Japan Earthquake: Political Aspects

[jlduh]

To Dmytry:

This extract is very informative of the scenario that we can see appearing at any of the Fukushima pool if the situation deteriorates on any of the reactor and the level of water goes to zero in the spent pool. And this risk is going to last for a very long time as i don't see know how to secure this scenario to happen, based on the more than fragile (but in fact we may say lucky after all!) situation in which the Fukushima plant is now:

If the pool were to be drained of water, the discharged fuel from the previous two refuelings would still be "fresh" enough to melt under decay heat. However, the zircaloy cladding of this fuel could be ignited during the heatup.543 The resulting fire, in a pool equipped with high density storage racks, would probably spread to most or all of the fuel in the pool. The heat of combustion, in combination with decay heat, would certainly release considerable gap activity from the fuel and would probably drive "borderline aged" fuel into a molten condition. Moreover, if the fire becomes oxygen-starved (quite probable for a fire located in the bottom of a pit such as this), the hot zirconium would rob oxygen from the uranium dioxide fuel, forming a liquid mixture of metallic uranium, zirconium, oxidized zirconium, and dissolved uranium dioxide. This would cause a release of fission products from the fuel matrix quite comparable to that of molten fuel.545 In addition, although confined, spent fuel pools are almost always located outside of the primary containment. Thus, release to the atmosphere is more likely than for comparable accidents involving the reactor core.

Clearly it is recognized that the fact that there is no real strategy in place other than storing spent fuel has created the conditions for reevaluating the risks with SFP, because of increased volume of spent fuel and BECAUSE OF RERACKING... They reevaluated it but to do nothing because the probability was considered insignificant, after a very brilliant calculation. Obviously, big explosions as consequences of reactor damages that could deteriorate integrity of the pool, of even explode it completely and send in the air all its content were not part of the probabilities which end up terribly low -who would fear this so small risk? (really, didn't we go very close to this on reactor 3 when you see the force of the explosions ans the amount of destructions, same thing at reactor 4...).

I also like this sentence:

Ultimately, makeup to the pool could be supplied by bringing in a fire hose (60 gpm would suffice). Although one would expect that the failure probability associated with bringing in a hose (over a period of four or more days) would be very low, it must also be remembered that working next to 385,000 gallons of potentially contaminated boiling water on top of a 10-story building is not a trivial problem. We will assume, based purely on judgment, that the conditional failure probability for this method of makeup is on the order of 5%. When these probabilities are combined, the result is a frequency of 1.4 x 10-6/RY for an accident initiated by loss of spent fuel pool cooling.

Well at least they envisionned the difficulty if it could happen. But finally considered the probability to happen insignificant. Period.

I'm very surprised to see how risks assessment can be done without really taking into account domino effects. The only serious explosion that could destroy the pool is the one of a tornado missile... Well, well.

 

[Dmytry]

To Dmytry:

This extract is very informative of the scenario that we can see appearing at any of the Fukushima pool if the situation deteriorates on any of the reactor and the level of water goes to zero in the spent pool. And this risk is going to last for a very long time as i don't see know how to secure this scenario to happen, based on the more than fragile (but in fact we may say lucky after all!) situation in which the Fukushima plant is now:

Yep. Well that link is also very informative as of why the plants appear so fragile.
The probability of the threat was somehow 'estimated' as 1/ 700 000 years, and consequently it was deemed unnecessary to add measures to mitigate the threat.
1/700 000 years is of course not what Japanese plants are rated for, considering that they are based on historical tsunamis and quakes, so there you go.

 

[Guest Member]

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.

 

[Dmytry]

One in 700 000 years (posted the link before, so it is sourced as per thread rules). What sort of culture one must have to declare such a number...
Let's say, I am 'fearful' enough to think that there is >=1/10 possibility there is yet unknown 1/10 000 years event or mechanism. That gives risk of 1/100 000 years or worse.
Let's suppose that I am 'paranoid' enough to think there is a >=1/100 probability of management failure / corruption, leading to neglect of 1 in 100 years event (what seem to have happened in Japan). That is 1/10 000 years or worse. It seems that not even very slight doubt in the completeness of our knowledge, or a slight mistrust, is compatible with such figure as one in 700 000 years.

 

[rowmag]

In the technical thread:

recently, some type of media scrubbing of any negative reporting...This Forum should be getting an email any day now.

Somebody want to provide a link that gives evidence for this assertion?
Did this come from some press conference or something?

http://japanfocus.org/-Makiko-Segawa/3516

Thank you.

From the link above:

Now the Japanese government has moved to crack down on independent reportage and criticism of the government’s policies in the wake of the disaster by deciding what citizens may or may not talk about in public. A new project team has been created by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, the National Police Agency, and METI to combat “rumors” deemed harmful to Japanese security in the wake of the Fukushima disaster.

The government charges that the damage caused by earthquakes and by the nuclear accident are being magnified by irresponsible rumors, and the government must take action for the sake of the public good. The project team has begun to send “letters of request” to such organizations as telephone companies, internet providers, cable television stations, and others, demanding that they “take adequate measures based on the guidelines in response to illegal information. ”The measures include erasing any information from internet sites that the authorities deem harmful to public order and morality.

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?

 

[Dmytry]

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" 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.

 

[rowmag]

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" 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!"

 

[Dmytry]

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.

 

[rowmag]

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.

 

[|Fred]

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...

 

[Dmytry]

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.

 

[rowmag]

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.

 

[jlduh]

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.

 

[rowmag]

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.

 

[Dmytry]

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.

 

[rowmag]

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.

 

[PietKuip]

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.

 

[Danuta]

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"

 

[Dmytry]

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.

 

[jlduh]

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.

 

[jlduh]

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

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

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

 

[Danuta]

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"

 

[rowmag]

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.

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.)

 

[Dmytry]

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.

 

[rowmag]

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.

 

[Dmytry]

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.

 

[jlduh]

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

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

 

[Danuta]

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!

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

 

[Guest Member]

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.

 

[Danuta]

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"