It has taken less than three days for Japan’s notoriously dishonest and evasive nuclear industry to concede the seriousness of the crisis affecting the Fukushima Daiichi and Fukushima Daini plants NE of Tokyo with six and four reactors respectively. But the ferocious debate over nuclear power that has erupted in the media outside Japan is completely missing several key points.
The first is the failures of “fail safe” cooling processes at each plant is a risk analysis bet gone wrong by Japan’s nuclear power regulators and the Fukushima plant owner Tokyo Electric. And secondly, the calamities unfolding at the nuclear plants will not kill anything like the 10,000 or perhaps far more people now officially believed to have died in the massive tsunami that ravaged low lying areas of Honshu’s northern Pacific coast on Friday afternoon after a magnitude 9.0 earthquake occurred near Sendai at 2.46pm local time.
This is likely to be true even if several completely uncontained meltdowns of reactor cores were to occur, despite the extreme seriousness of such events.
When the tsunami overwhelmed the separate coastal locations of the Fukushima Daini and Fukushima Daiichi plants, they had already begun shutting down in an automated response to the earthquake, the most powerful ever directly recorded in Japan.
It was the fail-safe back-up cooling processes that failed, because they had deliberately been designed and built to withstand severe yet less extremely severe natural disasters.
This was a money saving risk analysis bet by Japan’s nuclear regulators and the owners that a combination of such an extremely violent earthquake and following tsunami would not occur in its lifetime.
That bet nearly came off. The older Daiichi plant has only weeks to run on its 40-year operating licence and half of its reactors were already offline and are reported to be undamaged in their shut down state.
Until about 9am local time on Saturday, Tokyo Electric, the Japanese government, and nuclear apologistas worldwide were insisting that there had been no meltdowns in the reactors, that there was no risk to public safety and that mass media comparisons to the Chernobyl melt down in 1986 were flawed, which in terms of design is certainly true.
It was even claimed that only if such desperate measures as flooding the reactor cores with sea water took place would the situation be serious.
Shortly afterwards it became apparent that nuclear fuel rods exposed by falling levels of coolant in the Daiichi No 1 reactor were initiating partial meltdown with the release of “slightly” radioactive steam from the reactor bloc and admissions that caesium contamination had been found outside the plant, indicating that the outer layer or cladding of the uranium rods had crumbled and been ejected into the environment during the “harmless” steam releases.
Then the outer retaining walls and roof of the Daiichi No 1 reactor were violently blown to smithereens, a process the Chief Secretary for the Cabinet, Yukio Edano, described as a “roof collapse”.
While the Japan government continued to evade the seriousness of the situation, it was flying in emergency consignments of unspecified coolants, possibly additional supplies of boric acid, which absorbs neutrons and thus acts as a liquid alternative to control rods in a reactor core in which fuel rods and control rods have been partially melted or otherwise damaged to the point where they cannot be used.
The language of officialdom began to shift rapidly from benign soothing evasions to urgency throughout Saturday and yesterday until this morning when Prime Minister Naoto Kan specifically referred to the nuclear plant situations as “grave.”
It appears that up to seven reactor cores, the total that were active in the Fukushima complexes, have been or are about to be flooded with seawater and injected with boric acid, both previously described by nuclear apologistas as “desperate measures” not justified in the post-tsunami crisis. Yet these measures will, according to nuclear scientists, irreparably damage the reactors in the course of shutting them down when all else has failed.
As of this morning the smallest figure given for the number of people in hospital for radiation exposure is 90 and the population at large is being given potassium iodine tablets which will pre-empt the absorbing by the thyroid gland of radioactive iodine particles. The confirmation that radioactive iodine particles had escaped from the Daiichi complex came yesterday afternoon, some 24 hours after the authorities grudgingly conceded the presence of caesium fallout.
In the drip feed of disclosure coming from Tokyo Electric and the government, it is now publicly confirmed that the fuel rods in the Daiichi No 3 unit, which is of most immediate concern and at risk of an explosion, use a combination of plutonium oxide and uranium oxide, not just the uranium that was being used in Daiichi No 1.
The fission process using only uranium fuel does produce plutonium, however the addition of plutonium oxide at the start of the process lifts the output of a reactor while substantially adding to the lethality of the sort of failure that the nuclear industry regulator and Tokyo Electric knew was possible but gambled would not occur.
This morning there was an elevated radiation level emergency declared at the Onagawa nuclear plant, which comprises three reactors, and is 120 kilometres from the NE outskirts of Sendai, compared to about 240km for the nearest Fukushima plant.
These fluctuations at Onagawa are now attributed to fallout from the Fukushima “releases” which is not comforting to those in Tokyo or elsewhere in Japan but is an inevitably that adds to the far more visible and immediate aftermaths of the tsunami.

121 thoughts on “Nuclear myths erupt in Japan”
freeze
March 15, 2011 at 11:26 pmthe “good news “just gets better — NOT.
I looks like all 6 reactors in the complex are rooted. Very sad for Japan.
freecountry
March 16, 2011 at 1:57 amFreeze, you are overstating your case. There are more than ten thousand dead, and the thing you’re talking about is not what killed them.
freeze
March 16, 2011 at 7:53 amIn the context of what we are talking about , I think not
Earthquake
Tsunami
Loss of essential services ie no power, no water
Possible 10s of thousands dead
Possibly 3 meals away from rioting
Economic meltdown
Nuclear meltdown
This nuclear meltdown may not kill many people. But that is not the point. There are probably 50 techs in the plant who have vertually committed suicide to stop the run away train. If the plant runs out of control, it could wipe out a substantial part of the country. And you don’t think it’s that serious because no one has died yet?
twobob
March 16, 2011 at 9:37 amI would note with a touch of sad irony that the bigger danger in Japan is the problem with reactor 4. Reactor 4 is off-line, that is it is shut down but it stores nuclear waste.
If it goes off it will be an order of magnitude worse than Chernobyl.
AND we (humans) have to store this sh!t for 10 000 years!
Yet we cant even manage 40!
Enough said I believe, to make more of this toxic waste and then to have the audacity to call nuclear power clean is to be incredibly myopic and blatantly dishonest.
freecountry
March 16, 2011 at 9:41 amLoss of food, shelter, electricity, clothing, for perhaps hundreds of thousands, many of them injured or stranded, in cold weather. Fires. Perhaps loss of hospitals and communications infrastructure. The rest we can only speculate about for now, because no one is reporting on anything except the nuclear power stations. Thousands of bodies still in the open, infection risk, maybe release of toxic chemicals and waste which could be more carcinogenic than the radioactive residues. You speak of the workers committing suicide, which is an exaggeration (this isn’t Chernobyl, where many workers did volunteer for suicide missions) but did you stop to wonder whether their families are still alive?
My grandfather was a cavalry officer in WWI on a troop carrier sunk by a torpedo. I don’t know what happened with the lifeboats. Those who survived the break-up of the ship and couldn’t swim, drowned. Then came the horses. Someone had taken pity on the beasts, released them from the stables down below, and they thrashed around and killed many of the men treading water before themselves drowning. In the end only a few score men were left to rescue.
The Fukushima nuclear reactors are like those stampeding horses. What are you going to do, ban horses? It’s very hard to plan for catastrophes that kill ten thousand in a few minutes. Authorities can and do plan for that kind of chaos, but it’s never perfect, you never think of everything, and I have little regard for people sitting in comfort, bellies full, children safe, second guessing that they should have done this, shouldn’t have done that, shouldn’t have had nuclear power in the first place.
twobob
March 16, 2011 at 10:39 amSimilarly fc I have even less regard for fools who see this and then advocate for the toxic waste to be transported and stored here. For money.
The Fukushima nuclear reactors are not like stampeding horses they are more like ticking time bombs, one can hope that catastrophe can be averted in this situation, but to ignore the difficulties in storing nuclear waste for 10 000 years is to be willfully ignorant. And it reminds me so much of the the willful ignorance surrounding one side of the climate change debate. Imagine the tragedy of those calling for caution in that having to say ‘I told you so’.
I can just see it now
“The climate change catastrophes are like those stampeding horses. What are you going to do, ban horses? It’s very hard to … blah blah blah”
We were warned, we know the dangers and to proceed is sheer bloobyminded lunacy, fueled by the usual suspects, greed and arrogance.
Meski
March 16, 2011 at 10:45 am@Freeze: After exceeding their specs like that, they wouldn’t trust them for long term use, anyway. I guess we’ll find out how long it takes to construct a modern reactor if you’re in a hurry, and really need it. Or suggest an alternative that generates the gigawatts that that plant did, in total. (let’s rule out oil/gas/coal, as being CO2 producing)
Twobob’s still running the 10,000 years myth. Yawn.
twobob
March 16, 2011 at 11:13 amAnd meski’s fantasising that nuclear has a snowballs chance in hell of being built in Aus. lol
Heres some data for ya meski
In 1/2 lives
Strontium 90, 29 years , Caesium 137, 30 years,
There are seven isotopes identified which will still be active after millions of years
Technetium 99, Tin 126, Selenium 79, Zirconium 93, Caesium 135, Palladium 107, Iodine 129, Caesium 135,
Thus effectively you can say it stays dangerous for ever, or as long as humans are likely to exist, but the most dangerous parts will have decayed to only a small proportion of their original activity after a FEW THOUSAND years.
Only a fool would yawn at that, fool
Meski
March 16, 2011 at 11:21 amAnd none of those are produced in a modern reactor. yawn. (again)
Gederts Skerstens
March 16, 2011 at 11:22 amNuclear Disaster Update:
Death toll from damaged reactors soars to zero.