Japan Earthquake: Political Aspects

[Jim Lagerfeld]

A better map of Austria:
http://www.progettohumus.it/include/chernobyl/mappe/europa/PLATE10.PDF

And detailed maps for the rest of Europe if you are interested:
http://www.progettohumus.it/chernobyl.php?name=mappe2

Not sure the best way to go about making comparisons with the Japanese maps as the European ones only ever seem to show CS-137, and I also saw it said somewhere that the ratio of CS134 to 137 was quite different between the two accidents?

 

[Borek]

http://astroarts.punt.nl/upload/Ker...23_uur_Moskou_tijd,_radioactieve_zones_78.jpg

Image doesn't show.

 

[nikkkom]

Not sure the best way to go about making comparisons with the Japanese maps as the European ones only ever seem to show CS-137, and I also saw it said somewhere that the ratio of CS134 to 137 was quite different between the two accidents?

Very roughly, initially the dose from both isotopes is about the same. Cs-134 has lower fission yield, but is more active than Cs-137.

By now, Chernobyl's Cs-134 is gone - almost all has decayed.

 

[Jim Lagerfeld]

Very roughly, initially the dose from both isotopes is about the same. Cs-134 has lower fission yield, but is more active than Cs-137.

By now, Chernobyl's Cs-134 is gone - almost all has decayed.

Sorry, I should have been more specific. I mean that I have read that the initial ratio differed between the two accidents. 0.5 or 0.6 to 1 Cs-134:Cs-137 in Chernobyl, closer to 1:1 in Fukushima.

This paper gives the 0.6 :1 value: http://www.irpa.net/irpa7/cdrom/VOL.3/S3_146.PDF

But the Tokyo figures are much closer to 1:1 in the immediate aftermath
http://monitoring.tokyo-eiken.go.jp/monitoring/f-past_data.html

 

[tsutsuji]

http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/noda/statement/201112/16kaiken_e.html The English translation of Prime minister Noda's 16 December "cold shutdown" press conference is now available.

 

[Yamanote]

Thanks for the information, especially to Jim!

It would be interesting to compare this with a current contamination map of Japan, but I seem to be too stupid to find one...

 

[Sorai]

Thanks for the information, especially to Jim!

It would be interesting to compare this with a current contamination map of Japan, but I seem to be too stupid to find one...

The ones that have been translated are here:

http://radioactivity.mext.go.jp/en/monitoring_around_FukushimaNPP_MEXT_DOE_airborne_monitoring/

And then there is this one, but it's in Japanese:

http://ramap.jaea.go.jp/map/map.html

 

[Yamanote]

Thanks again, great forum!

Although I am checking the MEXT page regularly, I missed this part completely.

 

[clancy688]

Map for Cs-137 deposition in Germany. The fallout in southern Germany is not so different to the Fukushima fallout southeast of Fukushima prefecture (is that Gunma and Tochigi prefecture?).

http://www.environmental-studies.de/rad_1.1.jpg

(Btw: Wouldn't this particular discussion fit better in the "contamination and consequences" thread?)

 

[Yamanote]

(Btw: Wouldn't this particular discussion fit better in the "contamination and consequences" thread?)

I agree. Comparing the discussions about Fukushima in different countries turned into a comparison about contamination somehow. Sorry for that.

PS: South of Fukushima prefecture are Ibaraki, Tochigi and Gunma (Ibaraki is at the coast, Gunma is in the center and Tochigi is between them).

 

[zapperzero]

Dunno what thread this should go into. Perhaps "contamination and consequences"? Maybe "performance"?

Anyway. TEPCO is threatened with a suit for damages by its own shareholders. In response, it has issued a document stating that board members do not hold any responsibility for the disaster and its aftermath:

"The board members had appropriately considered and implemented anti-tsunami measures based on government instructions and approvals, [...]The accident is attributable to the tsunami waves that were far higher than assumed for the measures."

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/tepco-board-members-not-responsible-for-fukushima-2012-01-16

disgusting, but expected.

 

[Yamanote]

disgusting, but expected.

I fully agree with you. But I don't consider this as a typical Japanese or Tepco issue, it's more an issue of human beings in general and would happen in a very similar way everywhere in the world. Unfortunately...

 

[Caniche]

I fully agree with you. But I don't consider this as a typical Japanese or Tepco issue, it's more an issue of human beings in general and would happen in a very similar way everywhere in the world. Unfortunately...

"human beings in general"More like " oops there goes my performance related bonus" Unless I can shift this ****

 

[tsutsuji]

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/genpatsu-fukushima/20111228/0910_gijiroku.html NHK requested the public release of the conference minutes of the accident response headquarters that was set up on March 15 between the government and Tepco in Tepco's Tokyo main office. But there isn't any. The NISA said: "as it was meant as an information sharing measure, no conference minutes were taken, nor any sound record". According to a specialist, this will hinder the study and the learning of the lessons from this accident.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/genpatsu-fukushima/20120123/1410_gijiroku.html Chief Cabinet Secretary Osamu Fujimura said that he is studying how the conference minutes of the accident response headquarters (whose chairman is the Prime Minister) can be reconstituted, as they are a requirement of the National Archive Law.

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20120122p2g00m0dm066000c.html "residents within a radius of 170 kilometers or more of the plant would be forced to move out, while those within a radius of 250 km of the plant, including Tokyo, would be allowed to leave if they wish" : government worst case scenario dated March 25, 2011.

 

[Caniche]

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/genpatsu-fukushima/20120123/1410_gijiroku.html Chief Cabinet Secretary Osamu Fujimura said that he is studying how the conference minutes of the accident response headquarters (whose chairman is the Prime Minister) can be reconstituted, as they are a requirement of the National Archive Law.

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20120122p2g00m0dm066000c.html "residents within a radius of 170 kilometers or more of the plant would be forced to move out, while those within a radius of 250 km of the plant, including Tokyo, would be allowed to leave if they wish" : government worst case scenario dated March 25, 2011.

Worth a second look and more

 

[zapperzero]

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20120124p2g00m0dm144000c.html

Japanese industry minister Yukio Edano on Tuesday apologized for the government's failure to take minutes of meetings of a taskforce dealing with the Fukushima nuclear crisis and said that he has instructed the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency to compile them soon based on notes taken by meeting attendees

How very convenient.

 

[Yamanote]

Worth a second look and more

Indeed, looks like a kind of "Three Wise Monkeys" syndrome:

"It contained such shocking content that we decided to treat it as if it never existed," a senior government official said.

 

[etudiant]

"human beings in general"More like " oops there goes my performance related bonus" Unless I can shift this ****

I think that is not right.
The reality is that Japan had a disaster which could not be averted or mitigated in any meaningful way.
Sure, they could have evacuated Tokyo... where to and for how long?? At what cost in human lives and ruined communities?

It seems to me that Japan has managed this debacle rather well, the country is functioning again, after the worst double whammy in a millenium and the problems are really pretty minimal, at most claimed to be a few percent increase in the eventual cancer rate in a society where cancer is eventually found in half the population already.
Would we do as well if the Ramapo fault caused a serious problem with the Indian Point reactors just up the river from NYC?

 

[zapperzero]

Sure, they could have evacuated Tokyo... where to and for how long?? At what cost in human lives and ruined communities?
It seems to me that Japan has managed this debacle rather well,

You're kinda sort of missing the point here. It could very well have become necessary to evacuate Tokyo. Upon learning this fact, the J-gov promptly buried it. THEY DID NOTHING.

Compare and contrast:

There was about a company-size element of CBIRF (IRF-A) sent to Tokyo to cover the evacuation of the US embassy, should it become necessary. It was withdrawn (to a US army base in Japan iirc), then sent again, then withdrawn again. They never set foot in Fukushima, because, regardless of what you read on the news, those guys are not aid workers; they are marines, there to shoot people and break things. Families of military and diplomatic personnel were evacuated, private US citizens told in no uncertain terms to evacuate a huge area around the NPP, pack up and stick close to airports... the US was preparing for the worst case scenario.

What did the J-gov do to prepare for significant fallout in Tokyo and the Kanto region? For a country cut in half by a radioactive wasteland?

Sure, worst did not come to worst and the SFPs did not boil dry. But this is not proof of good management.

 

[clancy688]

Sure, worst did not come to worst and the SFPs did not boil dry. But this is not proof of good management.

Well, perhaps some kind of advanced fatalism:

"In the worst case, we're done for. Not anything we could do to manage THIS. Therefore we won't waste our time with preparing for an emergency which can't be prepared for."

 

[zapperzero]

Well, perhaps some kind of advanced fatalism:

"In the worst case, we're done for. Not anything we could do to manage THIS. Therefore we won't waste our time with preparing for an emergency which can't be prepared for."

I wouldn't want my government thinking like that.

 

[etudiant]

You're kinda sort of missing the point here. It could very well have become necessary to evacuate Tokyo. Upon learning this fact, the J-gov promptly buried it. THEY DID NOTHING.

Compare and contrast:

There was about a company-size element of CBIRF (IRF-A) sent to Tokyo to cover the evacuation of the US embassy, should it become necessary. It was withdrawn (to a US army base in Japan iirc), then sent again, then withdrawn again. They never set foot in Fukushima, because, regardless of what you read on the news, those guys are not aid workers; they are marines, there to shoot people and break things. Families of military and diplomatic personnel were evacuated, private US citizens told in no uncertain terms to evacuate a huge area around the NPP, pack up and stick close to airports... the US was preparing for the worst case scenario.

What did the J-gov do to prepare for significant fallout in Tokyo and the Kanto region? For a country cut in half by a radioactive wasteland?

Sure, worst did not come to worst and the SFPs did not boil dry. But this is not proof of good management.

It is simply that even preparing for an evacuation during a crisis has massive bad consequences.
Any plan to evacuate would automatically spur individuals to act to front run the rush, with chaos not far behind. The US had the luxury of needing to deal with a relative handful of people, whereas the Japanese government had to weigh its actions knowing at least 30 million concerned citizens were watching everything it said or did.
I agree there should now be a more forceful set of emergency measures plans set up and practiced for Tokyo, if only because a large earthquake there seems a sure thing, but imho it invites a panic to start to plan for unprecedented actions in the midst of a disaster.

 

[Yamanote]

I think that is not right.

I would relate the statement from Caniche more to what happened BEFORE the accident. Or better what DID NOT happen before the accident for some reason, especially the preparation with respect to flooding by a Tsunami.

And it is quite evident, that this risk was not addressed as it should have been. Maybe it was money TEPCO wanted to save, maybe it was just carelessness, I don't want to guess about the reasons and the outcome is always the same anyway. Once the damage is done, it is too late.

If you are the owner of an NPP, you have to ensure that
1.) the plant will not loose electric power supply
2.) if electric power is lost, the reactor cooling doesn't fail
3.) if it fails anyway, venting and freshwater injection can be accomplished

They were not prepared for this kind of accident accordingly and they failed in all these points, as the Tsunami knocked out the plant completely.

By the way, currently only three reactors are in service in Japan...

 

[etudiant]

I would relate the statement from Caniche more to what happened BEFORE the accident. Or better what DID NOT happen before the accident for some reason, especially the preparation with respect to flooding by a Tsunami.

And it is quite evident, that this risk was not addressed as it should have been. Maybe it was money TEPCO wanted to save, maybe it was just carelessness, I don't want to guess about the reasons and the outcome is always the same anyway. Once the damage is done, it is too late.

By the way, currently only three reactors are in service in Japan...

Clearly there has been a reaction to this disaster, as the above statistic shows.
Logically one would expect much more of this, as I cannot imagine any Japanese political leader willing to be caught out this way again. How reform will be implemented however is apparently still a very unsettled question.
Unfortunately, the US press offers no insight into Japanese decision making. In fact, our press does not even know the topics under discussion, much less the alternatives being weighted.

 

[Caniche]

I would relate the statement from Caniche more to what happened BEFORE the accident. Or better what DID NOT happen before the accident for some reason, especially the preparation with respect to flooding by a Tsunami.

And it is quite evident, that this risk was not addressed as it should have been. Maybe it was money TEPCO wanted to save, maybe it was just carelessness, I don't want to guess about the reasons and the outcome is always the same anyway. Once the damage is done, it is too late.

If you are the owner of an NPP, you have to ensure that
1.) the plant will not loose electric power supply
2.) if electric power is lost, the reactor cooling doesn't fail
3.) if it fails anyway, venting and freshwater injection can be accomplished

They were not prepared for this kind of accident accordingly and they failed in all these points, as the Tsunami knocked out the plant completely.

By the way, currently only three reactors are in service in Japan...

Have no fear ,I'm sure that next time,just like last time ,we will have learned all the relevant lessons and the causes of disaster will be entirely new and totally unpredictable

 

[etudiant]

Have no fear ,I'm sure that next time,just like last time ,we will have learned all the relevant lessons and the causes of disaster will be entirely new and totally unpredictable

Just as in medicine, where miracle drugs produce miracle bugs.
It is always the problem you did not anticipate that gets you. That said, it is disappointing that TEPCO did not adequately address even the anticipated problems.

 

[jim hardy]

Progress has come generally from painful lessons.
Engineering magazines from 1880's are full of bridge collapses and boiler explosions.

Technology gets better.

Human Nature probably does too..

Somebody decided Titanic's watertight doors needn't go all way to main deck despite her intended use, plying icy waters at high speed..

a hundred years later somebody decided those electrical rooms in the basement didnt need watertight doors despite new findings about local tidal waves.

Memo to Western Civilization: we're old enough to know better.

 

[Caniche]

Just as in medicine, where miracle drugs produce miracle bugs.
It is always the problem you did not anticipate that gets you. That said, it is disappointing that TEPCO did not adequately address even the anticipated problems.

Hang about, failure to anticipate a statistically predictable regular occurrence is just stoopid,which is more than disappointing . I mean,the old guard even stuck marked rocks at the maximum height of previous inundations. "How were we to know?" "look there's a stone that tell's you"

 

[zapperzero]

TEPCO posts losses equal to already received gov't bailout, asks gov't for more money.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-13/tepco-widens-loss-forecast-as-fukushima-costs-trigger-8-9-billion-of-aid.html

 

[zapperzero]

I'll just leave this here, as I think the "management and government performance" thread kinda died and I don't feel like bumping it.

http://www.japan-cities.com/fukushima/fukushima-city/greeting-mayor-fukushima-city.html

 

[tsutsuji]

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/feature/20110316-866921/news/20120216-OYT1T01050.htm The Fukushima prefecture nuclear energy public relations organization has unanimously decided to dissolve. It was funded by Fukushima prefecture and 11 cities and towns. It published a magazine 4 times a year. They stopped their activity in March as their office is in the restricted zone in Ookuma town. They explain : "We have been doing public relations about nuclear safety, but with the Tokyo Electric Fukushima Daiichi plant accident, the prerequisite has collapsed".

 

[LKofEnglish]

First time poster. Came over from a site called Zero Hedge. Saw a story about potential recriticality at FD and thought I would chime in here first as my only nuclear experience came from studying Chemistry in HS. My question is this: how can anyone really expect to improve the situation without their being some purpose or reason to trust those who inform us? I have more to add but I would curious to hear what you all think about "disclosure after a nuclear accident." thanks.

 

[zapperzero]

My question is this: how can anyone really expect to improve the situation without their being some purpose or reason to trust those who inform us?

TEPCO has been doing a lot of heel-dragging, blame-shifting and general obfuscation.

But, the stuff that can be checked out by and large checks out - total radioactive release (source term) estimates they have published are consistent with (independently) observed contamination, for example. Results of the modeling TEPCO use to estimate core damage are also consistent with the observations and calculations others (including people on here) have made. Reported temperatures evolved as expected, by and large. And so on and so forth.

So, it would appear that whatever data is being made public can be trusted. That's not to say that everything that should be made public was or is.

 

[LKofEnglish]

would you argue that Tepco has been this way all along? It seems fairly straightforward to call Tepco's response to the crisis as at best "evolving." Are their dangers of radioactive material spreading through the debris of the tsunami throughout the Pacific Ocean? Why isn't this patently obvious issue even being discussed? What about the possibility of recriticality? "Blaming the instruments" seems rather incredulous. How can one have poor instrumentation on the biggest industrial accident in human history? What about the disposal of nuclear waste into landfills in and around Tokyo Bay? Are these people insane? the list is so long as to beg the question "why are they hiding so much" and not "why does the data fit the image being portrayed." (as a point of reference I'm coming at this issue from the standpoint of a financial person trying to figure out what the Japanese currency is going to do as a result of this catastrophe. currently it is selling off dramatically.) i am here because folks like me are constantly in the need for "all the data" and not merely what we are told to think. is there anyone here who can make "best guesses" as to what they think is in fact going on? anyone here who can explain "what are the implications to recriticality"? what is the implication of radioactive flotsmam washing ashore the islands of Hawaii and the State's of Washington, Oregon and California even if only at the theoretical level?

 

[etudiant]

would you argue that Tepco has been this way all along? It seems fairly straightforward to call Tepco's response to the crisis as at best "evolving." Are their dangers of radioactive material spreading through the debris of the tsunami throughout the Pacific Ocean? Why isn't this patently obvious issue even being discussed? What about the possibility of recriticality? "Blaming the instruments" seems rather incredulous. How can one have poor instrumentation on the biggest industrial accident in human history? What about the disposal of nuclear waste into landfills in and around Tokyo Bay? Are these people insane? the list is so long as to beg the question "why are they hiding so much" and not "why does the data fit the image being portrayed." (as a point of reference I'm coming at this issue from the standpoint of a financial person trying to figure out what the Japanese currency is going to do as a result of this catastrophe. currently it is selling off dramatically.) i am here because folks like me are constantly in the need for "all the data" and not merely what we are told to think. is there anyone here who can make "best guesses" as to what they think is in fact going on? anyone here who can explain "what are the implications to recriticality"? what is the implication of radioactive flotsmam washing ashore the islands of Hawaii and the State's of Washington, Oregon and California even if only at the theoretical level?

The instrumentation deficiencies simply reflect that the reactors have experienced catastrophic damage and are sufficiently radioactive that new instruments could not be installed even with human sacrificial volunteer help.
The radioactive debris claims are pretty far fetched. The tsunami that washed the debris out to sea was over and done with by the time the plant blew up two days later.
The radiation contamination is real, but at levels found elsewhere on Earth in areas people that people live in, in Iran, Brazil, India and parts of China. Getting frantic about burying the debris begs the question what other option exists?
With cancer the cause of death of over 40% of all Japanese, the accident will be difficult to see in the mortality statistics. However, the cleanup will be a $100 billion class dead weight on the Japanese economy.
Recriticality is a concern primarily because the site will take decades to clean up enough for the fuel to be removed. Only then will the situation be safe again.