Japan Earthquake: Political Aspects

  • Thread starter Thread starter jlduh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Earthquake Japan
Click For Summary
A new thread has been created to discuss the political aspects surrounding the Fukushima nuclear disaster, complementing the existing scientific discussions. This space aims to address concerns about the transparency and communication of authorities like TEPCO regarding evacuation decisions and safety measures. Contributors are encouraged to document their opinions with sourced information to foster a respectful and informed debate. The thread also highlights the potential for tensions between Japanese authorities and international players as the situation evolves, particularly regarding accountability for the disaster. Overall, it serves as a platform for analyzing the broader implications of the accident beyond the technical details.
  • #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

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:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #62


More workers to be sent to Fukushima?

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

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

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

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"

"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

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

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

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.
 
  • #71


Trying to keep my uninformed rants off the main thread:

As of now, it seems like there's a temp spike on the bottom of #3. This spells corium to me, so new massive releases are a distinct possibility again. This time, the predominant winds are shifting inland.

I guess the political lesson to be learned is don't eff around with already-blasted nuclear reactors. Go all in fast and hard, involve the army, accept any outside help you can get (especially from neighbors), use the wave of popular anger and fear to get volunteers and secure political support NOW for what are sure to be illegal measures and rather un-popular ones in the medium term. The Obama administration had no trouble securing a ban on new drilling in the Gulf during the Macondo crisis.

Some contamination on-site and in the environs is to be expected, some people may get hurt in the haste. Don't sweat it. Heroes are good for the national psyche. It beats having to wait around for the next criticality/explosion/tsunami/quake/typhoon while apologizing profusely and trying to pre-emptively shift blame like some god-damn weasel.

Yeah, I'm angry. Does it show?
 
  • #72


A lot of people are angry. And frightened. It's a normal response to such a situation.
 
  • #73


zapperzero said:
I guess the political lesson to be learned is don't eff around with already-blasted nuclear reactors.

Political lesson learned by others maybe but not TEPCO. Forget them effing around with already blasted nuke reactors, they are still at the effing around with the data stage, which should eventually tell them the nuke reactors are blasted.

Their new tactic is to overwhelm the public with data as opposed to previous underwhelming.

Tepco drowns media in data tsunami
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110510f2.html"

"The result is a marathon of highly technical information delivered in dull and excruciating detail that regularly drags on for four hours or more, to the dismay of the patiently long-suffering reporters.

To some, this dragged-out daily rundown has become another symbol of Japan's cultural passion for process — the very opposite of the decisive, topdown leadership that some experts say is desperately needed during the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl.

"What is missing is one strong balanced leadership to align everything toward one goal," said Shuri Fukunaga, managing director of Burson-Marsteller in Tokyo, who consults companies and governments about crisis communications.

Fukunaga says Japan is skilled at teamwork, which is good under normal times. But it's a dismal failure at having a clear leader take control — a vital necessity during a crisis.

"The leaders tend to be more of a figurehead when what you need is someone to roll up your sleeves and jump in," she said."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #74


If there should be an ultimate reason for not having privately owned companies running plants like the nuclear ones with so heavy consequences to social life and communities around in case of accidents, i think it could be this one:

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/10_20.html

TEPCO seeks govt help to pay compensation

The president of Tokyo Electric Power Company has asked the government for financial help in paying compensation over the accident at its nuclear plant in Fukushima.TEPCO President Masataka Shimizu handed a letter of request to Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano and Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Banri Kaieda on Tuesday.According to the letter, in the current business year TEPCO expects to spend an extra 1 trillion yen or about 12.5 billion dollars for thermal power generation and 9.3 billion dollars to redeem its bonds and repay debts.

The utility says it is afraid that the expenses will make it hard to offer just and speedy compensation while maintaining stable power supplies.

In the list of what they will do to raise "maximum" funding, I see "reduce the salaries and the bonuses -which bonuses by the way? Will they still have bonuses?) BUT i DIDN'T see something like:

"refund the necessary dividends accumulated in the past by shareholders"

(for an other example of huge social impact of a crisis, this remark could apply to all private banks in the financial crisis, with in both cases the TOO BIG TO FAIL THREAT TO PUSH TO ACCEPT THE "DEAL")

Instead of this, sates/citizens will probably pay collectively for it.

For any "normal citizen", this is not acceptable to privatize the gains for years and share the losses with the community. Especially when a company has a so long list of frauds and lies to the community behind her...

Ok, you drove drunk several times in the past, this time you have a huge accident and kill and injure many people and destroy their house, you have to pay fines and penalties for it and... you go to see the government to ask to help you to pay part of the stuff -but promise you will do your "maximum" to pay part of it!

Does it sound right and logical to you, as a "normal citizen"?

I know that it has been said several times here: "don't condemn them as long as you didn't run into their shoes".

But hey, if I was a japanese citizen, couln't I say ALSO that they stealing MY SHOES in fact?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #75


Jiduh, first of all thanks for your contributions here--and no need to apologize for mistakes in English, yours is just fine :-).

In the article quoted above this statement also stood out:

Goshi Hosono, an adviser to the prime minister, initiated the joint news conferences at Tepco, hoping to send a unified message to the public and the international community.

"We have not been mistaken in our response to the crisis," he told reporters. "But our public relations effort has been lacking."

[end quote]

Is it just me or is this guy (and the many others I suspect he speaks for) completely divorced from reality?

Amazing.
 
  • #76
I just looked through the powerpoint presentation at:

http://blog.energy.gov/content/situation-japan/

One slide compares radiation doses from flying, chest x-rays etc.

The implication is that external and internal exposure is the same. There is little distinction made generally in information released to the public.

Such obfuscation does not lend credibility to these authorities to those of us aware of this critical difference.
 
  • #77


You are completely right and i already mentionned it several times, the way radiations are very often presented leads to misunderstanding...

Saying that an alpha emitter can have its emission blocked by a simple sheet of paper is misleading because this only implies external indirect contamination. But this alpha emitter can also enter the body (inhalation, ingestion...) and very often it is not mentionned that then this alpha emitter is the most dangerous one of all for the cells, even if it can act only at a limited distance blocked by a sheet of paper which won't be of any help when in close contact with living cells.

Contamination can be external or internal (from the body standpoint) and direct or indirect. Not only radiations matters, but dust and particulates are also very important of course!
 
  • #78


Can this get even more irresponsible and fool hardy?

Children Don Masks, Hats in Fukushima as Radiation Looms

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-11/fukushima-students-wear-masks-as-radiation-looms.html"

Students at the Shoyo Junior High School in Fukushima are wearing masks, caps and long-sleeved jerseys to attend classes as their exposure to radiation is on pace to equal annual limits for nuclear industry workers.

“Students are told not to go out to the school yard and we keep windows shut,” said Yukihide Sato, the vice principal at Shoyo Junior High in Date city, about 60 kilometers (37 miles) northwest from the crippled Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear station. “Things are getting worse, but I don’t know what to do.”
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #79
Susudake said:
I just looked through the powerpoint presentation at:

http://blog.energy.gov/content/situation-japan/

One slide compares radiation doses from flying, chest x-rays etc.

The implication is that external and internal exposure is the same. There is little distinction made generally in information released to the public.

Such obfuscation does not lend credibility to these authorities to those of us aware of this critical difference.

What are you talking about? They already take into account the effect of the radiation differing on the human body. Thats what the unit REM is for.

The roentgen equivalent in man (or mammal[1]) or rem (symbol rem) is a unit of radiation dose equivalent. It is the product of the absorbed dose in rads and a weighting factor, WR, which accounts for the effectiveness of the radiation to cause biological damage.

This takes into account external radiation from high energy photons, AND internal radiation received from alpha/beta emitters absorbed into the body. Alpha and beta radiation received externally doesn't increase REM dosage, because it isn't absorbed by the body.
 
  • #80


Drakkith said:
What are you talking about? They already take into account the effect of the radiation differing on the human body. Thats what the unit REM is for.



This takes into account external radiation from high energy photons, AND internal radiation received from alpha/beta emitters absorbed into the body. Alpha and beta radiation received externally doesn't increase REM dosage, because it isn't absorbed by the body.


I don't know how to make it any clearer--jiduh appears to understand what I meant (even if we're both completely wrong), so I'm a little disinclined to try again but will (I'm not impugning your intelligence)...

What I see in the reports released from gov't and nuclear power orgs like AREVA are statements comparing the amount of radiation present in irradiated areas to the amount of EXTERNAL radiation we receive from other sources--x-rays, cosmic rays, Billy Ray Cyrus rays, etc.

But as jiduh pointed out, x REMS of alpha radiation received externally (or more likely--dare I say probably?--not received at all because blocked by clothing etc) has little/no relation to the same amount of alpha radiation ingested. That's pretty basic info, isn't it? Even non-specialists like us can get our mushy minds around that. One particle on your clothing emitting alpha rays--not so bad. One particle stuck for months, years, or a lifetime in your lungs, intestines, bones--different story all-together.

It seems--SEEMS--to me that this distinction is not being made clear. Can you show me reports from the official realm, or even articles in the media (MS or otherwise) that emphasize, or even report/comment on, this crucial difference?
 
  • #81


Susudake said:
I don't know how to make it any clearer--jiduh appears to understand what I meant (even if we're both completely wrong), so I'm a little disinclined to try again but will (I'm not impugning your intelligence)...

What I see in the reports released from gov't and nuclear power orgs like AREVA are statements comparing the amount of radiation present in irradiated areas to the amount of EXTERNAL radiation we receive from other sources--x-rays, cosmic rays, Billy Ray Cyrus rays, etc.

But as jiduh pointed out, x REMS of alpha radiation received externally (or more likely--dare I say probably?--not received at all because blocked by clothing etc) has little/no relation to the same amount of alpha radiation ingested. That's pretty basic info, isn't it? Even non-specialists like us can get our mushy minds around that. One particle on your clothing emitting alpha rays--not so bad. One particle stuck for months, years, or a lifetime in your lungs, intestines, bones--different story all-together.

It seems--SEEMS--to me that this distinction is not being made clear. Can you show me reports from the official realm, or even articles in the media (MS or otherwise) that emphasize, or even report/comment on, this crucial difference?
Well hopefully there's no alpha active dust except in immediate vicinity of the plant. I don't think we had a lot of fuel dust problem after Chernobyl.

Otherwise - yes this comparison of external doses and ignoring internal (and a new limit for schoolchildren, at 20mSv/year, over which someone quitted), that is worrysome. The land is contaminated with cs-137 (beta and gamma-active )and it is just too difficult to evaluate how much of it gets ingested - it is fairly clear that they assume 0 , just comparing averaged gamma doses. The internal doses depend greatly on how well the food is to be tested and how much stuff could be raising into the air when it gets hot and some dirt dries out, etc etc. It can spike when there's a wildfire, for example. It is not something you can just calculate.
Then the beta active dirt on the skin, that is also not good. Then, the Sr-90 that accumulates in bones, and firstly you get the effect that it doesn't leave the body at all plus secondarily you get the effect that it irradiates bone marrow, which is more sensitive.
Read the definition of sievert:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert
The entire use of Sieverts there to describe radiation is a sort of pseudoscience. When they measure gamma only they should provide result in Gray and say it is gamma only that they measured, but not internal exposure. Radiation detectors do not measure in Sieverts. Dummies with radiation detectors inside measure Sieverts after a calculation and that's for external only.

This sort of lie really works unless you've been living in EU and you're aware of all the food testing measures, radioactive wild boars, etc etc. and you know that it is a lot more complex issue than japanese make it out to be.
That is not to say internal exposure will necessarily be significant. The level of internal exposure would depend greatly to the food standards they will set, and to the quality of and compliance with testing requirements. It is simply not possible to tell, to even guess at - it may be lot less than external exposure, or it may be a lot more.
 
Last edited:
  • #82


Let me ask you a simple question Drakkith:

could you explain me how any measurement in Sv (or mSv) can take into account the effects of ingested and inhaled particles as this parameter is highly dependent, as i mentionned several times before, of what a person does, touches, eats, drinks? (Ultimately it is also very dependent of local windy conditions and relocation of deposited dust for example)
 
Last edited:
  • #83


An interesting summary of the crisis and its implications from the global nuclear safety system an regulation standpoint. Independance and conflicts of interests.

Note at the very beginning this exchange between a woman living close to the plant ant Tepco Top management:

Woman: You always told us it was safe. Why?
Tepco Top management: I am very sorry.


For me it's the symbol of this disaster.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/movie/feature201105112006.html

More on the various cover ups from Tepco and Nisa in the past (which is part of Ministery of Economy, Trade and Industry).

http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/pdffiles/nit97.pdf

The whistleblower story about which governor is talking in this interview is also adressed in this article, i extract it:

Whistle-blower Made A Press Conference:
Mr. Kei Sugaoka, a former GE engineer,
who disclosed lax management of nuclear
inspection by TEPCO and GE, revealed his
name and appeared to the public in Fukushima
Prefecture for the first time. In replying to
the question, why he decided to whistle-blow
long concealed secrets in nuclear industry, he
explained "it's all about GE's insincere management
attitude." He added, however, that he never
expected that his appealing could result in the
resignation of the former president of TEPCO as
well as the shut down of all the nuclear plants in
TEPCO's power supply region. Mr. Kei Sugaoka is a third generation Japanese-
American who had been working as
an engineer at GE until 1998 when he was fired
without being given sufficient reason. He was
involved in the construction of Fukushima I-1
where he witnessed flaws that were kept secret
by the company.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #84


Dmytry said:
This sort of lie really works unless you've been living in EU and you're aware of all the food testing measures, radioactive wild boars, etc etc. and you know that it is a lot more complex issue than japanese make it out to be.
That is not to say internal exposure will necessarily be significant. The level of internal exposure would depend greatly to the food standards they will set, and to the quality of and compliance with testing requirements. It is simply not possible to tell, to even guess at - it may be lot less than external exposure, or it may be a lot more.


Yes this is in part what I was getting at--ingestion through inhalation or through ingesting contaminated food.

And it's not just how serious the health risk is--for me. For me it's a moral issue too--obfuscating the difference while children are being affected. It's no different than killing children with, I don't know, depleted uranium? In other words the military/industrial/nuclear/academic/political complex is synergistically poisoning us in 1000s of ways from the inside and outside while they mis- and disinform us. To quote Edano today: "very deplorable."

I'll note I very much appreciate your input here and if you're the same dmytry at arstechnica, there as well; I objected to being grouped with you by nuceng earlier merely because I object to that kind of "paint them all with the same brush" mentality regardless of who's doing it. Anyway, you have much much more expertise on this matter than I do so I suspect you'd object much more to being lumped with me :-).
 
  • #85
jlduh said:
Let me ask you a simple question Drakkith:

could you explain me how any measurement in Sv (or mSv) can take into account the effects of ingested and inhaled particles as this parameter is highly dependent, as i mentionned several times before, of what a person does, touches, eats, drinks? (Ultimately it is also very dependent of local windy conditions and relocation of deposited dust for example)

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/federal/techdocs.html

Estimates require both the dose and the contributing isotopes for internal doses. See FGR 11 and FGR12 for explanations how this is calculated. For internal sources a whole body scan can make accurate measurements of body burden. Personnal dosimetry usually monitors external or whole body dose. Offsite doses are estimated based on monitoring results. It is not perfect but can be useful in making decisions about evacuation zones, and identifying people who may need medical followup.
 
  • #86


jlduh said:
http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/pdffiles/nit97.pdf

The whistleblower story about which governor is talking in this interview is also adressed in this article, i extract it:

"Whistle-blower Made A Press Conference:
Mr. Kei Sugaoka, a former GE engineer,
who disclosed lax management of nuclear
inspection by TEPCO and GE, revealed his
name and appeared to the public in Fukushima
Prefecture for the first time. In replying to
the question, why he decided to whistle-blow
long concealed secrets in nuclear industry, he
explained "it's all about GE's insincere management
attitude." He added, however, that he never
expected that his appealing could result in the
resignation of the former president of TEPCO as
well as the shut down of all the nuclear plants in
TEPCO's power supply region. Mr. Kei Sugaoka is a third generation Japanese-
American who had been working as
an engineer at GE until 1998 when he was fired
without being given sufficient reason. He was
involved in the construction of Fukushima I-1
where he witnessed flaws that were kept secret
by the company."

Interesting YouTube vid of Kei Sugaoka blowing the whistle. The report is in Japanese but Kei Sugaoka speaks in English. Press CC tab at right hand bottom of vid for English subtitle.

Kei Sugaoka the GE/Tepco Whistleblower 東電のトラブル隠し

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBjiLaVOsI4"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #87


Susudake said:
I don't know how to make it any clearer--jiduh appears to understand what I meant (even if we're both completely wrong), so I'm a little disinclined to try again but will (I'm not impugning your intelligence)...

What I see in the reports released from gov't and nuclear power orgs like AREVA are statements comparing the amount of radiation present in irradiated areas to the amount of EXTERNAL radiation we receive from other sources--x-rays, cosmic rays, Billy Ray Cyrus rays, etc.

But as jiduh pointed out, x REMS of alpha radiation received externally (or more likely--dare I say probably?--not received at all because blocked by clothing etc) has little/no relation to the same amount of alpha radiation ingested. That's pretty basic info, isn't it? Even non-specialists like us can get our mushy minds around that. One particle on your clothing emitting alpha rays--not so bad. One particle stuck for months, years, or a lifetime in your lungs, intestines, bones--different story all-together.

It seems--SEEMS--to me that this distinction is not being made clear. Can you show me reports from the official realm, or even articles in the media (MS or otherwise) that emphasize, or even report/comment on, this crucial difference?

As Nuceng pointed out, there are several methods of determining the internal dose. Official reports and articles from the media aren't going to go in depth and make these distinctions because they are irrelevant and 99.9% of people wouldn't have a clue what they were talking about.
 
  • #88


Dmytry said:
Then the beta active dirt on the skin, that is also not good. Then, the Sr-90 that accumulates in bones, and firstly you get the effect that it doesn't leave the body at all plus secondarily you get the effect that it irradiates bone marrow, which is more sensitive.
Read the definition of sievert:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert
The entire use of Sieverts there to describe radiation is a sort of pseudoscience. When they measure gamma only they should provide result in Gray and say it is gamma only that they measured, but not internal exposure. Radiation detectors do not measure in Sieverts. Dummies with radiation detectors inside measure Sieverts after a calculation and that's for external only.

This sort of lie really works unless you've been living in EU and you're aware of all the food testing measures, radioactive wild boars, etc etc. and you know that it is a lot more complex issue than japanese make it out to be.
That is not to say internal exposure will necessarily be significant. The level of internal exposure would depend greatly to the food standards they will set, and to the quality of and compliance with testing requirements. It is simply not possible to tell, to even guess at - it may be lot less than external exposure, or it may be a lot more.

Wow, you simply have no idea what you are talking about. Sievert isn't a measurement of the amount of radiation received. It is a measure of the biological harm inflicted by an amount of radiation. This depends greatly on the type of radiation received and takes into account the locations most affected by it. They talk about Sieverts because X amount of ionizing gamma radiation is less harmful than an equivalent amount of beta radiation on the body. So saying you received X amount of radiation wouldn't be an accurate means of determining potential bodily harm unless you used something like Sieverts.

Also, it is entirely possible to accurately track radiation in food and water and calculate the rate of internal absorption people will be exposed to. It is being done right now as we speak. Whether you believe it or not is your problem, and as we already know, you don't believe much of anything unless it agrees with your own views.
 
Last edited:
  • #89


Susudake said:
In other words the military/industrial/nuclear/academic/political complex is synergistically poisoning us in 1000s of ways from the inside and outside while they mis- and disinform us.

Susudake said:
I objected to being grouped with you by nuceng earlier merely because I object to that kind of "paint them all with the same brush" mentality regardless of who's doing it.

You are contradicting yourself big time.
 
  • #90


Drakkith said:
Wow, you simply have no idea what you are talking about. Sievert isn't a measurement of the amount of radiation received.
Wasn't it what I implied when i said that radiation detectors do not measure in Sieverts?
It is a measure of the biological harm inflicted by an amount of radiation. This depends greatly on the type of radiation received and takes into account the locations most affected by it. They talk about Sieverts because X amount of ionizing gamma radiation is less harmful than an equivalent amount of beta radiation on the body.
Actually, beta and gamma have same weighting factor. Bone marrow and skin, however, do not.
So saying you received X amount of radiation wouldn't be an accurate means of determining potential bodily harm unless you used something like Sieverts.
it wouldn't be an accurate means of measuring potential body harm unless you actually calculated the conversion.
What they do, they report grays of external gamma exposure as sieverts of total exposure. It'll take actual measurements on the people's bodies to know their internal exposures, it depends greatly to diet and a zillion yet undetermined factors.
They, however, take the readings from a Geiger counter 'calibrated' in Sieverts (which is nonsense), and declare zone safe/unsafe based on that.
They are reporting it as Sieverts because it makes you (and people like you) think that they done the conversion.
And you are the one who has absolutely no idea.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14K ·
473
Replies
14K
Views
4M
  • · Replies 2K ·
60
Replies
2K
Views
450K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
49K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
10K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
8K
Replies
38
Views
5K