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”
freecountry
March 17, 2011 at 2:31 pmDavid, I know you didn’t mention those things; I did. My reason for doing so was to answer your question: some of us are concerned with avoiding panic and irrationality, rather than trumpeting our cynical evil investments at the expense of human lives.
Consider Gavin Moodie’s point. The fact that the start-up cost for lighting up a society might include high emissions, should be balanced against the longer term prospects. Even setting up a renewable power station might involve temporary high energy usage and portable diesel generators on the building site, so what? People living in the dark may need cheap coal to get them over a hurdle before they can lift their sights to the luxury of saving the world from carbon. Until then you have crises caused by rising food prices relative to income, such as what’s happening now in Libya. Try telling the Libyans that what they need now is renewable energy.
Of course, in an international ETS regime, we could probably get poor countries–where labour and land is cheap but coal requires international transport from far away in Australia–get them started with renewable power in the first place, much more cheaply than we could replace non-EOL infrastructure here. That means every billion dollars we invest in renewables could do far more good in foreign aid to greenfield poor regions which have no power yet, both in the short term and the long term, and with humanitarian and economic benefits that dovetail with emissions reduction. But whenever this is mentioned, Greens cry out ignorantly that this is cheating and avoiding responsibilities. You just can’t reason with them.
Flower
March 17, 2011 at 2:39 pm@ Free Country: “Panic, stampede, apocalypse, scaremongers, trillion dollar investments in renewables?”
That’s a load of old cobblers FC and you know it. The Japanese victims are not stampeding or panicking. They are rightly concerned about potential exposure to radionuclides and they have every right to be and that includes concerns for their young children who are more susceptible to the insidious health impacts of radiation than adults.
You have conveniently forgotten about the UN’s report on the trillion dollar damage to the environment caused by big polluters every year. The environmental carnage caused by the nuclear industry is well documented and just to remind you, the taxpayer has picked up the massive tab to remediate contaminated rivers and soils in Australia – a legacy of uranium mines abandoned by the hit and run uraniuam industry.
Further a company whistleblower produced documents that show BHP using manipulated averages and distorted sampling at the Olympic Dam project to ensure the figures are below the maximum exposure levels for workers, set by government. In addition, the levels of polonium-210 at OD breached health standards.
Whenever adverse documented facts are raised the nuclear proponents on these threads throw in red herrings with a very occasional feeble defence. There is scant acknowledgement of the grim facts, scant debate and exposing Japanese citizens to radiation is trivialised by the deniers.
Would you buy a used car from these industry shills who sow the seeds of deception and who see truth as irrelevant? Let’s cut them loose. The avaricious nuclear industry is sucking off the teat of a nineteenth century, mired in ignorance and pestilence.
freecountry
March 17, 2011 at 3:21 pmYou could have the decency to appeal for calm, or better yet, remain silent and let those on the ground deal with this complex catastrophe until it’s over. When the postmortem results are in, you can crow to your heart’s content about how the tragedy supports your political agenda, and I won’t get in your way.
Frank Campbell
March 17, 2011 at 3:31 pmMR James
There are no wind turbine infestations near us. I mention this quite often, because the urge to say “nimby” is an itch the Crikey knitting circle can’t resist….
Frank Campbell
March 17, 2011 at 3:54 pmFlower:
Why is it that whenever an “X causes Y-nasty” is mentioned, Crikey knitters knit lists of “A-Z also cause Y-nasties”, then giggle in unison?
Every single dispute.
Today it’s nuclear pission: Death by power-plant? (clickclickclick) woddaboud death by ladders, killer bees, hydro dams, pedestrian crossings, coal mines, smoking, asbestos, trapped in a lift with Andrew Bolt, a loo with Alan Jones, the Titanic, listening to Gillard, climbing the North Face of Ross Garnault’s ego (no sorry, that’s suicide), war, plague, cancer and attemped intercourse with a giant stingray…
We end up with the Great Crikey Intellectual Quilt, which is then raffled to pay for Rundle’s research into casual sex in Sweden…
green-orange
March 17, 2011 at 5:32 pmIt is the comparable to Cherrnobyl ; in both the fuel rods became hot and caught on fire because of a lack of cooling water.
If you look at the report on Chernobyl, you’ll find it was basically impossible to stop once the fuel rods caught fire ; more water simply increased the steam pressure in the reactor which _caused_ the initial explosion.
Then once the water was vapourised, there was a larger explosion – which would NOT have been contained by a container vessel. In fact, the explosion would have probably been WORSE.
The container vessel is a pressure vessel designed to contain radioactive steam and gases released from the reactor if it gets too hot. It is NOT designed to contain an explosion.
MLF
March 17, 2011 at 5:36 pm@Gavin at 1.16pm – yeah, thats an interesting take too, and I think I agree. Or at least I’m pretty sure I don’t disagree. Even if it does sound a bit deep for our pro-nuclear elected officials.
But if it’s technology for technology’s sake, rather than need, at what point do the costs – fiscal, human, environmental, ideological – begin to outweigh the benefits?
Einsten and all those guys rued the day they invented this stuff. In 70 years we seemed to have learnt nothing.
Gavin Moodie
March 17, 2011 at 6:03 pm@ MLF
I agree that even the most ardent technophiles reach a limit. I think the US has reached that limit in sending humans to the moon and beyond: the US seems most unlikely to try that again for several decades.
But I think many are well short of that limit in nuclear power because it has become normalised in many OECD countries and because there seems the prospect of further scientific and technological advances which may make nuclear power more attractive.
The West is ambivalent about new technologies, but in the end there is a preference for introducing new technologies which is deep within the West’s economic, political and social systems. Witness the introduction of in vitro fertilisation, genetically modified food and gene therapy. These new technologies may be good or bad, but they are being introduced despite deep ethical, economic or practical reservations held by many people.
MLF
March 17, 2011 at 7:43 pmYar, yar. I see your point more clearly now. Thanks.
syzygium
March 17, 2011 at 10:04 pm@ Frank Campbell: What a biting criticism. We are all humbled. You are right, of course. I, personally, am in much greater danger of dying falling off a ladder than from nuclear radiation. Are you planning to hop on an airplane and deliver this message in person of how misguided their fears are to the people of Japan?
@Free Country: I think the risk of a Chernobyl-scale disaster is greater than a mass panic in Tokyo caused by the musings of the comments section of Crikey. Please allow us this indulgence, what else can we do?
@Gavin and MLF: Interesting discussion, I think you’re on to something big. The Enlightenment, which no question made our world a much better place, also has caused us to lose our humility. I think we are gradually relearning an ancient lesson.