International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (pdf), University of Florida College of Medicine, Weill-Cornell Medical College, etc. (2014):
- The Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant accident is an example of a contemporary nuclear plant accident with serious implications.
- The Fukushima NPP accident has had health implications due to the high levels of radiation released and vast area over which the radiation has disperse.
- The significant radiation release, as likened to Chernobyl, reflects the context and severity of the Fukushima accident.
- The level of 137Cs that was released is likened to Chernobyl levels, with 100,000 TBq released.
- Radioactive plume dispersion occurs worldwide, far exceeding 300 miles previously mentioned. This should implicate radiological hazard at distances otherwise overlooked.
Potassium Iodide Distribution
- Radioactive plumes from the Chernobyl accident containing 131I caused benign and malignant thyroid nodules to develop, especially in children within a 310 miles radius of the incident.
- The current recommendation is for KI [potassium iodide] availability to people 200 miles from a NPP. Plume radii for nuclear events have been shown to exceed 300 [miles]. Extension of KI availability to 300 miles only further underscores the inadequacy of current preparedness plans.
- In regard to KI prophylaxis, TEPCO utilized 17,500 KI tablets for 2,000 onsite workers… with one individual receiving and taking 85 tablets.
- Radiological plumes containing 131I cause benign and malignant thyroid nodules to develop within a 300 mile radius… This necessitates KI pre-distribution to all schools, hospitals and other of-interest sites extending 300 miles from any nuclear reactor. Evacuation or sequestering is impossible in congested urban areas… There is currently virtually no compliance with [the] 20 miles radius KI pre-distribution law, section 127 of the Bioterrorism Act of 2002. In fact, there is little compliance with the 10 miles Ki pre-distribution radius law in the United States.
- Japan did not utilize KI for prophylaxis of the general public, acknowledging it was not prepared to act accordingly.
- Study: Daily release from Fukushima of 100+ Quadrillion becquerels of cesium-137 early on in crisis “seems reasonable” — Chernobyl total release was ~70 Quadrillion Bq of cs-137
- Canadian officials estimated Fukushima cesium-137 release almost double Chernobyl — Based on the “most conservative and credible” projections
- EU-funded Research: Fukushima atmospheric release of 210 quadrillion becquerels of cesium-137 used as upper bound in simulation — Chernobyl estimated at 70 to 85 quadrillion
- Marine Chemist in Jan. 2014: Latest numbers I have are Fukushima has released 80 Quadrillion Bq of cesium-137 (Chernobyl estimated at 70 Quadrillion) — “The radioactive plume itself has actually arrived… it’s already here” on west coast of N. America (AUDIO)
- Gov’t Report: Fukushima released up to 181 Quadrillion Bq of cesium, Chernobyl was 105 Quadrillion — Radioactive material to flow from Japan “for years to come” — Fukushima radionuclides have now spread “throughout N. Pacific”
Gov’t approves plan to ‘drain’ Fukushima nuclear waste into ocean — Professor: Monitoring necessary to detect ‘worrisome signals’ — Expert: “It’s completely unsafe… impossible to remove 100s of radioactive materials”
NHK, Jan 21, 2015 (emphasis added): Regulators approve Fukushima wastewater drainage — Japan’s nuclear regulator has approved a plan by [TEPCO] to drain filtered wastewater from the firm’s crippled Fukushima Daiichi plant into the sea… The firm also plans to reduce the level of radioactive material in the water before releasing it into the nearby Pacific. On Wednesday, the Nuclear Regulation Authority approved TEPCO’s plan to install drainpipes and a pumping system and to reduce the level of radioactive cesium-137 to less than one becquerel per liter.
NHK Transcript, Jan 21, 2015: Japanese regulators have approved a controversial plan by [TEPCO]. They say TEPCO officials can flush filtered waste water into the ocean… Fisherman: “We can’t trust Tepco… If they proceed with their plan the situation will surely go back to how it was before. I’m worried the government and Tepco will act to suit themselves.”
Wall St Journal, Jan 21, 2015: Japan’s nuclear regulator has officially called on [Tepco] to work toward discharging low-level contaminated water… just two days after a worker fell into [a tank] used to store contaminated water… Tepco is using a processing system [that] is unable to take out the tritium [and] is reluctant to release it into the ocean to avoid… criticism from neighboring countries and some nations with a Pacific Ocean coastline… there is no detailed study about tritium’s long-time effect on animal genes. Mamoru Takata, a Kyoto University professor and expert on radiation’s long-term effects, said monitoring would be necessary to
detect any worrisome signals.
TEPCO: [ALPS] is designed to remove mostremaining radioactive contaminants
TEPCO (pdf): (ALPS) — Removal capacity:Reduce 62 nuclides below the density limit
Asahi Shimbun in Jan. 2012: “To prevent a further contamination of the sea [Tepco] plans to remove about 1,000 kinds of radioactive materials from water”
Japan Atomic Energy Agency (pdf), Feb 2014: TOPICS Fukushima — [W]e carried out detailed calculations… for 1,200 radionuclides, and the results were incorporated into a database.
Dr. Gordon Edwards, court-certified nuclear expert, Aug 8, 2014 (50:00 in): It can’t be dumped into the ocean, because it’s completely unsafe because of these fission products. They have built over 1,000 large tanks, huge tanks… that contain this very, very radioactively contaminated water. At the moment they’re trying to filter out these fission products… It’s impossible for them to remove all those hundreds of radioactive materials. They know how to remove about 62 of them, but there’s other ones that they cannot.
Asahi: ‘Underground holes’ may be needed to search for Fukushima’s 3 molten cores — Did fuel ‘escape’ via basement? — Experts unsure if Tepco will allow them to search for corium
Asahi Shimbun, Jan. 24, 2014: [Tepco] has yet to learn where the nuclear fuel currently lies. The locations and amounts of the melted nuclear fuel should be identified by the time the government and TEPCO plan to start extracting it in the first half of fiscal 2020. Even if the melted fuel has escaped into the basement levels, it can still be located by installing [muon] sensors in underground holes, the scientists said.
Kyodo News, Jan. 23, 2014: The condition of the melted nuclear fuel remains unknown […] “The (cosmic ray) measurement system can be installed easily,” said team member Hidekazu Kakuno, associate professor at Tokyo Metropolitan University. “We are ready to use it at the Fukushima Daiichi plant if TEPCO cooperates.”
RT, Jan. 23, 2014: [Fumihiko Takasaki, a researcher at the High Energy Accelerator Research Organisation] claims that TEPCO has not yet officially confirmed that it will use the technology it is being offered.
- Gov’t experts warn about mass of corium melting deeper than Japan, Tepco claim — Fukushima cores “could be eroded more extensively than announced” February 10, 2014
- US Experts: Fukushima melted fuel “a concern for millennia”; Risk of criticality from corium moving, redistributing — Tepco Chief: Certainly a difficult path ahead… we’ll be able to move forward if we can find damaged fuel (VIDEO) June 4, 2014
- Japan Nuclear Experts: Footage shows ‘major problem’ at Fukushima Unit 1; Cesium release to continue for next 5 decades — Tepco: Even if we knew where it’s broken, how can we stop it? — “Still in the dark” about other 2 units (VIDEO) February 9, 2014
- Japan TV ‘News Flash’: Officials fear melted reactor fuel is now exposed at Fukushima — Tepco: We don’t know at this point if fuel is uncovered — Large drop in water level — Experts ‘struggling’ to find condition of nuclear cores, nothing is known for all 3 reactors (VIDEO) June 10, 2014
- Nuclear-friendly Magazine: Fukushima melted fuel is glowing, could still be ‘lava-like’ — Only vaguest idea of where corium is — Pouring concrete in structure being discussed — They may not be able to decommission plant, but have to give it a try March 6, 2014
‘Historical Weirdness’: Expert says US gov’t has failed public by not testing Pacific for radiation — A ‘very obvious’ need since Fukushima is leaking into ocean
MIT Center for International Studies — Japan’s Continuing Nuclear Nightmare, Oct 24, 2013:
Ken Buesseler, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (at 1:30:00 in): Talking about some of the failures […] what I’ve discovered on the academic side, is that when we went to offer our service, we wanted to go and help out, we didn’t have an agency in this country that really had an interest. NOAA was given the authority to look at this disaster and see what the US response should be. Their reaction was to continue this modeling effort to try and model where these things might be at. Not to do the on-the-ground field efforts. They said we don’t do that, we don’t measure radionuclides. Then they’d point across the aisle to the Department of Energy […] the ocean, that’s not their thing, it’s salty — that’s not their problem. Here we have in our country many reactors on oceans and don’t have even an authority or body that has a mission that includes fate of those radionuclides in the ocean. I think that’s a failure that we still haven’t solved […] It’s very obvious when you hear the stories about leaking tanks on land getting into the ocean, there’s a connection there. But we failed to fill that in, our ability to understand the consequences. […] One example of something we’re still trying to plug up as a failure.
‘Your Call’ hosted by Rose Aguilar, KALW, Jan. 16, 2014:
Ken Buesseler, senior scientist in marine chemistry & geochemistry at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (At 5:30 in): Historical weirdness going on — NOAA doesn’t study radionuclides per se at all in their programs, so they were looking at some of the debris and their predictions, but not the radioactive contaminants. That typically falls to the Department of Energy, but they tend to only focus their resources and expertise on land and groundwater […] not the general spread of radionuclides in the marine environment. So, we kind of fell between the cracks […] no one was responsible.