Aug 3, 2011

Fukushima disaster: worse than Hiroshima

More gravely serious truths about the severity of the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster following the earthquake and tsunami of March 11 have emerged.

Ben Sandilands — Editor of Plane Talking

Ben Sandilands

Editor of Plane Talking

More gravely serious truths about the severity of the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster following the earthquake and tsunami of March 11 have emerged.


Leave a comment

152 thoughts on “Fukushima disaster: worse than Hiroshima

  1. fredex

    Bloody hell!

    Watch the nuke apologists start to fall over themselves to obfuscate.

  2. Mark Duffett

    It’s possible that the reluctance of officials to facilitate evacuations stemmed from the IAEA finding that far and away the greatest source of casualties arising from Chernobyl was the stress and disruption associated with forced mass evacuations.

  3. Captain Planet

    Thank you Ben,

    Calls for calm from Nuclear proponents in the immediate aftermath of the disaster were, on balance, probably justified.

    Until more information was known there was little to gain by hysterical doomsaying.

    At this point, however, very little that is positive can be said about the scale of this emergency.

    The Japanese government and TEPCO have achieved the unthinkable – they have outdone the cold war era Soviet government in secrecy, callousness and deception.

    I await the usual coterie of nuclear apologists reassuring us that such a disaster could never happen with a modern nuclear reactor.

    Closely followed by nuclear enthusiasts getting all excited about new prototype thorium reactors, which don’t exist but will supposedly be even safer.

    Until they, too, melt down catastrophically, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and cancers, and untold human misery.

    When there is ample evidence that the Nuclear Power Industry cannot function in the modern world without massive government subsidies, due to the high inherent risk of the operation and high costs, why we would even consider continuing with such an outdated technological terror, is beyond me.

    Nuclear Power was a bold experiment, but frankly, it has been shown time and again to be just too dangerous.

    Any business manager is ultimately in the risk management business. This means ranking the potential worst outcome, against the likelihood of that outcome.

    In this case, the potential worst outcome is complete catastrophe on a scale which rivals the most severe adverse events ever experienced by humankind, whether natural or manmade.

    The likelihood of this outcome, some would say, is vanishingly small. Chernobyl and Fukushima suggest otherwise, and even if the likelihood is ranked as “Unlikely in the extreme” the risk is still too great due to the phenomenally terrible consequences.

  4. Captain Planet

    @ Mark Duffet,

    It’s possible. But do you really think that was what drove this coverup?

  5. Phen

    And all this is now relegated to the status of “world news in brief” at best. All we can do is hope that the truth is somehow closer to TEPCO’s version of events than it unfortunately appears.

  6. Michael Wilbur-Ham (MWH)

    I would like to know how much of the Japanese talk was incompetence and how much was deliberate spin.

    We certainly live in a world where spin is effective. The first reports get all the attention, and that is all that most of the public remember. Drip feed the truth later on and most people don’t notice.

    The assignation of Bin Larden provides a good case study. Huge news that he had been killed resisting the US soldiers, over the following few days more information (and ‘clarifications’) emerged suggesting to the rational that he was deliberately killed, and only today is there the first leak saying that the mission was to kill and not capture. Thanks to spin a deliberate assassination will be remember as a capture mission during which the US were forced to kill because he resisted arrest.

    In the same way, in a few years time, I’m sure that most of the Australian public will remember Fukushima as a fairly minor nuclear event, and those saying otherwise will be thought of as extremists.

  7. Robert Merkel

    With respect, Ben, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    Do you even understand how the casualty estimates from the Chernobyl accident that are so hotly debated have actually been arrived at?

  8. paddy

    Bloody hell!! That embedded video is a must watch. 🙁

  9. Mark from Melbourne

    It would great if any one had a video grab of Andrew Bolt on Insiders that weekend. He was carrying on something fierce about how everyone was overreacting massively about the nuclear risk. Denouncing people left right and centre. (Sorry, didn’t mean to include the right).

  10. nicolino

    Tuna are a far ranging fish and I don’t recall anything being said about the possibility of contaminated fish making it to our canned tuna industry.
    Perhaps someone can enlighten me.

Leave a comment

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details