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”
Socratease
March 16, 2011 at 11:16 pm@Flower,
Exactly. As long as these catastrophes remain in the northern hemisphere, the fission fanciers sit smugly at a safe distance.
Mark Duffett
March 16, 2011 at 11:16 pmModeration shmoderation. This is a repost.
Looks like I wasn’t the only one with doubts about this story: flightglobal.com/blogs/airline-business/2011/03/japanese-crisis-that-nuclear-w.html
This still leaves some serious questions unanswered, though. Are we to infer that an aviation advisory of strangely obscure provenance is the only evidence for “a plume of radioactive particles extending into the stratosphere” “stream of nuclear contaminants” “radioactive clouds” (let alone “driven by an intense heat source consistent with exposed fuel rods burning in air”)?
If not, what other evidence is there?
John Reeves
March 16, 2011 at 11:27 pm@Christopher: I sincerely hope you are right. And I’ve read a convincing account from a nuclear expert that there will not a /massive/ explosion, but he and several of the other boffins on TV here are upfront about the possibility of at least a moderate sized explosion releasing materials from the core.
I accept that it is probably unlikely that we will experience sustained high levels of /radiation/ here in Tokyo, but given that we regularly get sand blowing in from the Gobi Desert here, I am skeptical about claims that /radioactive material/ won’t reach here and enter the local water supply.
I am not fazed about being exposed to radiation, but I don’t want radioactive strontium in my bones or radioactive iodine in my thyroid. More to the point, I don’t want these things in my baby son’s bones, etc, which is why we are getting out of here first chance we get.
I’m sorry, but I’ve heard phrases like “impossible”, “most certainly will not…” and “will never be” quite a lot in the last five days, but the “impossible” keeps happening with disturbing regularity, so forgive me if I remain cautious, and if I remain dubious about similar claims for thorium, etc.
Ardent pro-nuclear advocates are welcome to swap places with me any time they like, on condition that they bring two or three of their loved ones with them.
Roquefort Muckraker
March 16, 2011 at 11:29 pmI don’t have a dog in this fight, other than I share the planet with another 6.3 billion people and I guess have a passing interest in how we are going to live together. But I must say that I’m a bit bewildered by Christopher Dunne’s replies. He claims the three things that concern him most are the “poor quality of reporting, … the the incredibly polarised opinions about nuclear power, [and] the poor understanding of radiation hazards”. If those are your three greatest concerns about all of this then I really pity you friend. What worries me most, just to “share”, are the fates of the Japanese devastated by the earthquake, tsunami and the unfolding nuclear power accident. I’ll start there and let my concerns cascade from there.
And Freecountry reiterates my point. The story out of Japan is powerful and media are focusing, perhaps too much, on the nuclear question. Therein rests that nasty wooden stake aimed at the heart of the nuclear industry. It’s clear that the nuclear story, at least for now, in the media is top dog. Already the story is tragic, and I can’t see how the nuclear industry will survive it. Unlike Chernobyl, which happened, “over there” and with virtually no “vision”, this one is filled pathos, good video and a lousy outcome. And the best nuclear proponents can say is “look, it didn’t happen to the other reactors.” Of course, the reply is that even happening to one is too much and not what the industry promised.
Roquefort Muckraker
March 16, 2011 at 11:34 pmsorry, that’s 6.8 billion, I’ll share it with everybody!
CHRISTOPHER DUNNE
March 16, 2011 at 11:35 pmFlower, the accident at Chernobyl was horrible, it killed people near the event, and it did cause some thyroid cancers in children subsequently. But one of the predicted effects, a big increase in leukemia in the exposed populations has not been detected.
The epidemiological data just does not show any significant increase in leukemia, which was not what was expected. Our understanding of radiation exposure across populations is not all that complete, but the evidence for there being a huge number of cancers attributable to Chernobyl is just not there.
the man on the clapham omnibus
March 16, 2011 at 11:39 pmFear and irresponsible crisis reporting abound, way too many necks being stuck out here and abroad it looks like, I guess it’s too much to ask our media for balanced reporting.
Headline in a swedish newspaper (DN.se).. ‘Downfall on the way to Sweden’, the article then goes on to say in the first sentence ‘within 2 weeks radioactive downfall from the damaged reactor will be noticed in Sweden’
…
Last sentence in the paragraph..if you get that far..’only with our most sensitive meters will we be able to notice the effects of the leak from Japan’
By the time you’ve read the headline you’re probably starting to head down to your local swedish nuclear bunker.
CHRISTOPHER DUNNE
March 16, 2011 at 11:41 pmMucky, my ‘concerns’ related to this post and the various comments, and the whole anti-nuke slant the media seems to have adopted.
My concerns for the Japanese after what has happened to them are ineffable.
Sorry if you were confused about that.
Flower
March 16, 2011 at 11:42 pmWithin the hastily built Chernobyl sarcophagus is some 200 tonnes of nuclear fuel — nearly all of the amount originally contained in the nuclear reactor — which is now mixed in with the building itself.
Twenty five years after the carnage, the European Union and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development are now leading a drive to construct a gargantuan steel arch to encase the exploded reactor and the “sarcophagus.”
But they still need $1 billion for the project, which has only just started and has doubled in cost to nearly 1.5 billion euros ($2 billion). The current funding will only allow work to continue through the beginning of next year and the new sarcophagus is expected to last for 100 years. Hopefully, Momma Nature, outraged by the pillaging of the hazards in her waste repositories, will refrain from trying to get even.
Unperturbed Russia (Rosatom) is busily flogging its nuclear reactors to developing countries while Western nations are contributing big bucks to clean up the abominable radioactive mess, scattered throughout Russia.
Sean
March 16, 2011 at 11:42 pmRoquefort, what about thorium LFTR technology?
The Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor: What Fusion Wanted To Be – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHs2Ugxo7-8
plus the ABC notes above on the technology, and simply google the phrase for more info.