 30,000 yen/mo. A lump sum bonus of 100,000-600,000 yen is available upon graduation. A child too young for school before the disaster can be funded for up to 16 years. There is more than enough to cover the stipends, but there is also a lot of extra money. The question is what to do with it. It was donated specifically for educational purposes, so it should be spent accordingly. Iwate Prefecture has had 7.74 billion yen donated, and Fukushima Prefecture 7.56 billion yen. Miyagi has 1,064 eligible students, Iwate 583, and Fukushima 198. http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/recovery/AJ201511110077
  • Candidates for the Namie mayoralty complain of election problems. Of the 16,000 eligible voters, 4,000 live in 44 prefectures other than Fukushima. This makes it difficult for candidates to communicate with one-fourth of the eligible voters. In order to accommodate the complaints, the election commission has extended the official campaign period ten days. The town’s government has the evacuation addresses on file, but official policy will not allow them being shared with campaign staff. The candidates have little more than the internet to use as a tool for campaigning. Many estranged Namie evacuees try to stay informed through the town website, but there is no way to know how many have not used the web.  http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20151112p2a00m0na017000c.html  (Comment – News media polls show that a third of Fukushima’s Tokyo-mandated evacuees have no intention of repopulating, and another third say they are undecided. Most of those who say they will not return live outside Fukushima Prefecture. We suggest that Namie post a poll of for its evacuees on the town website and have the responders include their names. Make it clear that those with no intention of repopulating will no longer be allowed to vote in town elections, but the response will not affect their generous compensation packages.)