A plume of radioactive particles extending into the stratosphere from the Fukushima Daiichi reactor complex makes a mockery of claims that Japan’s nuclear crisis isn’t comparable to the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.
The stream of nuclear contaminants are being driven by an intense heat source consistent with exposed fuel rods burning in air, the process that inevitably leads to meltdown unless massive and prompt intervention is successful.
These radioactive clouds are now mixing with higher altitude air currents and being dispersed more widely across northern Asia and the north Pacific.
They are being tracked by the international Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre in London, which is authorised by the International Atomic Energy Agency to alert airlines and airports to accidental releases of nuclear contamination.
The VAAC this morning issued 10 nuclear emergency flight information regional advisories (FIRs) to enable airlines to route flights well clear of the hazard along air corridors across northern Asia, southern China including Hong Kong, all of Japan and Korea and the high latitude or sub-polar routes that are used to connect North America to dozens of Asia-Pacific cities.
Qantas either has or will soon re-route its Narita flights to achieve a minimum time turnaround at the main Tokyo airport and return via Hong Kong, where there will be a crew change.
This change will avoid overnight stops by crews in Japan for occupational health and logistical reasons, but the airline is closely monitoring the changing situation and all travellers (and on all airlines) are advised to check for late changes to the northern Asia flights.
There is a line of six nuclear reactors at the Fukushima plant, four of which have now experienced one or more large explosions with the remaining two that had been taken off line before the earthquake and tsunami of last Friday now heating up to levels so dangerous Tokyo Electric is considering breaking down the reactor block walls to allow a build-up of hydrogen gas to escape.
Exasperation with the quality of information coming out of the Japanese nuclear authority, the government and the Tokyo Electric company led to harsh words from the French nuclear authority this morning.
It said the Daiichi accident could be classed as a level 6 event on the scale of one to 7. The Chernobyl calamity in 1986 began as a level 6 event and was then elevated to level 7, which until now consist of the only level 6 and level 7 events recorded.
An official was quoted as saying “Tokyo has all but lost control over the situation”.
This morning the Japan nuclear authority insisted that level 4, an event with purely local effects, was the appropriate level, which is clearly not what the normally ultra-tactful International Atomic Energy Agency thought when it directed the VAAC to issue the warnings to airlines, and also to the airports at which any aircraft exposed to radiation must be thoroughly decontaminated under international conventions.
The major European and China flag carriers have variously cancelled services to Japan or re-routed flights to ensure that flight crew do not overnight in Tokyo, similar to the action that Qantas is about to take.
The quality of information from the Japanese has descended into farce, with simultaneous claims that radiation levels are harmful in the Chernobyl-sized exclusion zone but did not constitute a threat to health. This follows the patently dishonest misuse of radiation exposure metrics used for the first 3½ days of the crisis, which understated the real levels by 1000 or three orders of magnitude.
The US think tank, the Institute for Science and International Security, said the situation at Daiichi had worsened considerably and was now closer to a level 6 event and “may unfortunately reach a level 7”.

231 thoughts on “Japan’s nuclear farce”
danr
March 16, 2011 at 9:09 pm“when they do enforce regs”
If people keep voting in pollies that dont enforce regs what you get is
Modern Day Society
Scary
freecountry
March 16, 2011 at 9:11 pmAnd by the way, I would think if there’s any ulterior motive behind those arguing for calm, it’s because the Japanese are dealing with a major catastrophe, many thousands dead, many more thousands homeless, an unknown number still to be rescued, in cold and deteriorating weather, with rolling power stoppages, and a volatile power station crisis, and the last thing they need is the ill-informed, tunnel-visioned panic of all the world’s media crowing “I told you so” and “run for your lives.”
Tom McLoughlin
March 16, 2011 at 9:13 pmAustralian man is asked by his son in Tokyo yesterday “Is it the end of the world”. Father replies, not just yet, and we are going to the airport for a trip to OZ …. now.
Based on an anecdote on ABC PM tonight.
My question – how many people in our Immigration Dept can speak Japanese. Maybe we will get that 100M population Frank Lowy, and Harry Triguboff are so keen on.
Only alot sooner than we expected. As long as they are made to play Aussie Rules and NO SUMO!
CHRISTOPHER DUNNE
March 16, 2011 at 9:46 pmBen, I do not wish to play down the seriousness of the cascading problems at Fukushima Daiichi, caused, I might add, not by an earthquake, but by being swamped by an enormous tidal wave that has virtually wiped out their capacity to cool down the reactors (which did in fact shut down correctly). These are not insignificant or trivial events, but they are not anywhere near, by massive orders of magnitude, what happened at Chernobyl.
My point is that you could, as a journalist, help spread information that gives readers some perspective, and not just parrot the extreme statements that others have resorted to. I thought questioning everything, even the comments of ‘experts’ was the basis of good journalism. Crikey prides itself on looking behind the soundbites of others and putting the ideas in a broader context, but you seem to be in fact hiding behind them in this instance.
It is a complex subject Ben, just parroting the hyperbole of others does not make it any easier to understand in a broader context.
Sean
March 16, 2011 at 9:51 pmthorium LFTR, anyone?
or even 4th gen reactors that don’t use water?
Roquefort Muckraker
March 16, 2011 at 10:10 pmNo matter which way you slice it, nuclear is dead. Can anybody see a citizenry sitting idly by while a nuclear power plant is built? The tsunami sealed it. And even if, magically, the catastrophe Fukushima Daiichi were to end today, the pictures shown and the fears raised are enough, I think, to have forever closed the book on nuclear power. No matter how much redundancy in safety systems gets promised by the nuclear industry it will not be enough to overcome the intense feelings and fears brought about by the catastrophe Fukushima Daiichi.
It is clear the Japanese government cannot avoid dissembling. And supporters of nuclear are worse than Dr. Pangloss. Hardly the stage from which nuclear can launch a comeback.
To put a Japanese spin on it, sayonara nuclear power
CHRISTOPHER DUNNE
March 16, 2011 at 10:27 pmJust to clarify: there are 55 operating reactors in Japan. The plant at Fukushima Daiichi ( that’s Fukushima ‘the first’) has six units which were inundated by the massive tsunami one hour after the two fully operating units shut down, as designed.
There was a very minor fire at one plant (Oganawa) which was even closer to the epicentre, but there was insignificant radiation released and the whole plant has shut down safely.
So the plant that was swamped by the tsunami is what we are dealing with, not the other 49 reactors in Japan. These units are water cooled, and not having water to remove the residual heat after the main fission reaction is stopped is the problem (plus some outside containment problems also caused by the tsunami).
Chernobyl was operating at full power when the cooling water was accidentally shut off, which caused the reactor to overheat and ignite the graphite it contained as a moderator. The graphite exploded the reactor, which had no containment, and spewed the contents of the reactor into the atmosphere…a major catastrophic release of radioactive material.
Two things: Fukushima’s reactors were all shut down and hence the energy in the reactors was a tiny fraction of Chernobyl’s, and more importantly, they contain no graphite to ignite. Sure, some of the reactors may melt down their contents, but there will not be a massive explosion of nuclear material as in Chernobyl, and, there are quite substantial containment structures in place that will not see this stuff ejected like a volcano as it was in Chernobyl. It may leak locally, but spread a “plume” (as Ben puts it) like the Ukrainian reactor did, is either sloppy journalism or intentionally hyper-dramatic.
This is a very serious incident, and it isn’t over, but to make comparisons with Chernobyl can only be done through ignorance or an intention to over dramatise it.
Roquefort Muckraker
March 16, 2011 at 10:38 pmIt’s telling when the best one can say about Fukushima Daiichi is that it’s not Chernobyl. Put that on a tshirt and see how it works. Nuclear is dead, killed by the wooden stake driven into its heart by the tsunami.
Rena Zurawel
March 16, 2011 at 10:42 pmWhy do we keep comparing Fukushima to Chernobyl? If it is worse than Chernobyl we should be comaring this disaster to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I am not sure we have a single expert on nuclear energy in Australia ( we do not train nuclear specialists) but we have plenty of ‘concerned’ Australian citizens.
All those concerned citizens should rather stop and think about the napalm, phosphorus bombs, depleted uranium and other weapons FREELY used in some countries against civilian population. Many children are dying from bombs and bombing related diseases.
And us, bigots, worried about our safety? Nice. Shall we protest against highly radioactive full body scanners?
And we have a field day again!. Those Japs, again. First, the whales and now Fukushima. We may forget the II World War because we kindly accepted apology.
What about thousands of people killed by the tsunami itself?
CHRISTOPHER DUNNE
March 16, 2011 at 10:49 pmHey Mucky, love your vampire analogy, but how about we just wait and see what the real lesson of this event is. Perhaps the lesson may be that nuclear reactors can withstand the biggest recorded earthquake, but not so good with being inundated by water.
I’ll wait and see, but you’re welcome to keep us amused with your prognostications.