Gransnet forums

Science/nature/environment

Good news from Fukushima

(38 Posts)
Bags Mon 17-Dec-12 10:45:24

Info from the Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation
Fifty-ninth session (21-25 May 2012)

(a) To date, there have been no health effects attributed to radiation exposure observed among workers, the people with the highest radiation exposures. To date, no health effects attributable to radiation exposure have been observed among children or any other member of the population;
(b) As of 31 January 2012, a total of 20,115 occupationally exposed people, comprising company workers (17 per cent) and external contractors (83 per cent) of the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), were involved in the on-site mitigation activities. About 66 per cent of the workforce are reported to have received effective doses equal to or below 10 millisieverts (mSv). In addition, rescuers and volunteers were occupationally exposed. Six TEPCO workers received effective doses above 250 mSv (the maximum reported dose as of 31 January 2012 was 679 mSv); the largest part of those doses resulted from intakes of 131I, 134Cs and 137Cs. About 170 occupationally exposed people received effective doses above 100 mSv. It should be emphasized that there are no data available in the open literature that allow estimates to be made of thyroid dose for occupationally exposed people. The Committee has requested further information from the Japanese authorities on worker doses and monitoring data;
(c) A system was established on 20 May 2011 for the management of radiation exposures and medical monitoring of occupationally exposed people involved in dealing with the emergency situation. As of 10 March 2012, none of the six deaths noted since 11 March 2011 had been attributed to exposure to ionizing radiation;
(d) Although there were several cases of occupationally exposed people with exposure to radiation from documented skin contamination, no clinically observable effects were reported.

Full report here (top link on the page):

www.unscear.org/unscear/en/data/index_right.html

Jendurham Mon 16-Sep-13 00:59:13

Japan is today closing down its last nuclear power station.
Good.

Oldgreymare Mon 02-Sep-13 08:27:06

Well quoted Jendurham, particularly
'Common sense on the contrary would suggest that the burden of proof should lie on the man who wants to introduce the change'.
Sadly, the 'men who want to introduce change' often have vested interests, more money to throw at their cause, and louder voices!

Jendurham Sun 01-Sep-13 17:29:32

Nuclear and fracking together worry me. The Bowland shale is not far from Sellafield.
I have rediscovered Small is Beautiful by Schumacher from the 70s.
"The religion of economics promotes an idolatry of rapid change......The burden of proof is placed on those who take the ecological viewpoint: unless they can produce evidence of marked injury to man, the change will proceed. Common sense on the contrary would suggest that the burden of proof should lie on the man who wants to introduce the change. He has to demonstrate that there cannot be any damaging consequences. "
"Disused nuclear power stations will stand as unsightly monuments to unquiet man's assumption that nothing but tranquility, from now on, stretches before him, or else that the future counts as nothing compared with the slightest economic gain now."
If anyone else still has a copy, it's worth reading the whole chapter on nuclear power.

j08 Sun 01-Sep-13 16:10:43

Yes. I guess I just meant that ours, these days, are safe. And yes, we are lucky not to have to contend with earthquakes and tsunamis.

Tbh, I am inclined to think that most British built things are better than foreign stuff. shock

gracesmum Sun 01-Sep-13 15:36:22

Sorry about the "bold" throughout - an asterisk got missed out!

gracesmum Sun 01-Sep-13 15:35:37

I think what I have just read on the BBC website must be what nightowl is referring to?

"Radiation levels around Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant are 18 times higher than previously thought, Japanese authorities have warned.
Last week the plant's operator reported radioactive water had leaked from a storage tank into the ground.
It now says readings taken near the leaking tank on Saturday showed radiation was high enough to prove lethal within four hours of exposure"

How do we know we are "better at it than the Japanese" j08? What I would say though, is that as we do not live in a part of the world subject to regular and devastating earthquakes, we do not face *ALL the same dangers.

annodomini Sun 01-Sep-13 13:18:31

Such a dogmatic statement, J08. What evidence do you have to back it up?

nightowl Sun 01-Sep-13 12:30:33

Are we better than the Japanese? How do we know that? And considering that Chernobyl affected Welsh sheep (and presumably people) then my view is the world is just too small to take such risks. I don't have any better ideas, but then I'm not an expert on such matters. But if the only option is a form of power that has the potential to destroy the planet then I think it's time someone came up with a better alternative (or range of alternatives).

j08 Sun 01-Sep-13 12:20:25

We need power and nuclear is the only way for the present time. We are very good at it now. Better than the Japanese.

Or do you have better ideas carbon?

nightowl Sun 01-Sep-13 11:31:55

news.sky.com/story/1135655/fukushima-radiation-readings-18-times-higher

Not such good news from Fukushima. I don't mind admitting that nuclear power scares the hell out of me. I am no more reassured of its safety than I was when I was a member of CND in the 80's.

I worry for the workers who have been exposed to these risks at close hand.

FlicketyB Sat 24-Aug-13 14:49:03

carbon, that is no answer at all. It is just a pious platitude.

You always give us to understand that you have studied the problem of climate change extensively and intensively. You must at some time have considered the alternatives and the problems we face over the next 15 years, in particular the power cuts that could happen within the next five years unless we get to grips with the energy deficit that is building up.

I repeat my question: How would you structure the energy industry to provide adequate 24/7 power for the next 15 years? I mean from 2015 - 2030?

carboncareful Sat 24-Aug-13 13:27:13

There is no one way. We have to pursue every avenue that is not dangerous.
Re Fukushima, there have been two incidents in the news: contaminated water has been leaking into the ground all along and they didn't know it. that's how clever they are !!!!

FlicketyB Tue 20-Aug-13 22:38:08

I think the continuing critical state of the plant has always been well publicised. The information about radioactiveleakage into the sea has been known for some months.

Carbon How would you structure the energy industry to provide adequate 24/7 power for the next 15 years? I mean from 2015 - 2030?

Oldgreymare Tue 20-Aug-13 22:26:42

Well, that didn't last long!
I've just watched the news and it seems that there is still a major problem!
I do wonder whether we are drip fed 'good' news in the hope that we will ignore the bad news when it is reported or is that being far too cynical?
sad

Ariadne Tue 20-Aug-13 19:02:34

I for one, am not suggesting that there isn't a potentially serious issue here. I was just surprised by the information source - "The Vine of Life" - cited, which did not seem to be particularly credible given the contextual issues on the same page.

carboncareful Tue 20-Aug-13 18:50:17

Suggest you watch the news today; and read your papers tomorrow. Radioactive water has been leaking into the sea around Fukushima.....and, as is usual with governments, the true facts have been kept from the public.
Nuclear power is dangerous. full stop. Those in power want it because that's how they make plutonium to make bombs.....full stop

Ariadne Tue 20-Aug-13 09:56:53

It is indeed, Nfk and I agree with you on where to place credence.

Oldgreymare Tue 20-Aug-13 09:04:09

For now! hmm

NfkDumpling Tue 20-Aug-13 08:39:56

I give a report from the United Nations Scientific Committee far more credence than anything published by governments or reliously biased organisations. Cancers and other problems may come to light in the future but it looks as if the precautions the Japanese put in place are paying off at present - and this is excellent news.

FlicketyB Tue 20-Aug-13 07:55:45

I saw an article abut him that suggested that it was a great danger to him, but not that he had died.

Jendurham Tue 20-Aug-13 00:05:14

I seem to remember just recently that the man in charge of Fukushima has died of cancer. But I cannot find any reference to it any more. Can anyone else find it?

FlicketyB Mon 19-Aug-13 20:49:42

I read the article on 'Vine of Life'. I started to list all the unsubstantiated statements in it - and then I stopped and decided just to give a big sigh and move on.

I find James Lovelock's (the environmentalist that developed the theory of the earth as Gaia) analysis of the results of Chernobyl much more convincing.

Ariadne Mon 19-Aug-13 20:34:55

Yes, Jess it is a serious matter!

JessM Mon 19-Aug-13 19:06:21

I believe the leakage from Fukushima continues to get worse.
It is also the case that any long term damage from radiation is just that, and may cause cancers in the future. However the verdict on the Belarussian disaster in Chernobyl is that worrying about the effects of radiation seems to have done more harm than the radiation itself.

MiceElf Mon 19-Aug-13 18:12:42

It makes the monster raving loony party look very sane. I've just followed a few links around the web and whoever runs this outfit is seriously deranged.