I was struck by this headline in the Washington Post (7/10/11):
Loss of Support for Nuclear Power Threatens Japan’s Economy
There are probably a lot of things that are threatening the Japanese economy–a massive, deadly earthquake and tsunami, for instance. Or the massive nuclear disaster that resulted from that tsunami.
The news here is that Japanese officials are doing inspections of their nuclear reactors–as they’ve always done. The problem, apparently, is that they’re doing more than that:
Under ordinary circumstances, these shutdowns would be temporary. Instead, they loom as an urgent problem for Japan, whose government–itself divided over nuclear policy–has not yet mustered the political will or the popular support necessary to restart reactors once they are idled.
The “problem” is that the government is also doing stress tests to make sure the reactors can survive major disruptions. That doesn’t sound like a bad idea, given the horrendous disaster that they’ve just suffered. The Post describes the government’s decision to call for these tests as “undermining its cause,” apparently because this contradicted an earlier claim that the reactors were safe.
The problem, as defined by the Post, is a lack of political support for nuclear power, inspired by a government that wants to increase the country’s reliance on safe renewable energy. That position is what the Post is saying “threatens” the country’s economy. Others might argue that a massive nuclear disaster is to blame.
The horrendous disaster they just suffered is due to the earthquake and tsunami. The reactor meltdowns have not killed anyone and only hurt a couple people (and I mean two or three). Your irrational fear-mongering has probably harmed more people than the meltdown. Please put this threat in perspective and stop the fear mongering.
Hey TROLL, I had the grand misfortune of serving on the USS Enterprise 1994-1998. “Affectionately” named the Mobile Chernobyl, mainly because of its EIGHT 50-year-old Nuclear Reactors. I worked in the Nuclear Propulsion Plants, so lets just say I have more than a little experience in these matters. EVERY SINGLE ONE of the workers trying to clean up that NUCLEAR disaster in Japan WILL die prematurely. Fearmongering???? You must be one of those FoxNewsZombies that beileves anything your masters tell you. Nuclear power will be the end of this moronic species. Count on it.
We now have radioactive vegetables very far from the Fukushima reactors. There is plutonium in the ground around it, besides other things not quite as bad. Cesium-137 and strontium-90 continue to come out of there and be scattered everywhere. Those two have half-lives around 30 years. Cesium 137 is like potassium, so it flushes out pretty fast, but strontium-90 is almost like calcium, so it piles up in the bones. 30 years after strontium-90 gets in your bones, half will still be throwing high energy electrons into those bones and surrounding tissues. Strontium is a little more reactive than calcium, so it’s not so easy to get it out of there. Bone cancer sucks. Ask anyone still around to tell about it.
So, Robin, leaving aside that infant mortality on the US West Coast is already higher due to this – mostly iodine-131 – to count only how many people are dead now is right up there with the guy that fell out the 50th floor window and says as he passes the 20th, “It’s great so far!”
I never saw an important and current story “fall off” the public media screen more abruptly and without comment, faster than Fukushima Dai-ichi; certainly not Three Mile Island nor Chernobyl (Kiev). Yet, it seems to have worse than either one of those two.
No one brings up that U.S. and world reactors are all publicly funded and insured–and that the nuclear industry has gone to extraordinary lengths to limit liability since the early 1960’s.
As an unrepentant 30-year veteran of the anti-nuclear-power struggle, I was not surprised – although I labored hard online against – viral recent internet rumors of an Obama-ordered media blackout of coverage of the Fort Calhoun nuke plant’s woes, similar to and in the fresh wake of Fukishima. What I tried to point out was that a presidential order was an unnecessary hypothesis
the mainstream media’s willingness to stand mute in the face of major nuclear crises. It’s gone on for far too long to pin it on Obama. Obviously. it’s still going on, at WAPO and no doubt elsewhere.
As a resident in one of the supposedly, “safe” areas of Japan, I look for ward to a non-nuclear nation. It’s a matter of common sense to start phasing out this horrendous technology. Yeah, it’s great when it’s working– helping the mass-production of lots and lots of toys we don’t need. But when there’s an accident — sorry, ya gotta move — for 3 or 5 or 10 decades. And I’m sure the increase in future cancer rates will be just a coincidence.
Japan’s anti-nule movements are small. Because companies, bankers, bureaucrats, politician(including ruling party-DP) bribed experts( most of all from Today universities) councils or cities receiving grant in aid all oppose anti-nuclear movement. yesterday’s PM’s speech seeking nuclear free nation denied by his own DP exec. Shame!
As another resident foreigner in Japan, I’d just like to invite Robin to come over and spend a few weeks in the effected area. Seeing as how there’s so much ‘fear mongering’ he’ll be in no danger.
Sadly what Tatuo said is all too true, and no doubt similar things go on where ever nuclear power is employed.
åŽÅ¸Ãƒ¥Ã‚ÂÂÂåÅ”ºÃƒ¯Ã‚¼Ã…¸Ãƒ£Ã‚ÂÅ㔹ã¨㔚ÂÂ㔚Åï¼ÂÂ
We need a huge anti nuke movement ,and we need it now.We need everyone to put their ass on the table like those guys on Whale wars.We need all real libs to get on the buses, and get on the planes and get ready to do battle.I will wish for your success in North Korea and Iran. Good luck(you will need it).I think it prudent to start on the newest members and probable weaponizers, then move to remove this energy system from those who use it for peaceful purpose.Of course you must be prepared to supplement the amount of energy removed from the grid. And you cant use gas or oil or coal as that is also slated for removal.
Steven – While I also lament the fact that this story has dropped from the western media radar (though it is still very much the lead story in Japan with all the recent agricultural discoveries), implying that it is worse than Chernobyl is going a bit too far, don’t you think? The consequences of the two are certainly not comparable up to this point and even the biggest critic among experts has yet to predict that it will surpass Chernobyl in either human or environmental toll.
Jason — Fukushima is much much worse than Chernobyl and Chernobyl is (please note the present tense) really really bad. The only fact that Fukushima is not even beginning to be under control (Chernobyl is not completely under control, as the sarcophagus needs to be replaced, and funded as always by public money) ought to make you suspicious.
The only reason why you do not hear that often is that by definition, experts work when they have the maximal amount of data available to them. But in the present case, when the data was withdrawn or concealed to them (yes even to academic researchers…), what can you do ? Besides, who are the experts ? If by experts, you mean people from the WHO or the IEIA or the ICRP, then it’s a nonstarter. All these people are puppets of the nuclear industry. They have been exposed so often, the documents are now even available on the web… Truly a matter of public interest.
See for instance
http://enenews.com
http://www.euradcom.org/
On a more technical level, the point is that statisticians smooth out the overall fallout in the northern hemisphere. But 1) there are hot spots, even outside of Japan; 2) even outside of these hot spots, if you increase by a small percentage the risk of a huge population, even though you do not know who will eventually get cancer or other diseases, the number are no longer negligible and the whole population pays the price (in terms of health, social work and so on).
Besides, there are good scientific reasons to believe that internal exposure to radiation has been largely underestimated (see the documents by the ECRR [European Comission on Radiation Risk], where they detail their scientific model and check it against the epidemiological studies on Chernobyl).
This is actually what is going on: not only the public funds without any agreement and without any democratic control the nuclear industry, but it also funds the “day after”. Under these conditions, how do you want to restrain the promoters of the nuclear industry ? The promoter cannot be the regulator. This is as simple as that.
Believe me, the people living near Chernobyl or Fukushima do not get a chance to be the lead story nowadays outside of their respective country, but they would amply deserve it.
All the best,
Keep up
Leo
Leo
Not to be flippant but…………Or not! The idea that everyone is lying, and everyone is going to die(my words)does not help the real work to be done.And that is…. to make nuclear power as safe as we possibly can. Also to ascertain(and yes there are good agencies working on this)the extent of this disaster. Then to use everything we have learned so that these accidents will not happen again.Of course if the idea is to stop all nuclear power….