July 3, 2014

Jul 30, 2014 | Fukushima Accident Updates

  • Craig McClain posted a list of science-based reports on radiation in the Pacific. His piece is in Deep Sea News. The listed reports de-bunk internet-based postings of “pseudoscience, misinformation, or outright lies” which have “received far more attention and links than they deserve”. McClain cautions everyone to thoroughly evaluate all claims and look at the biases and expertise of the writers. The listings include the topic of the report(s) being discredited, links to rebuttals by experts, and McClain’s favorite quotes from the debunkers. My personal favorite quote comes from Scientific American’s Michael Moyer concerning scandalous reports about U.S babies dying from Fukushima radiation, “A check [of the data] reveals that the authors’ statistical claims are critically flawed—if not deliberate mistruths…picking only the data that suits your analysis isn’t science—it’s politics.” Craig McClain is the Assistant Director of Science for the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center. His popular writing has been featured in Cosmos, Science Illustrated, American Scientist, Wired, Mental Floss, and the Open Lab: The Best Science Writing on the Web. http://deepseanews.com/2014/01/all-the-best-scientifically-verified-information-on-fukushima-impacts/
  • Tepco has recovered 80% of last year’s major tank leak. The announcement was included in today’s Tepco news conference. In August of 2013, one of the wastewater storage tanks lost 300 tons of contaminated liquid to the surrounding earth. A report to the Nuclear Regulation Authority says the recovery has been due to removing soil which was soaked. The other 20% seeped deeper into the earth. However, the soil has effectively contained all radioactive isotopes, much like a high-efficiency water filter. Thus, it is unlikely that any of the leakage reached to sea. Tepco also said that the 300 tons of wastewater contained about 4.5×1013 Becquerels of Strontium activity A Becquerel is one radioactive emission per second. Another topic was the elevated levels of Tritium found in one of the inland wells used to pump out uncontaminated groundwater. Tepco says they continue the investigation. What does not seem to be reported anywhere in the Press is that the well’s Tritium level has dropped from 1,700 to 1,500 Becquerels per liter since May 28. http://fukushimaupdate.com/tepco-reports-on-radioactive-substance-leak/ — http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2014/images/pump_well_14070202-e.pdf
  • The head of Japan’s nuke watchdog questions nuclear utility attitudes. NRA Chairman Shunichi Tanaka says the utilities applying for restarts “have not taken the accident that occurred in Fukushima seriously enough,” and this has caused delays in processing NRA safety assessments. He added, “The primary responsibility to secure safety (of nuclear plants) is placed on the operators. I’m not sure if such a stance is well established in corporate culture of utilities in our country.” http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2014/07/299766.html
  • A fear-mongering editorial says health studies expose the myth of nuclear safety. The Japan Times purports that investigations published out of Germany, Great Britain and the United States show that routine operation of nukes inflicts health-threatening risks on the near-public. The editorial focuses on what they call “the scientifically established fact that there is no safe dose of radiation, no matter how small, bearing in mind that dangerous radioactive elements constantly accumulate in the body.” The editorial asks Industry Minister Motegi that “in light of this evidence…are you and the rest of the Abe administration still determined to restart the reactors?” What the article fails to report is that each and every cited report is that all of the reports have been refuted by experts from across the scientific community. Further, the notion of no safe level of radiation exposure is far from scientifically established. It is an historical assumption predicated on the data from of huge exposures, arbitrarily extrapolated down to zero. In fact, a major faction within the scientific community wants the no-safe-level assumption abolished in light of a mountain of conclusive evidence to the contrary. (see…Radiation: The No-Safe-Level Myth http://www.hiroshimasyndrome.com/radiation-the-no-safe-level-myth.html) The Times editorial is a clear case of cherry-picking references, using only the fringe publications of antinuclear writers who have total faith in the no-safe-level assumption. One-sidedness in evidence-selection can only mislead and misinform the readership. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2014/07/02/voices/health-studies-explode-myth-safe-nuclear-power-plant/#.U7QnLaNOUdV