Note — I have written previously about other aspects of this subject here, here, here, and here. I am not by nature an alarmist about nuclear power or even particularly anti-nuclear. But sometimes truth just has to be told.
Nobody died following the nuclear accident at Three Mile Island in 1979. I should know because I was there. But this fact can’t be attributed to any wisdom of the U.S. nuclear industry, but simply to dumb luck. The two TMI reactors were (and still are) the only such devices ever built deliberately on the approach path to a U.S. Air Force base, now Harrisburg International Airport. An extra 18 inches of reinforced concrete was added to the TMI containment buildings to protect them if hit by a fully laden B-52. No other reactors in the USA had (or have) such thick containment vessels. Had Unit 2 been built to the standards of all its sister reactors like Rancho Seco in California, hydrogen explosions would have breached the containment just as they have in Japan and many people would have died just as they will in Japan.
Notice my emphasis in that last paragraph? Japanese people, probably hundreds and maybe thousands, will probably die as a result of the Fukishima Daiichi nuclear accidents following the tsunami earlier this year. This is according to old nuclear safety contacts of mine from TMI days currently working the accident in Japan. Those sources tell me there is a coverup.
Why there might be a coverup is pretty obvious. It will take years for people to die as a result of the accidents yet political parties want to remain in power right now and the Japanese nuclear industry wants to remain key to that nation’s energy plan. So men with gray hair who are nowhere near Fukishima and are not themselves in any physical danger are downplaying the accident still and apparently keeping the truth from reaching those who are endangered.
The public health situation at Fukishima Daiichi and beyond is apparently far worse than we have been told.
This is the way things work in Japan and always have. Japan is, after all, an export economy built on the inherent financial abuse of its citizens who can generally buy the same Japanese cars for less in the USA than they could at a dealership in the city where those cars are manufactured. This is seen as the collective price of prosperity. But in this case it will probably kill people.
Just look at the Japanese regulations for radiation exposure, which are right now being rewritten with a new — and higher — number considered to be normal. Soon what’s normal in Fukushima and in fish taken from surrounding waters would be considered unsafe in the USA.
This is, as my Mom would say, a God damned shame, but I can’t see what’s to be done about it, can you?
That’s the largest problem with nuclear power in my opinion: the nuclear industry and the civil authorities who regulate it are not trustworthy, and people know it. If a safe type of reactor existed, almost no one would believe it. That’s a shame.
Now, if Iranians, Egyptians or Chinese people are able to circumvent censorship, why wouldn’t the Japanese, in a free society, be able to access the same information you have?
Safe reactors do exist and have for 50 years. Every aircraft carrier and submarine in the U.S. Navy is nuclear powered. The powerplants in Japan are an old design that would never be built here.
And for all the alarmist talk, as I recall the biggest industrial accident oversees was when the Union Carbide battery plant blew up in India.
Let’s not forget that Texas City, Texas was leveled in the 1940s by a freighter loaded with fertilizer.
“would be built”? that’s on the assumption that any would ever be built again. The youngest commercial plant in the United States is the South Texas Project, and that is *23 years old*. We can describe what would and should be the standards all we want, but the truth is that every plant predates any standard we would, today, truly consider “safe” given the increased awareness of the power of natural disasters.
Us utility customers in Texas are *still* paying for the Commanche Peak Nuclear power plant and will be for the next 40 years.
The original project cost was $200 million.
The final cost of the original build was $12 billion.
We cannot afford to build very many more nuclear power plants.
Chronische Erkrankungen beseitigen eine Menge mehr als 36 Millionen, frauen MBT Chapa schuhe nizza grau , Einzelpersonen 1 Jahr alle die kosten wird Ihre internationale Wirtschaftslage nahezu 47000000000000 $ aus den nachfolgenden 30 Jahren, die ganze Welt Wirtschaftlich Forum Staaten. Die Zahl der Todesopfer könnte steigen, dass die 52 Tausend pro Jahr in dieser Zeit, im Einklang mit der ganzen Welt Wellness Company. Standorte stellen eine neue heikle und auch komplexe Tätigkeit bei der Darstellung “oben” eine Art von internationalen Aktivitäten, um Herzprobleme, die meisten Krebsarten, Diabetes Kampf will, dachte Krankheit und Erkrankungen der Atemwege – viele von denen, Entscheidungen im Zusammenhang mit Diät-Regime zugeordnet werden können, schlecht, mit Übung zu trinken. Sie sind Unterstützung durch Firmen, benötigt mbt frauen , in denen Lebensmittel erzeugen, Medikamente zusammen mit Rauchen von Zigaretten Artikel zusammen mit über Chefs, die umweltschädliche Orte der Arbeit besitzen wird.
Aussichten, in dieses, frauen mbt schuhe Tunisha blau haben, die Interaktion mit bereits unter der gewesen, weil well-to-do Nationen auf der ganzen Welt neben multinationalen Unternehmen waren nicht geeignet, irgendeine Art von wirtschaftlicher zu erreichen, während akzeptieren in der rund Ausdruck zu Hilfe zu füllen und fördern die Bestrebungen hinsichtlich geringerem Nationen auf der ganzen Welt. Mit Freitag, folgte die Montage Ihrer Anlage jeden Bericht herauszupicken, dass die globale Finanz-und zwischenmenschlichen Problemen der ständigen Störung, ohne Ort bestimmte Ziele zu kürzen ihre Auswirkungen. Tipps enthalten, mbt frauen , Förderung einer gesunden Diät-Programmen, rauchfreie Arbeitsplätze, Zugang zu Krebs Malignität Screening-Programme zusammen mit dem Stillen im Hinblick auf die in Bezug auf 6 Monate über Lieferung und auch Lehr-Allianzen, um herauszufinden, frische Drogen.
At Union Carbide in Bhopal they were making a pesticide. The problem was the result of poor maintenance procedures and poor operator training. While attempting to wash something, they mixed water with a chemical that would react with water and produce a toxic gas. The operators did not understand the chemistry of the operation. They did not have or follow proper maintenance safety procedures.
These are things that USA firms waste too much time on, right?
As more and more production is shipped out of the USA, important know how and safety information is being lost. There is less emphasis on procedures and training. Right now the world is creating the conditions for several more Bhopal accidents.
Technology can be dangerous. When using dangerous technology, one must exercise great care and caution. When this is not happening, we need people like Bob to speak out and start a dialog. You can not trust a factory, a company, or even a government to manage dangerous technology well. We must have the right to question what is happening….
Continual Krankheiten über 36 Tausend verwischen, mbt sapatu weißen frauen schuhe , Männer und Frauen pro Jahr und auf jeden Fall wird die tatsächliche globale Wirtschaftssystem nur über $ 47000000000000 in folgenden 10 Jahren, die Welt Monetary Online-Community, dass Preis. Wie viele Todesfälle erhöhen kann, um Fifty Two Million jährlich Hilfe für den Grund dieser Periode, nach dem Planeten Health Organization. Orte Gesicht der komplizierten neben schwierige Aufgabe rund Skizzieren anstelle der globalen Maßnahmen zu planen, um mit koronarer Herzkrankheit, Krebs, Diabetes, Geist Krankheit zusammen mit Atemstörung viel – die meisten, die nach Alternativen in Bezug auf Ernährung, Zigaretten-, Alkohol zusammenhängen passieren sowie Training. Sie brauchen Unterstützung durch Unternehmen, MBT Schuhe , diese machen Mahlzeit, Betäubungsmittel sowie Zigarettenrauchen Produkte, als auch über Organisationen, die umweltgefährdend Arbeitsplätzen umfassen könnten.
depends on how you define trust.
you can trust them to cover their behinds.
you can’t trust them to cover YOURS.
it has always been thus. the dangers and levels have been known from the 30s and 40s, when fast and loose turned the nuclear research and development community into the best-educated, most diligent, scientifically-trained, and carefully journalling collection of guinea pigs ever dreamed of.
but bucks versus “tail of the curve?”
bucks every time.
How far outside Miyagi do you think the radiation will extend? Are people at Tokyo at risk?
yep. food, water, air… eventually as the fission nucleides migrate with movement in the environment, there will be a rise in disease and deaths across Japan.
There’s nothing that can be done for the afflicted except perhaps acknowledgement, the truth, compensation and punishment of those responsible. Truly a shame, indeed. If a disaster like this happened in USA, there would almost certain be a collusion between government and corporate concerns to cover up any hard truths. They’re doing it right now with BP, lying to residents of Gulf about the safety of the seafood and seashore affected by oil spill. Another goddamn shame.
[…] https://www.cringely.com/2011/09/truth-about-fukushima-daiichi/ […]
There are citizen reports on YouTube (don’t know about their accuracy) that claim to have measured radiation in areas of Tokyo that are now hotter than the quarantined area surrounding Chernobyl.
[…] From Robert Cringely on Cringely.com: […]
Asian culture and Japanese pride are big impediments to solving this problem. Preventing ocean and groundwater contamination by radionucleides should be the top priority, but the Japanese have put their equivalent of our Bureau of Indian Affairs in charge, and it shows.
Compare the Japanese clusterf*ck to the response at Chernobyl where the Soviet military was tasked with stabilizing the situation and evacuating residents. Yes, politicians tried to hide it for about a week, but then the military took charge and the horrible emergency at Chernobyl was handled quickly and efficiently.
The hackerspace in Tokyo has designed and is distributing simple geiger counters to measure the radiation at many locations throughout the country.
http://tokyohackerspace.org/en/project/tokyo-hackerspace-netrad-geiger-shield
With real-time monitoring it will be hard to cover up the extent of the the contamination.
….but haven’t thousands of people died from coal burning power plants? As dangerous as radiation is, doesn’t nuclear energy have a better safety record overall?
See figure 24.11 on death rates of electricity generation technologies in David MacKay’s book :
https://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/withouthotair/c24/page_168.shtml
Air travel is super safe too, but when a 737 crash lands in your back 40 and thousands of gallons of fuel are leaking into the nearby creek, that fact is small comfort to the folks downstream. The Japanese are not acting with the needed urgency given the severity of the meltdowns at Fukushima.
The problem is that assuming your numbers are correct that the deaths wouldn’t even statistically measurable in the over 300,000 cancer deaths the Japanese experience in a normal year.
https://www.jcancer.jp/english/cancerinjapan/
The best part about these sorts of reports is that no one can ever falsify them. Hypothesize a grand enough coverup, and you can explain away the fact that several different agencies, including international agencies and the US military, are doing the measurements independently. Say “hotter than Chernobyl” and you get lots of excitement, without anyone saying “hotter than Chernobyl where? and when?”
Same thing happens with Chernobyl: WHO’s most recent report suggests strongly that the worst public health effect of Chernobyl has been on people being scared sick by alarmist accounts of the public health effects of Chernobyl; when linear dose-response models (themselves questionable) suggest there may be as many as 4000 excess cancer deaths in all of the exposed area, the reports hardly ever get to the next sentence, which is “but then 4000 cancer deaths over 30 years in a population of 300 to 500 million exposures is completely undetectable and statistically meaningless.”
The IAEA released a report on 13 September that could be useful: https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/focus/fukushima/japan-report2/japanreport0911.pdf
I’m sorry you think I’d write something so shallow, Charlie. I thought you knew me.
I didn’t go looking for this story. But when I speak with people I’ve known for 30+ years, people who are THERE at Fukushima right now in technical positions monitoring the accident and they say things like: “The situation is in decline. But the amount of message control on this is such that you don’t want to be on the wrong side of the message. Because of a lack of instrumentation in the plant even before the event – most agree we are talking varying degrees of nightmare – for centuries. The yellow cake folks not only control the message – but have extreme connections to people who just do – without any rules.”
How would you respond to that?
My response is: provide evidence, not speculative hand-waving arguments and reported snippets.
Bob is doing the right thing. He has excellent contacts in the nuclear industry and in Japan. If his friends are telling him these problems exist, they probably do. If there is tight censorship of the situation, they way you get “evidence” is to expose the censors. You have to force them to loosen their grip and you have to make it possible for those with the facts to be able to speak out.
There is an excellent example of this in recent history — the Watergate coverup. Look at the time and effort it took to find and document the truth!. If the reporters did not have the secret help of a high level person in the FBI, we may have never known what happened.
If people with inside knowledge of a critical situation feel there is a problem, how do we respond? Do you blindly trust the people in charge?
In 100 years nuclear power will be mankind’s most important source of energy. We need to learn to use and manage it much better. If the authorities are mismanaging this accident, they are hurting everyone and our future too.
Best to err, and believe, on the side of safety – don’t you think? Already, Fukishima Daiichi officials have been caught *lying*; who do you believe?
100% core meltdown!
4 Hotspots outside the safe zone!
Look here:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/09/09/f-vp-dale-japan-six-months-after-tsunami.html
Note the press has slowed down reporting on this – really good crisis control. Too bad they can’t stop the radiation. Cold shutdown in ONE YEAR away!! How much radiation is flowing into Chinese and Korean fishing waters? This is a nightmare!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TUM_UQr_hY
I bet being “completely undetectable and statistically meaningless” makes those 4000 dead and their families feel a lot better.
I think your Moms correct, and shame might work fairly well in Japan.
Well I never had you pegged as a latter-day chicken liken. On what do you base this alarmist comment. All the science reports that I have read say that, although there will be deaths due to a higher level of radiation, if this follows the pattern of Chernobyl then there will be more deaths from mental problems due to the evacualtion of the population. And one paper suggests that if people were moved from Tokyo to the affected area there would be a REDUCTION in deaths due to the fact that Tokyo has a high degree of air pollution. Rather than quote all the papers I have read on the subject I will link to a good source of links to original material. http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/04/23/fukushima-open-thread-5/#more-4476 There are many articles and references to the nuclear debate from eminent scientists and engineers on this web site. Please take the time to read it if you are concerned.
I can also recommend watching the BBC Horizon program “Is Nuclear Power Safe?” broadcast Sept. 14 on BBC TV, written and present by a leading UK nuclear physicist Professor Jim Al-Khalili ( no anti-muslim jokes please!). It is available in the UK on the BBC iPlayer and elsewhere on the web if you search..
The sky is NOT falling in!
“This is the way things work in Japan and always have. Japan is, after all, an export economy built on the inherent financial abuse of its citizens who can generally buy the same Japanese cars for less in the USA than they could at a dealership in the city where those cars are manufactured. This is seen as the collective price of prosperity.”
This has nothing to do with nuclear power in Japan. Conflating what is happening at this specific moment in this specific situation with some misguided pontification about the Japanese situation in general is misguided and borderline racist.
No one is saying that the Japanese government has been 100% forthright about this issue – there is certainly cause for concern. However, radiation measurements from independent groups have largely supported official government figures (see http://maps.safecast.org/). Do you have different figures? If so, release them and show your sources.
Conflating RXC’s comments linking Japan’s export economy and how the citizens are financially mistreated with racism is misguidedly silly and borderline stupid.
Get your PC head out of your PC butt, please.
Whether he is politically correct or not doesn’t matter. He makes a good point that promoting exports has little to do with nuclear safety. Microsoft sells Windows cheaper in China than in the US. So what.
He’s not being PC. He’s not being racist, and it’s a valid objection. I’d make a similar objection if someone used your comment to generalize about all Americans being ignorant bigots.
So what happened ? I was waiting for the truth, but the article ended prematurely.
What’s to be done about it? Move away from the worse contaminated areas, leaving them as ghost towns if necessary. Do eat fish or produce from the contaminated areas either.
Do NOT eat fish or produce from the worse contaminated areas either.
In roughly 48 hours, there is a more than 50% chance that the area around Fukushima Daiichi will be hit by a major typhoon. There are already warnings of severe flooding starting in about 24-30 hours. Time of this post: 17:30 CDT 20 Sep 2011.
It may well be true that “probably hundreds and maybe thousands” will die, though. One needs to see this in relation both to the number of people who have died in the earthquake/tsunami overall, about 16,000, and to the number of deaths saved by using fairly clean nuclear energy rather than alternatives, of which coal is the dirtiest (and hydroelectric obviously does kill people in earthquake situations).
It might be that if the goal is to save human lives in general, no matter what the cause of death, money would be better spent on causes of death other than nuclear power, such as more earthquake-proof residential buildings, safer cars, or even better policing.
It’s not really expensive, except for those at risk of not being re-elected, to fully inform the population regarding the level of risk.
“many people would have died just as they will in Japan”
Those people who would have died are going to die anyway. So am I. So are you. So will the people in Japan. So will everyone. Someday.
why not just write “meh” like all the other trolling d-bags, and save us all a lot of time? you add nothing but offense.
No perspective in this article then? No new information either!
The truth is people die. Everyone dies. It’s normal. The only things of interest are the rate at which they die with respect to the rate at which they are born and that they live happy fulfilling lives in the interim. Unfortunately people infest this planet because the rate at which they are born outstrips the rate at which they die. When there are too many people it becomes difficult for them all to live happy fulfilling lives. Will the minuscule increase in the death rate caused by extra cancers and other traumas due to this event cause it to exceed the birth rate? No. Even the massive instantaneous increase in the death rate due to the tsunami did not do this.
People die. Grow up and get used to it.
Das ganze Weltspitze Bedrohung wirtschaftlicher Schaden, wenn sie es nicht tun, mbt sapatu weißen frauen schuhe haben, Angelgeräte Mörder wie Krebs Tumor sowie Diabetes mit Live-Performance unter Berücksichtigung der Wirtschaft, von denen eine Wirkung auf dem Platz des Wohlbefindens, eine neue High-Level-Ough. D. Treffen mit schweren Störung bemerkt. Die Versammlung Sitzung über nichtübertragbare Krankheiten auf Mittwoch und Donnerstag sollten kostenlos diese Art zu erreichen mit der United Orte historischen Vergangenheit, die Aufmerksamkeit auf weltweit Wellness bezahlen, gleich nach Orten miteinander aufgetaucht, um Hilfe bei der Bekämpfung des jeweiligen CAN-Epidemie vor einem Jahrzehnt HELP. “Unser Bestreben ist definitiv mehr als ein Strafgericht Wellness muss. Nichtübertragbare Krankheiten können eine Gefahr für die Weiterentwicklung sein”, UD-Generalsekretär Ban Ki-moon erklärte, zu Ihrer Konferenz. “NCDs treffen Sie Ihre schwache neben etwas unsicher vor allem anspruchsvolle und auch Push diese tieferen, billig MBT Schuhe , gerade in unteren Einkommensgruppen. “
Sprechin zie english du bluerta asel!
One small point of correction – Rancho Seco has been decommissioned. There is still spent fuel contained in vaults on the property, but the reactor was emptied and sanitized years ago.
Even the UN nuclear watch dog, the IAEA says 4000 people died because of Chernobyl, (and almost everyone thinks these numbers are too low). This make Chernobyl far worse than Bhopal.
Well, maybe you could tell the families more of them would have died if not for those nuclear reactors in Japan that did not spew particulates and acid rain and what not. People are a lot more willing to live with constant everyday risks than sudden rare events, even though over a the long run more people die of emissions from cars and gas or coal powered electricity, not to mention the traffic accidents. Unfortunately, this blog post does not help, as it does not put the expected deaths in context or actually give any numbers so that others could make some comparisons.
If worldwide nuclear energy is going to kill 4,000 in Chernobyl and 4,000 in Fukushima, that may actually be a very good track record. If anti-nuclear lobby had numbers that showed higher deaths and destruction due to nuclear power stations, they would hammer every news outlet with the info, so I presume the reality is the opposite. Over the long run and over a large geography, it is probably better and safer to rely on nuclear energy.
We should do the only thing we can do: next time we build a reactor, use a better design, and don’t put it in an area that’s known to be subject to tsunamis. What we shouldn’t do is get so scared that we bury our collective heads in the sand and stop building reactors alltogether.
Life is full of risk and nothing is ever going to change that. The only way nuclear technology will progress is the same way every other technology progresses: through trial and error. The errors may seem horrific, but in the broader scheme of things, they’re no more horrific than the amount of people who die of traffic accidents and heart failure.
While I agree with you, I also find the German reaction interesting. They seem to have chosen to “bury their heads in the sand” when it comes to nuclear power. I suspect they will change their minds as they run out of power. It would be nice if the German poster could post in English. He can read English apparently.
I am a long time reader of your column and appreciate your views but frankly this one is unacceptable. If you have things to say, say them precisely and clearly. Don’t allude.
There are many coverups around Fukushima, some small, some big, some clearly justified/explained, others less.
Direct contamination from Fukushima seems pretty well monitored with independent sites reporting soil and air contamination at various locations. The main worry now is food contamination with indeed a strange lack of involvement from central authorities (who oddly devolve to local authorities). Is this what you are talking about? In this case if you have precise data or accurate references, give them or explain why you can’t give them. Everything else is fear mongering which, taking into account the circumstances, is at best ill-advised.
I blame the Tokugawa shogunate. Reports from Western visitors before its establishment in 1603 portrayed a very, very different people. One guy, through cunning and bravery, figured out at way to capture all of Japan. Then he went about creating a totalitarian system aimed solely at keeping himself and his family in power forever. Worked for over two hundred years. Keep an entire people in a dungeon for that length of time, see what comes out the other end. Any other country, when people have a beef, they take to the streets, start a political movement, pull off an Arab Spring. In Japan, they have protest suicides. That actually makes sense if you view the country as being in a dungeon. The jailer’s tasked with keeping the prisoners alive, he doesn’t give a shit about anything else but that. So the only way to protest an injustice is to shame the jailer by killing oneself. It also explains why the Japanese population is shrinking, why young Japanese women don’t want to have babies, why they flee to places like Hong Kong and the USA in droves. Yeah, I know, massive oversimplification of a complex culture. Can’t do more, this is a comment to a blog.
As to nuclear power, it’s pretty obvious that the dangers and complexities of the technology are just beyond the edge of what humans can deal with. I’d say stick with nuclear in the near-term if the USA and Europe had a massive development program underway to create super-safe reactors using AI controllers monitored by humans, reactors sited by reality-based individuals concerned about safety and not profit – but that’s not happening, is it? If it’s nuclear or coal-fired, man, hard choice, because coal-fired kills just about as many people over the long-term. But wait, what about fuel cells, wind, solar, geothermal, and other cool tech that doesn’t poison people? Once again, we run up against the bars of our prison. We aren’t in a reality-based decision making environment. There are lots of political and reactionary cultural elements pushing us toward dangerous old-school solutions. Then there are the monied interests, who want more coal, more petroleum use because it makes them rich at the expense of our health and our money. If any of you have paid attention to recent supreme court rulings and the reality behind the Tea Party, you know that money is now transcendent in this culture. At least the problem is visible in this culture, even if most of us don’t know how to overcome it.
you’re obviously not a historian. that is utter nonsense.
And you clearly know nothing about Japanese history.
I feel that a part of the reason for coverups is due to the Catch-22 nature of the situation.
People cover up (minimize the bad aspects) because they know that there are extreemists that will overplay any negative news which causes people to see a coverup which . . .
We get Japanese TV 24×7 (NHK) and watched daily for weeks the story unfold. Bob is absolutely correct that what has happened at Fukushima is going to kill people. First up will be the ‘1st responders’ getting sick and dying. Next will be the people within a 10-15K radius. The economy around Fukushima is has strong agriculture and fishing (multiple dumps of radioactive water from the reactors) elements to it and both will pretty much go away as no one will either farm/fish there and or eat it. The whole Fukushima Reactor complex was poorly thought out in my opinion.
On the flip side, do a search for Fudai Sea Wall and you’ll find a story about 1 Japanese politician who survived the 1933 Tokyo earthquake and fought to build a Seawall to protect a small town that was in the earthquake/Tsunami zone.
2011 newest beats dr dre studio will meet your need.We offer superior product beats dr dre studio red and best service with competitive price.
bob, do you have any friends who can explain what we’re doing to prepare our own reactors from the inevitable? i can’t believe things would go down any differently in California.
What exactly is meant by this paragraph?
“Just look at the Japanese regulations for radiation exposure, which are right now being rewritten with a new — and higher — number considered to be normal. Soon what’s normal in Fukushima and in fish taken from surrounding waters would be considered unsafe in the USA.”
It sounds like the Japanese regulation are currently stricter than what would be acceptable in the U.S. and will “soon … be considered unsafe in the USA.” So the pre-Fukushima regulations were lower than the U.S. and someday in the near future they will be higher? Why were the U.S.’ so much higher to begin with? Different scientists making the decisions? Or different politicians making the decisions?
There is a lot of innuendo in this article.
“So the pre-Fukushima regulations were lower than the U.S. and someday in the near future they will be higher?”
Heh. One of the supposed scandals post-Fukushima was over some tea from the Shizuoka region, after one batch from one single farm exceeded Japanese food standards. I looked up U.S. radiation standards for food, which revealed that this same batch could still have been legally imported to the U.S. despite its supposedly problematic cesium isotope content. In a footnote to the “dosages of concern” schedule in that standard, it was also pointed out that one should compensate for dilution. Well, when you brew tea, you dilute the basic leaf an awful lot, don’t you? If you’re going to worry about radiation in your tea, you’d first think about the naturally occurring uranium and thorium particles washed out of the atmosphere and into your drinking water by rain. THEN you’d think about the cesium content of any tea that might be imported from Japan. Which won’t be very much of the tea you drink. And that same water you use for tea, you also use for coffee, for cooking … oh my goodness: tap water is radioactive. Whatever shall we do? Can we perhaps filter it through fine natural black sand from the beaches of Brazil? Oh my goodness: from its thorium content, that sand has 400x the usual radiation you get from your average dirt sample. And people are just lying there on it, in bikinis! Sipping from umbrella drinks into which fine radioactive sand particles are blowing! Well, this radiation threat, it just never ends, does it? To escape, we might have to migrate off-planet into space, where the radiation is– AIIEEEEE!!!!!
Thank you for the truthfulness of your article.
For keeping up with the radiation issues in Japan, may I recommend:
http://www.enenews.com
There is a special issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on-line about Fukushima now. Well worth checking out.
http://bos.sagepub.com/content/current
This was covered 4 odd months ago by other bloggers, and in much more depth.
I’ll add that no nuclear reactor will ever be safe, because they are run by imperfect humans and imperfect software. Some of the workers will be lazy, careless, sleep deprived, hung over, poorly trained, angry at management, immature, politically motivated or just plain stupid. Look around at your coworkers and management now, and imagine them being responsible for the safety of a nation. Scary, isn’t it?
Yes the US Navy has a good safety record, but they pour money into running their ships, they don’t attempt to make money from running their ships. Safety and reliability costs money, which diminishes immediate profit.
All technology consists of discovery, overuse, failures, scaling back and setting of standards, that is, a learning curve. Even after the learning curve, mature technologies continue to fail for reasons noted in comments above. In short, people, institutions, motivations all are imperfect.
The claim of new safer designs may be true, or may just have failure modes we have not yet discovered. As an engineer, I can assure you there are always failure modes and the nightmare ones are the ones you have not discovered, yet.
There are several energy technologies. People love nuclear because of the incredibly high energy density, a little stuff goes a long way. But even if a “perfect” reactor could be designed and verified, how much of a learning curve can we afford? Not much at all. How many mistakes can we afford once we have perfect plants and still have imperfect people? Darn few. How many reactors would we need to generate sufficient energy? Thousands.
The focus people have shown in their comments is on how many people will die. With some saying “everyone dies”. Yup, you first! No one has considered that we might do an analysis of anticipated relative death rates using different energy technologies.
You should also consider how much land will need to be abandoned, for generations. That’s not a trivial matter in Japan, or say near any major metropolitan area, where the lost infrastructure cost from a nuke accident would easily be billions. Go back to the number of plants needed to really meet significant energy demands, figure out an ongoing failure rate, you might start burning through land and money pretty quickly.
Yup, we can put them all in the Nevada desert, of course the transmission losses (or superconductive cooling) will require even more plants and there is nowhere near enough water to meet the current needs, much less a bunch of nuke plants.
The arguments that life is full of risk remind me of the argument that kids make “but Johnny’s parents let him (risky activity here)”. Responsible parents, like mine, say “NO, and never attempt to use that argument again!” A real, unflinching, risk analysis is needed, and it is unlikely to look nice for nukes.
Solar may have a crappy energy density, but its byproduct, shade under the panel, is something Nevada might actually want sited in their state.
BruceC’s argument that nuclear power is not cost effective because of the potential costs in the case of an accident may be true. It would be nice to see some comparative costs of the various energy methods factoring in not just teh cost of running the plants but the additional costs of pollution, the potential loss in the case of an accident etc.. However I bet if we looked at that then we would find it is not Solar but Fossil fuels and Coal that are teh least expensive.
However we are working hard to prevent any more of that in the US as they are not “green” energies. I have yet to see a single argument for Solar as an example that simply states it will cost less. And in the end that is what will drive energy generation. What costs the least to do.
This post was very well written, and it also contains many useful facts. I appreciated your professional way of writing the post. Thanks, you have made it easy for me to understand
“The best evidence for the safety and resilience of nuclear power plants can be found at Fukushima. Not at Fukushima Dai-ichi, the power station where the meltdowns and explosions took place, but at Fukushima Dai-ni, the plant next door. You’ve never heard of it? There’s a good reason for that. It was run by the same slovenly company. It was hit by the same earthquake and the same tsunami. But it survived. Like every other nuclear plant struck by the wave, it went into automatic cold shutdown. With the exception of a nuclear missile attack, it withstood the sternest of all possible tests.
“What we see here is the difference between 1970s and 1980s safety features. The first Dai-ichi reactor was licensed in 1971. The first Dai-ni reactor was licensed in 1982.”
https://www.monbiot.com/2011/07/04/corporate-power-no-thanks/
And of course, Gen III and newer reactors are safer still than those old 1980s designs.
Meanwhile, the American Lung Association estimates that emissions from coal kill 13,000 Americans *every year* just from their normal expected operation.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/14/power-plant-air-pollution-coal-kills_n_833385.html
Dams kill people too. The worst ever was the Banqiao Dam in China, which killed 26,000 people immediately from flooding, and another 145,000 later from the resulting disease and famine.
What’s more, all those estimates of radiation deaths we see assume the “linear model,” which assumes there’s no threshold below which radiation becomes harmless. Advocates of that model have yet to explain why people who live in areas with very high levels of background radiation don’t actually have higher cancer rates.
Anyone commenting on this stuff should really read the book *Physics for Future Presidents* by Berkeley physics professor Richard Muller, who spends a couple chapters on nuclear power and radiation.
There’s a saying that goes “The people who know the most about climate change are the most worried about it. The people who know the most about nuclear energy are the least worried about it.” A lot of environmentalists and climate scientists, such as James Hansen, have been saying that nuclear power is the only thing that will save us from catastrophic climate change that will kill millions of people.
Everything’s a tradeoff. I hate that Fukushima is still having problems, but let’s keep some perspective. This was a very old plant with obsolete safety features, hit by a 9.0 earthquake and tsunami that killed over 18,000 people directly.
The arguments that life is full of risk remind me of the argument that kids make “but Johnny’s parents let him (risky activity here)”. Responsible parents, like mine, say “NO, and never attempt to use that argument again!” A real, unflinching, risk analysis is needed, and it is unlikely to look nice for nukes.
The difference is, we have to make electricity *somehow*. Deaths per gigawatt-hour are lower for nuclear than pretty much anything, including hydro, wind, and rooftop solar.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
Here’s a nice graphical comparison with fossil fuels:
http://transitionvoice.com/2011/03/nukes-are-scary-but-dont-forget-coal/
I do not mean to sarcastic, but this article somehow reminded me of all those alarmist theories which some well-informed American experts developed and publicized with regards to the existence of Weapons of Mass Distruction in Iraq. Reliable sources, internal sources, analysis, sure things, eminent threat. Remember?
the Chiba refinery was hit by the earthquake and burned for 10 days. i bet a lot of carcinogenics were dispersed in the atmosphere, but it seems nobody is worried about that.
i am sure lots of the people who were living in the Dai-Ichi area will die in the next years. i am sure also lots of people who were living around TMI died, and almost all inhabitants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are dead by now.
it is very easy to blame something that cannot be seen or measured. perfect for writing pointless articles
The underlying assumption is that we will always need to have the kind of electricity we have today, and so everybody is arguing about how to make that kind of electricity. I haven’t seen any mention of the safest way to get this kind of electricity, which is to have more efficient devices.
We’ve had electricity for less than under 200 years. Maybe there’s another form of energy – or electricity – that could power an advanced civilization. Maybe we’re not even that advanced after all. Maybe we’ve just built crude but flashy gadgets to do for us what we could have done for ourselves in a different way that used a lot less energy.
A lot of our worshipped technology is for the purpose of solving a problem created by some previous technology. We need to take a much broader view look at deeper, long-term purposes.
just cause 2 für pc…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
The main face of the cards is young and trendy women. As long as you like the bag, as long as you worship trends.
Welcome to Beats By Dr.Dre of Beats By Dre Studio shop,100% Beats by dre outlet Authentic Beats By Dr.Dre Limited Edtion quality guaranteed….
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
claims solicitors…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
daycare business plan…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
Sam…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
The North Face 3 in 1 Jackets sale,Blustery winds stir up the morning and add a chill to the air. A low pressure system is moving in and you need a jacket that will cut through it all. DWR treated Polartec 300 Series fleece makes this North Face Dena…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
Online Price Comparison UK…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive » Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
smail kim…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – Cringely on technology[…]…
I enjoy what you guys tend to be up too. This type of clever work and exposure! Keep up the wonderful works guys I’ve included you guys to my blogroll.
Webseite…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – I, Cringely – Cringely on technology[…]…
[…] that started last year in Japan following the tsunami. But unlike those previous columns (1,2,3,4,5), this one looks forward to the next Japanese nuclear accident, which will probably take place at […]
Luftentfeuchtung…
[…]I, Cringely » Blog Archive Truth About Fukushima Daiichi – I, Cringely – Cringely on technology[…]…
[…] eftersom Three Mile Island byggdes under inflygningsrutten till Harrsiburgs militärflygplats (se I Cringley – Truth About Fukushima – Daiichi). 18 tum extra för att tåla eventuella strategiska bombplan rakt in i […]