Japan Earthquake: Political Aspects

In summary, this new thread is intended to be a complement to the "Japan Earthquake: nuclear plants" thread, which is focused on scientific discussion. Subjects that can be discussed in this new thread include more "political bits" around the accident development. Moderation will still exist in this thread, and contributors are requested to cite sources of information when making comments.
  • #36


rowmag said:
Here is the "letter of request": http://www.soumu.go.jp/menu_news/s-news/01kiban08_01000023.html

This looks rather toothless to me, and doesn't look like it amounts to more than a "Let's get it together folks" plea. Also not clear that anybody has taken it seriously. Anybody know of anyone who has actually been silenced by this?
dunno, I'd prefer if they rather demanded (in toothfull, not toothless way) that http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8416302/Japan-nuclear-crisis-evacuees-turned-away-from-shelters.html" [Broken] do not turn away refugees, as well as provided accurate information on the nature of radioactive dirt and the procedures for getting the dirt off (aka, shower).
It seems conceivable for me, given the strongly non-uniform distribution of the radioactive dirt, that some refugees may have beta-active dirt on their skin, which would make Geiger counter show very scary dose rate (due to Geiger counter's much higher sensitivity to beta), and which can also lead to dermatitis (due to high localized doses). Instead of trying to quell the opposition, the government must explain the situation. But they claim there are no immediate effects whatsoever. Which may not be true, as small highly active particles on the skin can give beta rash
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_burn#Beta_burns
even if the average dose is small. That was the case in Chernobyl aftermatch. (ignore the 'after the blast' stuff there, it's for nuclear weapons not for nuclear power plants, different isotope ratios)
Furthermore, beta particles are particularly dangerous to the eye lens. The point is, there is a definite potential for localized acute effects at low 'average' doses, and denying it is highly counter productive and causes the fear if the localized acute effects are first identified by the public before official statement is made.
The 'dirt' nature of contamination (as opposed to 'contagion') must be explained.
Public doses can be decreased a lot if public is informed to wash off the dirt, as well as the nature of radioactivity would be de-mystified and the act of washing would have positive placebo effect. The doses are very dependent to what you're doing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #37


Dmytry said:
dunno, I'd prefer if they rather demanded (in toothfull, not toothless way) that http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8416302/Japan-nuclear-crisis-evacuees-turned-away-from-shelters.html" [Broken] do not turn away refugees,

Do you watch the news in Japan? That kind of despicable stuff is covered prominently, and strongly condemned.

Can't say I have seen an in-depth discussion of beta burns in particular, but practical advice abounds. Authorities, experts and newscasters are not just saying, "Don't worry! Everything is under control!"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #38


rowmag said:
Do you watch the news in Japan? That kind of unfortunate stuff is covered prominently, and strongly condemned.
How strongly? It should be illegal. It's like a black walks into the store and he gets told "go away *****", not only that's strongly condemned, that may cost you license I think, right?
I don't understand Japanese.
 
  • #39


Dmytry said:
How strongly? It should be illegal. It's like a black walks into the store and he gets told "go away *****", not only that's strongly condemned, that may cost you license I think, right?

Don't think it is actually illegal, but public shaming is a pretty powerful force.

I don't understand Japanese.

NHK has English-language broadcasts.
 
  • #40


rowmag said:
Do you watch the news in Japan?

That's kind of the main issue imo:
I remember it was in the first few days, this french guy on youtube screaming that they were all going to die and that Japanese TV was still airing situation comedy.. And I was like why doesn't he switch to TBS or NHK.. They had 247 coverage , explaining Sievers and dangerosity days if not weeks before anything remotely similar was done in Europe. Meanwhile people oversea believe that radiation in Toyko was almost Chernobyl like..

I could watch on TV so called expert explaining how Japanese were resigned and abbey what they were told... And I knew for a fact that was complete B.S , anyone following tepco press conference, could witness how hard the press questioning Tepco , doubting what they are saying etc.. And while we were still pondering the fact that the Japanese did not extend the evac zone, understating that the Jap gov was not doing what it should..
Any one having a proper look, could have told you that 1) concerned people were evacuating if they could even if they were not if the evac zone ( I say if they could because they was no gaz, road were a mess at the time)
2) some people refused to evac or went back 3)looting was taking place in the evac zone .

So much for doing what they are told...

My understanding is that a lot of our own fear is projected on this Japanese crisis, not necessary a bad thing but when it reach the point where it no longer have anything to do with the actual reality ... it's just weird...
 
  • #41


rowmag said:
NHK has English-language broadcasts.
ahh... well I'll leave coverage of it to someone else and shut up and focus on technical stuff. I'm at the moment more interested in reading various NRC stuff. It's not very easy for me to pick up translator's english there from audio.

I recall NHK translator had the idea of radioactive contagion, when explaining closure of the zone, but i don't sure in what thread it was sourced in.

edit: BTW did they actually explain how much the dose varies from place to place within few meters? With demonstration using a counter. Showing that it is literally, radioactive dirt.
 
Last edited:
  • #42


|Fred said:
That's kind of the main issue imo:
I remember it was in the first few days, this french guy on youtube screaming that they were all going to die and that Japanese TV was still airing situation comedy..

Where did he find situation comedy? As far as I remember, the first ten days after the earthquake there was nothing but 24 hour news on all channels, and the next ten was half news, half "inspirational" stuff (sentimental song shows, etc.). Nothing like normal comedy reappeared until something like April.

And I was like why doesn't he switch to TBS or NHK.. They had 247 coverage , explaining Sievers and dangerosity days if not weeks before anything remotely similar was done in Europe. Meanwhile people oversea believe that radiation in Toyko was almost Chernobyl like..

I think we got better information here in Japan early on than folks overseas did, judging from the ridiculous stuff that got forwarded by overseas friends at the time, with the notation that "we fear you are not getting true information there"...

I could watch on TV so called expert explaining how Japanese were resigned and abbey what they were told... And I knew for a fact that was complete B.S , any one following tepco press conference, could witness how hard the press questioning Tepco , doubting what they are saying etc..

Yes.
 
Last edited:
  • #43
Well, i think it's important to recall that even if gamma radiation emission is with reason considered as the most dangerous because it is much more difficult to contain, so it acts at a much bigger distance, the alpha and beta emitters can also be very dangerous as long as they are inhaled or ingested, because in this case their lower distance of "radioactive action" is no more a protection against the effects.

Saying an alpha emitter can be stopped by a sheet of paper, or beta by an aluminium one of a few mm, DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE HARMLESS (and sometimes if find this straightforward presentation a little bit oversimplistic to say the least)...

The particles are dangerous depending also, at the end, where they will stay inside the body (internal contamination)

http://www.furryelephant.com/content/radioactivity/alpha-beta-gamma-radiation/
http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/understand/pathways.html
http://www.furryelephant.com/content/radioactivity/nuclear-radiation-health-effects/

Focusing on gamma means focusing on external exposures (and especially indirect ones). But there is also internal exposure!

The third pathway of concern is direct or external exposure from radioactive material. The concern about exposure to different kinds of radiation varies:
Limited concern about alpha particles. They cannot penetrate the outer layer of skin, but if you have any open wounds you may be at risk.
Greater concern about beta particles. They can burn the skin in some cases, or damage eyes.
Greatest concern is about gamma radiation. Different radionuclides emit gamma rays of different strength, but gamma rays can travel long distances and penetrate entirely through the body.
 
Last edited:
  • #44


Dmytry said:
I recall NHK translator had the idea of radioactive contagion, when explaining closure of the zone, but i don't sure in what thread it was sourced in.

That wasn't the NHK translator. That was the METI interpreter, who did not seem to be a native English speaker. If I were to criticize that, I would say:

1) Always use a native speaker of the target language for translation, if you care about the nuances.

2) Why did the Times not have anyone on payroll who is competent at Japanese, so that they could attend regular press conferences? Why are they sending a reporter who apparently cannot handle Japanese to cover events in Japan? It is only 6-7 weeks into an ongoing story, after all... The Times is not some tiny backwater operation -- presumably they should have some sort of professional standards, and a budget to back them up.

If you can't have been bothered to learn the language in which events are transpiring, or hire someone who does know it, then expect to receive incomplete, late, and possibly heavily filtered information.

edit: BTW did they actually explain how much the dose varies from place to place within few meters? With demonstration using a counter. Showing that it is literally, radioactive dirt.

You mean that youtube video? Haven't seen that on the news, but have seen reports that a team of academics is planning to do detailed measurements of place-to-place dose rates over a wide area including the evacuation zone.
 
  • #45


rowmag said:
You mean that youtube video? Haven't seen that on the news, but have seen reports that a team of academics is planning to do detailed measurements of place-to-place dose rates over a wide area including the evacuation zone.
no, not that specific youtube video, just anyone with a counter can do this really, showing hands-on how contamination works. Perhaps even touching that on skin and getting dirty, then washing hands off. Warning of the danger of ingestion and inhalation. Can be done outside restricted zone easily...
If they did not do that yet - your coverage is total crap, sorry.
edit: To clarify. I'm not saying that coverage here is any better or anything, judging it absolutely, not relatively.
 
  • #46


Dmytry said:
no, not that specific youtube video, just anyone with a counter can do this really, showing hands-on how contamination works. Perhaps even touching that on skin and getting dirty, then washing hands off. Warning of the danger of ingestion and inhalation. Can be done outside restricted zone easily...
If they did not do that yet - your coverage is total crap, sorry.
edit: To clarify. I'm not saying that coverage here is any better or anything, judging it absolutely, not relatively.

Yes, that kind of stuff has been covered. Take off shoes, wear a mask, wash hands, even gargling may help... Not the exact script you suggest with a counter, but the basics have been covered.

As I would expect they would be where you are (Lithuania?) in similar circumstances.
 
  • #47


rowmag said:
That wasn't the NHK translator. That was the METI interpreter, who did not seem to be a native English speaker. If I were to criticize that, I would say:

1) Always use a native speaker of the target language for translation, if you care about the nuances.

2) Why did the Times not have anyone on payroll who is competent at Japanese, so that they could attend regular press conferences? Why are they sending a reporter who apparently cannot handle Japanese to cover events in Japan? It is only 6-7 weeks into an ongoing story, after all... The Times is not some tiny backwater operation -- presumably they should have some sort of professional standards, and a budget to back them up.

If you can't have been bothered to learn the language in which events are transpiring, or hire someone who does know it, then expect to receive incomplete, late, and possibly heavily filtered information.
Unreasonable demands. It is probably more important that these events get covered by a journalist specializing in science & technology or environmental issues than by a scholar specializing in east-asian history and literature.

The interpreter said (in a video that is not online anymore):

"... individuals who would enter these areas because if they come out of these regions the radiation contamination of these individuals may affect other people outside of this area. Therefor such a decision had been made."

If that was false there is a problem with the competence of the interpreters that METI employs.
 
Last edited:
  • #48


PietKuip said:
Unreasonable demands. It is probably more important that these events get covered by a journalist specializing in science & technology or environmental issues than by a scholar specializing in east-asian history and literature.

The interpreter said (in a video that is not online anymore):

"... individuals who would enter these areas because if they come out of these regions the radiation contamination of these individuals may affect other people outside of this area. Therefor such a decision had been made."

If that was false there is a problem with the competence of the interpreters that METI employs.

In light of the article below, I doubt it is a problem with interpreter competence. More like a problem with the lack of proper radiological information dissemination. They've had since Hiroshima and Nagasaki to dispel "hibakusha" discrimination yet it still persists. But one also has to take into consideration the ingrained Japanese way of uninflicting one's problems/situation on the well being of others.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-radiation-survivors.html?ito=feeds-newsxml"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #49


rowmag said:
Yes, that kind of stuff has been covered. Take off shoes, wear a mask, wash hands, even gargling may help... Not the exact script you suggest with a counter, but the basics have been covered.
That does not address how radiation works... only 'what to do', without good explanation why and does not give a mental model.
As I would expect they would be where you are (Lithuania?) in similar circumstances.
I *hope* they'd have someone walk with counter show off how radiation works in less abstract way, in addition to telling what to do. In Lithuania, we have
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrius_Kubilius
In Germany, Angela Merkel.
We have scientists among top politicians, you see. We can have politician go there and do some science. I don't know how it is outside EU. edit: I mean, I know that in EU a politician with scientific background can go on site and measure something, cheap PR stunt it may be but it is a lot better than eating a tomato from the affected region. Plus said politician can't be easily bullgarbageted.

edit: also by now I would expect someone to set up high volume manufacturing of low cost personal dosimeters? I don't sure how quickly it was set up after Chernobyl. I think it did take very little time back then, using the military factories and the stockpile from the cold war. Owning a dosimeter really gives comfort in such situation. Keep in mind that during cold war, citizens of both sides were educated about radiation. Also, radiation and radioactivity was part of training during compulsory military service I believe. That is not to advocate the cold war - it was really terrible state of affairs - but to explain the difference.
 
Last edited:
  • #50


The problem of the social acceptance of a technology is not 100% determined by pure scientific reasoning and perfect objective knowledge shared by 100% of the population. That's what a lot of scientifics and engineers fail to understand (either, they cannot understand it, or they do not want to understand it).

A society is, whatever you may think about it, much more complex and irrational than you would like to see it. And even the scientifics are part of this irrationality of course (history of sciences show the long erratic way through scientific beliefs, and history is not finished!). Sorry this is a french book (i don't think it has been translated in english) but it's a must read to understand how excellent rational people with great rational procedures can end up with silly tragedies -most of the examples are about planes and boats accidents, but there could be a neat addendum with nuclear ones i think:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/2070315428/?tag=pfamazon01-20

(In english, the title would be: "Silly decisions: Sociology of radical and persisting mistakes". This would be at least a good read to those who are not inclined to inject enough doubt in their conceptions based on excessive rational thinking...).

So yes, a society is, whatever you may think about it, much more complex and irrational than you would like to see it. I'm not judging if it's good or bad (some can always say that obscurantism or misbelief in the society have to be fighted against until clear thuth appears!), I'm just saying IT'S LIKE THAT!

Moreover, if we talk about nuclear stuff, there are increasing factors for this tendency:

1) this is a complex area of science and technology. Just look at the number of units used for measuring it and you can have a good view of what i mean.

2) it's totally invisible but it can kill or harm you (ok, like bacterias or viruses you could say? Yes but bacterias were not socially developped, at first, by humans as weapons! )

3) and this is maybe the most important, the after war history that people have in mind is mainly related to military applications with bombs, weapons, the cold war, and so on. Even civil nuclear programs have all been initiated and managed as and by military approches (and culture of secrecy, by consequence). This is not an accusation, this is a fact. And this fact explains a lot of what people think and fear about, and that's understandable based on this history. It is funny by the way to observe that in the very first years of atomic research (after Marie Curie, etc.), radioactivity was seen by a good part of the society as a great magical phenomenon, with great health benefits even with direct exposure to radiations (yes, see all the stuff that was sold like baths with radiums sources, and so on, to get better health!

http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/quackcures/radbath.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium (historical uses)
http://www.museumofquackery.com/devices/revig.htm

The point is that even if there was lack of knowledge at first on the health effects of radiations, the society was not by nature threaten by this new nuclear domain as these examples show. This hugely changed after the WWII of course. Civil nuclear was just the phase which came after big military use -first at Nagasaki and Hiroshima of course- , and in direct relation with that (Pu was needed to make the bombs in large quantities and Pu is a by product of nuclear fission in reactors, so that was a good opportunity to build reactors, and even the first reason at this time!)...

So here it is, nuclear is still associated (with rational reasons, and sometimes also with irrational ones like this hibakusha phenomenon) to danger, secrecy of weapons, and fear. And that's not surprising in my opinion, based on psychology, sociology, and history.
 
Last edited:
  • #51


about the Hamaoka restart and reassessment of risks related to earthquake:

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/28_39.html [Broken]

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/28_39.html [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #52


Unbelievable. Restart in July folks.

"The Hamaoka plant, 200 kilometres (120 miles) southwest of Tokyo, sits near an active earthquake zone that the government has forecast carries an 87 percent chance of producing a magnitude-8 or stronger earthquake in the next 30 years."

"With regard to tsunami countermeasures for their nuclear plant, they have done virtually nothing."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/28/chubu-electric-idUSL3E7FS3IS20110428" [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #53


rowmag said:
That wasn't the NHK translator. That was the METI interpreter, who did not seem to be a native English speaker. If I were to criticize that, I would say:

1) Always use a native speaker of the target language for translation, if you care about the nuances.

2) Why did the Times not have anyone on payroll who is competent at Japanese, so that they could attend regular press conferences? Why are they sending a reporter who apparently cannot handle Japanese to cover events in Japan? It is only 6-7 weeks into an ongoing story, after all... The Times is not some tiny backwater operation -- presumably they should have some sort of professional standards, and a budget to back them up.

If you can't have been bothered to learn the language in which events are transpiring, or hire someone who does know it, then expect to receive incomplete, late, and possibly heavily filtered information.

PietKuip said:
Unreasonable demands. It is probably more important that these events get covered by a journalist specializing in science & technology or environmental issues than by a scholar specializing in east-asian history and literature.

Unreasonable? For a global news organization?

And why do you assume the only bilingual people are history and literature specialists?

But in any case, I think the main area of importance (besides language ability, but that should be a precondition) is some intelligence and ability to learn quick. There are not that many nuclear power experts in the world, and news media would use such experts for in-depth analysis interviews, not for covering press conferences.

The interpreter said (in a video that is not online anymore):

"... individuals who would enter these areas because if they come out of these regions the radiation contamination of these individuals may affect other people outside of this area. Therefor such a decision had been made."

If that was false there is a problem with the competence of the interpreters that METI employs.

Which was my point number 1).

(And I gave you the exact wording that was used in Japanese in the other thread, to show how problematic the translation was.)
 
Last edited:
  • #54


Well if the news didn't even teach their own translator that it doesn't spread like infectious disease, how are they to teach the public?

If there is some linguistic issue - e.g. if they are using the word commonly used for infectious diseases to describe radiation sickness or cancer - then translator would have a lot of advantage over people who don't speak English.

Also, I do not think it is at all unreasonable demand for a developed country's media to be able to find someone who understands radiation, and to have that person show how it works with the counter. Get his hand slightly contaminated, wash it, etc. A propaganda trick it may be but it is better than nothing. Reuse the 'dirt' intuition.
Really, anyone with physics degree should know it. Is Japanese scientific education system much behind? I know Japanese did quite a bit of theoretical physics, e.g. i know of Yukawa. I don't particularly like Michio Kaku but he isn't stupid either and he's quite common on TV in US.
 
Last edited:
  • #55


Dmytry said:
Well if the news didn't even teach their own translator that it doesn't spread like infectious disease, how are they to teach the public?

The translator is not talking to the (Japanese-speaking) public, she was speaking to foreign journalists. Yes, she did not seem to have been chosen for her scientific intuition, but things like that will happen, and perhaps corrected later if caught. As I said, her job is a very difficult one, working on the fly like that.

If there is some linguistic issue - e.g. if they are using the word commonly used for infectious diseases to describe radiation sickness or cancer - then translator would have a lot of advantage over people who don't speak English.

As I told you before, the word "contamination" was not used in the Japanese original statement.

Also, I do not think it is at all unreasonable demand for a developed country's media to be able to find someone who understands radiation, and to have that person show how it works with the counter. Get his hand slightly contaminated, wash it, etc. A propaganda trick it may be but it is better than nothing. Reuse the 'dirt' intuition.
Really, anyone with physics degree should know it. Is Japanese scientific education system much behind? I know Japanese did quite a bit of theoretical physics, e.g. i know of Yukawa.

As I explained, there has been a parade of physicists on the news programs, explaining various details of what radiation is and what to do about it.

If you don't like that they didn't use your particular visual gimmick (and for that matter, perhaps someone did -- I can't watch all the news shows simultaneously), then perhaps you could volunteer your services as presentation consultant.

I don't particularly like Michio Kaku but he isn't stupid either and he's quite common on TV in US.

Minor point of correction: Michio Kaku is not Japanese.
 
  • #56


What ever. The point is that if not even the translator who's constantly having to listen to the news learns it, then, the public probably won't learn it either. Public is not chosen for scientific intuition either.

Weren't you surprised how non-uniform it is? That youtube video. How it can differ so much within single yard.
 
  • #57


India rejects the authorization for the building of new reactors after the accidents in Japan

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/29_06.html [Broken]

Recently there has been a lot of protests against the contsruction of new nuclear plants in India (with the project of the biggest one in the world with 10 000 Mwatts).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8547436.stm

And even more recently, the police killed one person and 50 persons were injured during riots after a new protest against this plant:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13124773
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #58


Sorry for the between posts interruption of thought here but I'm sure this GE tidbit will get nuked on the other thread so I'll deposit it here too if nobody minds. "Use of Weapons"----thanks for the ZH mention, dude!

jlduh said:
Well, i can confirm that here in France, the medias have completely left this subject out. They just mentioned the 25 Anniversary of the Thernobyl accident and of course the various events and protests in relation with this. But Fukushima has disappeared from their scope. I guess they would probably show some images if some new explosions were happening. As i said in other places, radioactivity is invisible and complex, so this is not good for medias audiences...

More surprising the french IRSN has completely stopped (since almost one month) to report what is going on at Fukushima, except in a weekly basis but more for the french citizens leaving in Japan. So basically difficult, outside of this forum (and because we all now have recorded the links to where to go to compile infos) to follow what is going on there...
Maybe this explains it.

Media assets owned by GE(General Electric). (they own a lot more stuff unrelated to media too) What about AREVA? (wouldn't want their uranium mining shares to tank) Hitachi? Not to worry, the royal wedding will get coverage.

It's interesting observing the effect(no media coverage) but one really has to look at the cause. Or causes.

NBCUniversal (49% ownership)
NBC - National Broadcasting Company
NBC Network Television stations
WNBC 4 - New York
KNBC 4 - Los Angeles
WMAQ 5 - Chicago
WCAU 10 - Philadelphia
KNTV 11 - San Jose/San Francisco
KXAS 5 - Dallas/Fort Worth²
WRC 4 - Washington
WTVJ 6 - Miami
KNSD 39 (cable 7) - San Diego²
WVIT 30 - Hartford
NBC Entertainment
NBC News
NBC Sports
NBC Studios
NBCUniversal Sports & Olympics
NBCUniversal Television Group
Universal Media Studios
NBC Universal Television Distribution
NBC Universal International Television
EMKA, Ltd.
NBC Universal Digital Media
NBC Universal Cable
A&E Television Networks (co-owned with The Hearst Corporation and Disney/ABC):
A&E
The Biography Channel
Crime & Investigation Network
The History Channel
The History Channel en Español
History Channel International
Lifetime
Military History Channel
Bravo
Chiller (horror-themed cable channel, launched March 1, 2007) [1]
CNBC
CNBC World
MSNBC (co-owned with Microsoft)
NBC WeatherPlus
mun2
SyFy
ShopNBC
Sleuth
USA Network
Universal HD
The Weather Channel
WeatherPlus
NBCUniversal Global Networks
NBCUniversal Global Networks
LAPTV (Latin America) - co-owned with Paramount Pictures (Viacom), MGM and 20th Century Fox (News Corporation);
Telecine (Brazil) - co-owned with Globosat Canais, Paramount Pictures, DreamWorks, MGM and 20th Century Fox;
Universal Channel Latin America (except Brazil
Universal Channel Brazil (co-owned with Globosat Canais);
Sci Fi Channel (Latin America)
NBCUniversal Global Networks España.
Telemundo
KVEA/KWHY - Los Angeles
WNJU - New York
WSCV - Miami
KTMD - Houston
WSNS - Chicago
KXTX - Dallas/Fort Worth
KVDA - San Antonio
KSTS - San Jose/San Francisco
KTAZ - Phoenix
KBLR - Las Vegas
KNSO - Fresno
KDEN - Longmont, Colorado
WNEU - Boston/Merrimack
KHRR - Tucson
WKAQ - Puerto Rico
Universal Studios (co-owned with Vivendi)
Universal Pictures
Focus Features
Rogue
Working Title Films
Universal Studios Licensing
Universal Animation Studios
Universal Interactive
Universal Pictures International
Universal Studios Home Entertainment
Universal Home Entertainment Productions
United International Pictures (co-owned with Paramount Pictures/Viacom);
Universal Operations Group
Universal Production Studios
Universal Parks & Resorts
qubo - Qubo Venture,LLC¹
¹Minority interest
²Stations which LIN Television owns a minority interest (24%) in
 
Last edited:
  • #59


Danuta said:
Sorry for the between posts interruption of thought here but I'm sure my GE tidbit will get nuked on the other thread so I'll deposit it somewhere more sheltered, if nobody minds.


It's interesting observing the effect(no media coverage) but one really has to look at the cause. Or one of the causes.

Media assets owned by GE(General Electric). (they own a lot more stuff unrelated to media too)
Not to worry, the royal wedding will get coverage.

GE doesn't own the Associated Press but AP is still waiting on 3 FOIA requests from NRC and haven't gotten them. Right now, NRC isn't complying with requests.

Requests from AP to NRC -
1. access to and copies of all communications between the NRC, the Department of Energy, GE Energy and Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy pertaining to the Japanese nuclear incidents caused by the March II earthquake and tsunami.
2. access to and copies of all
internal communications within the NRC (including its chairman, four commissioners and their staff
members) pertaining to the Japanese nuclear incidents caused by the March II earthquake and tsunami.
3. access to and copies of all communications between the NRC and government counterparts in Japan pertaining to the Japanese nuclear incidents caused by the March 11 earthquake and tsunami.
 
  • #60


jlduh said:
The happiest news since a long time:

http://americasforum.org/archives/427

Much, much happier than using sunflowers. Those would only just brighten your day.

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Asia/Story/STIStory_660529.html" [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #61


TEPCO vice president Norio Tsuzumi recognizes this desaster is a MAN MADE DISASTER and not a natural one. At least he recognizes that...

When he was asked if he thinks of the nuclear crisis a man-made disaster or a natural disaster, he said personally he thinks it is a man-made disaster.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/01_09.html [Broken]

When he adds that

[...] some say the nuclear accident in Fukushima was beyond any expectations but personally he thinks adequate precautions should have been in place

does he remembers that he is... Vice President? That remark is kind of surprising, man!

But at least, that's one of the firsts times is see from this industry that kind of recognition of their responsability and lack of precautions. For the first time, do they they simply... DOUBT?

Doubt is IMHO the stuff that lacks the most in this industry very self assured of it's safety and superiority -especially when we consider the possible concentrated and extended consequences of its impacts in case of severe accidents, which is WAY beyond what are the risks in any other industry .

And not only in Japan...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #62


More workers to be sent to Fukushima?

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/01_11.html [Broken]

Well, when you consider the situation and the numbers of workers involved until now, and compare it to what has been done at Tchernobyl, it is clear to me that the difference is huge and without any comparison in fact.

Considering what has to be done to stabilize the situation and THEN to contain this mess in a kind of sarcophagus, it's clear that the number of people necessary will be even bigger than at Tchernobyl where a lot received much more than what they should have!

The numbers of workers will be a direct result of the work to be done (HUGE, and even more than that!) and the limit of time that radioactivity imposes to each one, so you can imagine...

To me this desaster will at the end involve even more workers than at Tchernobyl.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #63


Guest Member said:
Speaking of the NRC and political BS-

The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was sent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for information from the Associated Press (AP) on March 16.

The AP is a not-for-profit cooperative, which means it is owned by its 1,500 U.S. daily newspaper members. AP serves 1,700 newspapers and 5,000 radio and television outlets in the United States as well as newspaper, radio and television subscribers internationally.

The AP sent 3 requests:
1. access to and copies of all communications between the NRC, the Department of Energy, GE Energy and Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy pertaining to the Japanese nuclear incidents caused by the March II earthquake and tsunami.
2. access to and copies of all
internal communications within the NRC (including its chairman, four commissioners and their staff
members) pertaining to the Japanese nuclear incidents caused by the March II earthquake and tsunami.
3. access to and copies of all communications between the NRC and government counterparts in Japan pertaining to the Japanese nuclear incidents caused by the March 11 earthquake and tsunami.

The statute requires that NRC respond within 20 business days to the request. In unusaul circumstances, the NRC could extend that time by an additional 10 business days to give themselves time to collect the information requested.

Yesterday was business day 30, which should have meant that even with the 10 day extension, NRC should have provided all the information ro AP. But they didn't.

All of those newspapers, radio stations, and tv stations that depend on AP for their news are not able to provide accurate information until the NRC releases the info. Right now, NRC is in violation of the statute for not complying with the 30 day maximum law.
So, what happened to this? How serious is this violation? Is it something everyone violates all the time, or is it rare?
 
  • #64


Well, to me this is really one of the main reasons of the low social acceptance of this industry in many countries, to be related to some other reasons i developped in a post above. This technology has been developped at first by military engineers for military reasons, and this culture of secrecy (the Top Secret culture of the military world) has always been glued to this technology. Private companies have developped big efforts to repeat "We are transparent" (and paid a lot of money to com agencies to do it!) but this is totally ruined when we consider for example this kind of behaviour from the NRC in front of AP's request which fits under legal rights.

What happened here in France in 1986 was an other example (i was then a young engineer, i got my 20 years old birthday in April 1986 so Tchernobyl has been a big milestone in my life...): the cover up of real contamination data by french government, and especially the so called "professor Pellerin" who used false numbers in the medias to demonstrate that the radioactive cloud stopped at the boundary between Germany and France. These false data lead to no protective measures for people, especially in Corsica (an island of France) and Alsace area where i now live, which ended up with demonstrated increased numbers of thyroid cancers because people were drinking contaminated milk, eating contaminated mushrooms, and so on. This is unacceptable. But Mr Pellerin was previously a military general, so this was a "normal policy" guess. Business as usual i would say.

As long as this industry will continue that kind of opacity on the numbers and the real risks, there will be a growing number of opponents because this is just not acceptable in a normal democracy. This is perhaps possible in a Gadhafi Democracy, so maybe they have the solution if they want to continue the same way they did for decades: hire Gadhafi as a consultant. If they don't accept this, then they have to change their practices. A civil power industry CANNOT be managed in a military style in a respectable democracy. Period.

A new example in Japan, from the news:

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/02_32.html [Broken]

The secretary-general of the joint task force and prime the minister's advisor, Goshi Hosono, apologized for the delay in releasing the data.

Hosono said the task force withheld the information because some data were based on overly rigorous assumptions and feared it may trigger panic.

Well, this panic fear has always been the reason invoked for doing so. Well if the nuclear industry is not a dangerous one, if there is no risk as it is always said, then why fearing panic? There is a very strong contradiction within their strategy of communication and this becomes more and more counter-productive to demonstrate what they want to demonstrate, that they are (supposedly) transparent.

Saying is one thing, doing is an other. And now history has long list of events and examples to illustrate this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #65


This is the first time i see this, times are changing: Shareholders call for nuclear plant closures!

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/02_31.html [Broken]

Some of the shareholders of a Japanese electric power company say they want the utility to close its nuclear power plants.

On Monday, a group of 232 individual stockholders of Tohoku Electric Power Company submitted the documents needed for their proposal to scrap its nuclear power plants.

Well, sharelolders are also sometimes citizens... and they could even be citizen impacted by the accidents of their companies!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #66


An excellent read.

Ties Bind Japan Nuke Sector, Regulators

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2069237,00.html" [Broken]

"Regulators simply didn't see it as their role to pick apart the
utility's raw data and computer modeling to judge for themselves
whether the plant was sufficiently protected from tsunami. The policy
amounted to this: Trust plant operator TEPCO — and don't worry
about verifying its math or its logic."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #67


I post this recent video which debunks MSNBC propaganda proposed at the date of 25th anniversary of Chernobyl accident. MSNBC is owned by GE who also built some of the reactors at Fukushima.

If you didn't know that people returning living in the controlled zone around Chernobyl are in fact living LONGER than the ones staying outside, then it's probably because you didn't hear MSNBC propaganda...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7BlJIMxwKg&feature=related

For a long time nuclear activities, even the "civil" ones, were managed in military styles. Now, in addition, private companies make marketing out of them.

In the first case, the lies were called "top secret defense". Now they are called "communication and propaganda for the masses"...
 
  • #68


jlduh said:
about the Hamaoka restart and reassessment of risks related to earthquake:

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/28_39.html [Broken]

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/28_39.html [Broken]

Well, it seems Kan is moving faster now on this subject!

Kan calls for halt of Hamaoka nuclear reactors


http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/06_31.html [Broken]

Kan announced the decision on Friday, citing the need to better secure the plant against earthquakes and tsunami in the wake of the nuclear accident at the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

The prime minister says he has asked the plant operator, Chubu Electric Power Company, to halt reactors No.4 and No.5, and not to restart reactor No.3, which is now offline for regular inspections.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #69


jlduh said:
I post this recent video which debunks MSNBC propaganda proposed at the date of 25th anniversary of Chernobyl accident. MSNBC is owned by GE who also built some of the reactors at Fukushima.

If you didn't know that people returning living in the controlled zone around Chernobyl are in fact living LONGER than the ones staying outside, then it's probably because you didn't hear MSNBC propaganda...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7BlJIMxwKg&feature=related

For a long time nuclear activities, even the "civil" ones, were managed in military styles. Now, in addition, private companies make marketing out of them.

In the first case, the lies were called "top secret defense". Now they are called "communication and propaganda for the masses"...
holy ****.
Well, those people may be living longer, if you are speaking of the russians who are effectively finding refugee in the zone from various crap that happens in Russia. I mean, if the mafia is after you, you may go to zone and avoid getting killed by mafia, and thus live longer.

It really is reminiscent of the anthropogenic global warming. The industry always denies effects of the pollutants, tries to bribe scientists with 'research grants' (some, successfully), etc. The people in zone living longer? It's primarily old folks in the zone! (And just a very few young folks whom are hiding from something) No **** if you take average age, or average age at death even, it'll be larger.
 
Last edited:
  • #70


Hi to everyone.

I am sorry I am late in joining the discussions around this interesting forum.

having said that energy production, especially nuclear energy production, is a sensitive issues that ignites sometimes overheated discussions, i have to say that I found most if not all posts made by Dmitry extremely well informed and impronted to a sane scientific and risk averse attitude that is the only attitude that can prevent or at least substantially reduce the risk of further nightmares.

Thank you Dmitry for sharing with us.
 
<h2>1. What is the political impact of the Japan earthquake?</h2><p>The Japan earthquake of 2011 had significant political implications. The disaster exposed weaknesses in the government's disaster preparedness and response plans, leading to criticism of their handling of the situation. It also brought attention to the issue of nuclear power and the government's relationship with the nuclear industry.</p><h2>2. How did the government respond to the Japan earthquake?</h2><p>The Japanese government declared a state of emergency and mobilized the Self-Defense Forces to assist with rescue and recovery efforts. However, their response was criticized for being slow and inadequate, particularly in regards to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant meltdown.</p><h2>3. What role did international relations play in the aftermath of the Japan earthquake?</h2><p>The Japan earthquake brought about a strong international response, with many countries offering aid and support. However, it also strained diplomatic relations, particularly with neighboring countries like China and South Korea, due to ongoing territorial disputes.</p><h2>4. How did the Japan earthquake impact the country's economy?</h2><p>The Japan earthquake had a significant impact on the country's economy, causing widespread damage to infrastructure, disrupting supply chains, and leading to a decline in tourism. The government implemented various measures, such as stimulus packages and tax breaks, to help revive the economy.</p><h2>5. What measures has the Japanese government taken to prevent future earthquakes?</h2><p>Following the Japan earthquake, the government has implemented various measures to improve disaster preparedness, including stricter building codes and increased funding for disaster response and mitigation. They have also reassessed the safety of nuclear power plants and have implemented stricter regulations for their operation.</p>

1. What is the political impact of the Japan earthquake?

The Japan earthquake of 2011 had significant political implications. The disaster exposed weaknesses in the government's disaster preparedness and response plans, leading to criticism of their handling of the situation. It also brought attention to the issue of nuclear power and the government's relationship with the nuclear industry.

2. How did the government respond to the Japan earthquake?

The Japanese government declared a state of emergency and mobilized the Self-Defense Forces to assist with rescue and recovery efforts. However, their response was criticized for being slow and inadequate, particularly in regards to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant meltdown.

3. What role did international relations play in the aftermath of the Japan earthquake?

The Japan earthquake brought about a strong international response, with many countries offering aid and support. However, it also strained diplomatic relations, particularly with neighboring countries like China and South Korea, due to ongoing territorial disputes.

4. How did the Japan earthquake impact the country's economy?

The Japan earthquake had a significant impact on the country's economy, causing widespread damage to infrastructure, disrupting supply chains, and leading to a decline in tourism. The government implemented various measures, such as stimulus packages and tax breaks, to help revive the economy.

5. What measures has the Japanese government taken to prevent future earthquakes?

Following the Japan earthquake, the government has implemented various measures to improve disaster preparedness, including stricter building codes and increased funding for disaster response and mitigation. They have also reassessed the safety of nuclear power plants and have implemented stricter regulations for their operation.

Similar threads

  • Earth Sciences
Replies
5
Views
814
Replies
14K
Views
4M
  • Nuclear Engineering
51
Replies
2K
Views
416K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
0
Views
166
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
7
Views
46K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
28
Views
10K
Replies
28
Views
8K
  • STEM Career Guidance
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
21
Views
13K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
25
Views
2K
Back
Top