The End of Japan as we know it ?

The "Atomic Age" is definitely over. So over. 1 year after the Fukushima meltdowns and reactor catastrophes, Japan and important parts could be literally standing on the edge of a razor blade. Not only 4 crippled reactors are still posing an immense health threat, but also the 6 spent fuel basins on the site of the Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant, with spent uranium rods are heavily damaged and are considered by international experts as a huge problem. A new earthquake could very well damage the spent fuel pools and lead to massive leaks of both radioactive materials and cooling water into the ground water and Pacific, but furthermore an uncontrolled chain reaction triggered by the used fuel could mean the end of Japan as we know it today, and trigger a catastrophe of epic proportion. This is not a panicky wake up call, but a desperate description of the situation in Fukushima as it presents itself today. What makes the spent fuel pools in the case of Fukushima so dangerous:

...the spent fuel rod pools that sit right next door to the reactors. The storage pools are packed with radioactive uranium, rise several stories above ground and are always close to the reactor, thus facilitating easy transfer of the fuel rods. Their name— especially “spent” and “pool”— conveys calm dissipation. But spent fuel rod pools are actually highly radioactive, very unstable, extremely dangerous and, compared with reactors, not well supported, contained or looked over. The spent rods give off considerable amounts of “decay heat” and thus must be submerged in constantly circulating water. Expose them to air for a day or two, and they begin to combust, giving off large amounts of radioactive cesium-137, a very toxic, long-lasting, aggressively penetrating radioactive element with a half-life of thirty years. When cesium-137 it enters the environment, it essentially acts like potassium and is taken up by plants and animals that use potassium....(The Nation, C. Parenti 15.03.2012)

The spent fuel pools are situated in the reactor bulding on one of the top floors. We know from the satellite fixes that most roofs of the 4 reactors have collapsed and smoke is still evaporating from the spent-fuel level. This can only lead to the conclusion that the water in the spent-fuel pools is evaporating or worse boiling. Once the cooling waters gone, the used fuel will just catch fire and thus create a chain reaction, a heavy chain reaction in open air, like an open-air reactor, making it impossible to work on any of the other crippled reactors and thus provoking chain reactions in the other fuel tanks and reactors on the Dai-chi site. German State television ZDF recently called this scenario "likely to happen". If that would be the case they had found a word to describe it "Armageddon". Japan would thus cease to exist as we know it today. Chernobyl would be a scratch in comparison to a multiple open-air meltdown & chain reaction, and disturbingly, the Dai-ichi Fukushima Plant has enough material to match up this disaster:

... the spent fuel pools are of significant concern, Marvin Resnikoff, a radioactive waste management consultant, said in a Wednesday press briefing organized by the nonprofit organization Physicians for Social Responsibility. Resnikoff noted that the pools at each reactor are thought to have contained the following amounts of spent fuel, according to Mainichi Daily News:  

Reactor No. 1: 50 tons of nuclear fuel, Reactor No. 2: 81 tons, Reactor No. 3: 88 tons, Reactor No. 4: 135 tons, Reactor No. 5: 142 tonsReactor No. 6: 151 tons 

Also, a separate ground-level fuel pool contains 1,097 tons of fuel; and some 70 tons of nuclear materials are kept on the grounds in dry storage... (Scientific American, K. Harmon 17-03-2012)

The fuel pools are already in a desolate state in reactor 4's spent fuel pools, evaporation and steam could be seen for months now. Ant the spent fuel pools are even visible from outside. The roof has supposedly collapsed.
The blueish area on the center of the picture is the spent fuel pool (c) D. Gutterfelder, AP

The spent fuel pool can be seen from the crane. On this picture TEPCO took a sample measuring both the temperature and isotopes found in the pool. Note the steam on the right side of the picture.
(c) TEPCO / Reuters

What personally strikes me most are metaphysical and sheer existentialist questions, that nuclear energy confronts us with: Not only have we to provide security and stability for the waste of the power plants for more than 200'000 years, that's over 6000 generations, the only human activity that forces us to think in such numbers, but Fukushima could very well be the first time that nuclear energy threatens the integrity of a whole country and region. It is time to end this. And we can, without further ado!  Not tomorrow, but now. Japan has only 1 reactor left in operating mode, 53 are now shut down. China is reviewing their plans of massively building new reactors, even if they are far from perfect, the European stress tests triggered more protests all over the continent. A quick exit is possible in most countries. It is this generation's duty to end the "Atomic Age" or it will end us. This is not a cheesy and pathetic end to an article but a last wake up call, for an industry and political class that failed to learned the lessons from Mayak, Three Mile Island, Sellafield and Chernobyl.

Sources

http://www.thenation.com/article/159234/fukushimas-spent-fuel-rods-pose-grave-danger

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nuclear-fuel-fukushima

Big Hug and Thanks to my fellow good soul Véronique who proof-read my article so late at night

Fukushima: Newsreel & links for last week

Dear readers,
I decided to post a vast link collection of the hottest news from last week around the Fukushima Dai-ichi incident with small annotations.
Thank you, Good reading, keep up the good fight,
yours,
                                           Philippe Schockweiler




Kyodo News 19-3-2012:
Woman collapsing in No-Entry Zone aswell as workers - confirmed deaths.
http://www.47news.jp/CN/201203/CN2012032001001682.html


Manichi News, Kyodo 20-3-2012:
March Tsunami & Earthquake damaged also other nuclear power plants. Tokai NPP leaked 1.5 tons of radioactive water into environment.
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20120320p2g00m0dm015000c.html


Japan Times, 20-3-2012
Iitate ground highly radioactive - up to 153'000 bq/kg.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120320a3.html


Bloomberg, 18-3-2012
Food (in)security in Japan: 1% of the controls in comparision with Belarus & Chernobyl
... Inadequate testing by the government of rice, milk and fish from the region has prompted consumers to leave them on supermarket shelves and instead select produce from other regions or from overseas. Checks conducted nationwide so far are only 1 percent of what Belarus checked in the past year, a quarter century after the Chernobyl disaster, according to Nobutaka Ishida, a researcher at Norinchukin Research Institute...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2012-03-19/fukushima-farmers-face-decades-of-tainted-crops-as-fears-linger.html


Bloomberg 18-3-2012
Devastating Impact of Fukushima Disaster on Japanese Farmers: 
... Almost 100,000 farmers lost about 58 billion yen ($694 million) by March 1, or 25 percent of production, according to JA, the country’s biggest agricultural group. Imports of farm products jumped 16 percent to 5.58 trillion yen in 2011, according to the agriculture ministry... 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2012-03-19/fukushima-farmers-face-decades-of-tainted-crops-as-fears-linger.html


The Yomiuri Shibun, 18-3-2012
Radioactive Plankton found 600km away from Fukushima... The research team collected animal plankton at 17 locations between 30 kilometers and 600 kilometers east of the plant in June last year, about three months after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami that triggered the nuclear crisis. Cesium-137 was detected in all of the collected plankton, which in a dry state was found to contain 0.3 to 56.4 becquerels per kilogram. The farther away the plankton was collected, the less radiation it contained, according to the team...
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T120317003393.htm


Fukushima Diary, 16-3-2012
Reactortype of Fukushima: Problems known since the 1980's
In the 1980's simulations showed catastrophic results in the GE-Mk1 reactor (the one used in Fukushima) during meltdowns & accidents.
http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/03/corium-may-have-been-penetrated-15-hours-after-meltdown/


Japanese Investigation Committee for the Accident in Fukushima, 15-3-2012Tepco still waits with the final report - only preliminary conclusions published!
http://icanps.go.jp/eng/interim-report.html


Tepco's plant statuts report,  16-3-2012
Note the unusually high hydrogen concentration and temperatures in reactor 3. Aswell as the
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/images/handouts_120316_02-e.pdf


Yomiuri Shibun, 16-3-2012
High Concentration of Caesium in Japanese wildlife! Rabbits contaminated with 560bq/kg above safe limit! 
More and more studies show the devastating effect of the incident on Japanese wild- and naturelife.
http://www.yomidr.yomiuri.co.jp/page.jsp?id=56043


Kyodo News, 15-3-2012
Difficult task to remove spent fuel from reactor.
Chaotic state of the reactor makes it (nearly) impossible to decommission the plant properly.
http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2012/03/147327.html


Dr. Helen Caldicott Interview, 15-3-2012
Nobel Prize Nominee claims: Very early and high number of lumps in thyroid with Fukushima children.
A phenomenon seldomly observed that a nuclear incident causes so many lumps and complications only one year after the catastrophe.
http://greenacreradio.blogspot.de/2012/03/march-15-2012-lessons-from-fukushima-dr.html


ENENEWS, via NHK, 15-3-2012
Radiation too high for workers to continue repairs in suppression chamber of Reactor 2 & 3
http://enenews.com/nhk-radiation-levels-too-high-for-humans-to-continue-at-reactors-no-2-and-3-workers-must-repair-damage-to-suppression-chambers-video


Interview with Prof. Karl Grossmann, 14-3-2012:"Fukushima's toll will be worse"
http://majority.fm/2012/03/13/313-karl-grossman-fallout-from-fukushima/#


Arnold "Arnie" Gunderson via Xinhua 14-3-2012:
"Fukushima as bad or worse then Chernobyl

Chernobyl was a single reactor running at about 7 percent capacity when rupture ... [Fukushima] had three reactors running at 100 percent capacity and seven other reactors with spent fuel pools that were crippled

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2012-03/12/content_14814975.htm

French Nuclear Experts: Risk of Explosion in Fukushima still imminent! 14-3-2012
via France 24:

http://www.france24.com/en/20120306-one-year-later-fukushima-still-threat-radiation-explosion-tepco-residents-corium

The Economic Times: 1-3-2012
Subcontractor workers report of their treatment by Tepco. Tepco denies deaths at plant although they occur!

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/et-cetera/fears-for-safety-at-fukushima-one-year-on/articleshow/12093884.cms

25km from Fukushima, Radiation sickness strikes an 18 year old teacher
via Al-Jazzera correspondant in Minamisoma, Fukushima Prefecture

Mysterious highly radioactice powder found all over Fukushima region:


Further reading:
http://enenews.com/massive-amount-of-black-substance-found-on-road-in-minamisoma-after-several-days-of-rain-and-snow-emitting-50-microsvhr-photo

Interview with Keith Baverstock

During the “Fukushima 1 Year” Conference, organized in the European Parliament by the Green Group (Greens/EFA) I had the chance to interview Keith Baverstock. “Docent (adjunct professor) in the Department of Environmental Science at the University of Eastern Finland, Keith Baverstock studies the effect of ionizing radiation on the cells and has taken over the years a special interest in effects of low doses of radiation, the toxicity of depleted uranium and the consequences of accidents such as Chernobyl and now Fukushima.”*

Photo: Christian Gapp (c)

Approximately 1 year after the Fukushima catastrophe, how do you see the situation in Japan:

Baverstock: Well, I think the situation is pretty desperate. But I am limited in what I can say and what that might involve in terms of health effects. Because we simply do not have enough information with which to do that. It's pretty clear that in the village of Iiate and around there, there are people which have been exposed to months to levels which are similar to levels which are present in the settlements around the Chernobyl reactor, and where people stay only for 12 days roughly, at the highest. Those people we haven't been able to study because they've been dispersed. But I think there should be a study of these inhabitants of Iiate, because this is potentially valuable information. But the situation in Japan is quite unprecedented: There are 3 cores that have melted down, actually melted trough almost certainly and the secondary containment has been blown away. So there has been no limit to the release and we saw this huge release of Xenon-133, that's an indication that the fuel has melted and all the volatiles have come of. It is perhaps surprising that not more cesium has come out, certainly there must be still a lot retained in the molten fuel but precisely what is the state of the molten fuel, is it just lying on the reactor floor? Has it eaten into the concrete? Is there a danger of eating all the way trough the concrete? That's getting more remote as time goes by. And nobody can find this out, because nobody can get close enough to see what's happening. So, it's an extremely desperate situation, not at all like the situation that national governments have tried to suggest that, well I mean that one of the most ridiculous things is that the IAEA(International Atomic Energy Agency) reporting several months after the initial meltdown, that in fact these reactors are under cold shutdown. “Cold shutdown” doesn't mean anything if the fuel has run out and is at the bottom of the reactor.

After “Chernobyl” it was difficult for scientists to refer to comparable data. Some people tried to compare at the time “Chernobyl” to the data which had been collected from the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Now we have a lot of data from “Chernobyl”, can we use it to compare it to Fukushima?

Baverstock: Well I think we do have a lot of data which I think is useful to compare to Fukushima, but even tough it's 26 years since the “Chernobyl accident”, this long delay periods for diseases to appear after exposure. So there's still a lot to learn from the Chernobyl accident, and the European Commission has commissioned a study back in 2008, to see what else could be learned from the Chernobyl accident. And that study, which I was a part of in 2010, with a main recommendation that a long-term lifespan study should be setup, along the lines of the RERS-Study. And so far no action has been taken. We are now in 2012. We've had the Fukushima accident and there's undoubtedly a huge amount of information that would be gained from further studies of the Chernobyl accident in terms of setting up from existing cohorts, a lifespan study. The second thing is at the time of Chernobyl, it may not have looked appropriate to compare the effects of a low dose of radiation spread over a long period of time with the Japanese bomb survivor data. But now, we have enough data from Tetcha-River (river contaminated by the “Mayak Incident”), from radiation worker studies, to show us that there is in fact no difference. In fact it is even possible that exposure at a low-dose rate is even more damaging than exposure to a very short-lived flash of radiation. So it is quite legitimate to use the precisely the values that you get from Japanese bomb survivors and apply them to situations like Chernobyl or Fukushima.


* http://www.kbaverstock.org/ (Keith's personal Webpage with lots of information on both Fukushima and Chernobyl, his publications and interesting data)

Increase of Death Rate in U.S due to Fukushima-Fallout ?

Is there a connection between Fukushima Nuclear fallout and excess deaths of 14'000 in the U.S ? Renowned nuclear expert Joe Mangano and Janette Sherman, toxicologist and contributing editor of the 2009 New York Academy of Sciences "Chernobyl, Consequences for People and Environment" says yes there is, and it's comparable to the excess rates of U.S deaths from Chernobyl

 Furthermore Dr. Sherman told me that "the deaths from Fukushima will be greater than from Chernobyl" and that "the young will be adversely effected by the radiation - their immune and detoxification systems are not fully formed and operational, and based upon their small body weights, they receive a proportionally larger dose of radioisotopes than do adults."* This could explain the excess death rates of young infants in the U.S in the weeks following the Fukushima incident. The 18 page document published by Mangano & Sherman closes on this discussion:

"The Fukushima meltdowns, and the introduction of radioactivity across the 

globe, indicate that accurate measurements are needed on subsequent changes in 

environmental radioactivity and in health status. In the United States, there have 

been limitations in both measures. Radioactivity samples in precipitation, air, 

water, and milk were sporadically reported by the Environmental Protection 

Agency. Many measurements failed to produce detectable levels, and on May 3, 

2011, the agency reverted to its policy of making only quarterly measurements. 

Some elevated concentrations were found to be up to several hundred times the 

norm soon after the arrival of the Fukushima fallout, but no meaningful temporal 

trends and spatial patterns can be discerned from these data. 

Few aggregate data on health status are available until several years after a 

death or specific diagnosis. Immediately after Fukushima, the only nationwide 

health status data available in the United States were weekly deaths by age 

reported by 122 U.S. cities (about 25% to 35% of all U.S. deaths), as reported 

by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In the 14 weeks after the 

Fukushima fallout arrived in the United States, total deaths reported were 

4.46 percent above the same period in 2010; in the 14 weeks before Fukushima, 

the increase from the prior year was just 2.34 percent. The gap in changes for 

infant deaths (+1.80% in the latter 14 weeks, –8.37% for the earlier 14 weeks) 

was even larger. Estimated “excess” deaths for the entire United States were 

projected to be 13,983 total deaths and 822 infant deaths. 

Patterns of deaths among persons of all ages strongly reflect patterns among 

the elderly, who account for over two-thirds of all deaths. For the older population, 

explanations for excess deaths must be considered after exposure to higher 

levels of radioactive fallout. If cancer in some patients becomes active again, 

it may mean they already have cells carrying all but one of the three to four 

requisite mutations to express cancer. Exposure to radiation (or a toxic chemical) 

can provide the one final mutation to reactivate a quiescent tumor (17). Also 

vulnerable are those elderly with depressed immune status, made worse by 

exposure to radiation.

The CDC weekly mortality data have limitations. They represent only a 25 

to 35 percent sample of all deaths, which may or may not accurately represent 

the entire nation. Deaths are reported voluntarily and thus are subject to variations 

from city to city and for unusual circumstances in a week or period (e.g., totals 

during the Christmas holiday season appear to be much lower). Weekly totals 

are sometimes reported as unavailable and so cannot be used in any analysis. 

The deaths reported are by city of occurrence, whereas all final statistics are 

by residence at time of death. Deaths are categorized when the death certifi- 

cate is filed, not necessarily the date of death. Finally, the CDC weekly reports 

provide raw numbers of deaths, not the more useful mortality rates, as popula- 

tions or numbers of births are not given. 

Nonetheless, 25 to 35 percent of the United States is not a small sample, 

representing all large cities and many smaller ones in all regions of the nation. 

When extended periods are used, the numbers become larger and more 

meaningful, because any variations increasing or decreasing death counts are 

more likely to balance each other out. The total of 155,015 U.S. deaths in the 

14-week period after Fukushima, 2,722 of which are infant deaths, represents a 

large database that is meaningful in a preliminary analysis of potential Fukushima 

effects. Not to use them would mean a two- or three-year absence of any health 

status data, until final figures are made public. 

The statistically significant difference in increased number of reported deaths 

(total and infant) for the 14-week period after Fukushima has an added dimen- 

sion because of similar findings for the four months immediately after the 

Chernobyl meltdown in 1986, using a 10 percent sample of U.S. deaths. The 

post-Chernobyl increases, based on preliminary death data, were roughly com- 

parable to the increases calculated from final death data (see Appendix Table 2). 

The preliminary versus final 1985–1986 change for the period May–August in 

total deaths was within 3.7 percentage points (+6.0% vs. +2.3%), and the count 

of infant deaths was within 3.0 percentage points (+3.1% vs. +0.1%). Thus, it is 

unlikely that, for Fukushima, final death counts would show results markedly 

different from the finding that more Americans, especially infants, died than 

expected in the 14-week period following arrival of the Fukushima fallout. 

The 14-week excess death projections after mid-March 2011 (13,983 total, 

822 infant) are relatively similar to actual excesses in May–August 1986 (16,573 

total, 306 infant). 

Recent assessments have suggested that the amount of radioactivity released 

from Fukushima equals or exceeds that released from Chernobyl. Given the 

continuing emission of radioisotopes from the melted reactors, the high density 

of population around the plant, and the close proximity to food sources, we can 

expect that morbidity and mortality will be high in Japan. The relative homo- 

geneity of the Japanese population will allow for comparison of health conse- 

quences for people living in areas with lesser and greater levels of contamination, 

as has been done in areas affected by Chernobyl.

Adverse health effects may also be expected in the United States, even though 

exposures have been far below those in Japan. Low-dose radiation exposure, 

previously assumed to be harmless, has been linked with elevated disease rates 

in children born to women who underwent pelvic X-rays while pregnant (18), 

Americans exposed to atomic bomb fallout (19), nuclear plant workers (20), 

and, for leukemia, children exposed to very low doses after Chernobyl (21). 

In addition to physical diseases is loss of cognitive ability in adolescents fol- 

lowing low-dose ionizing radiation in utero (22). 

The human fetus and infant are especially radiosensitive, given their rapid 

cell growth and cell division, as well as their small size that results in a propor- 

tionately larger dose. These exposures include X-ray, alpha, beta, and gamma 

radiation. Depending on the time of in utero radiation exposure, the result can be 

expressed as spontaneous abortion, premature birth, low birth weight, stillbirth, 

infant death, congenital malformations, and brain damage. 

While this report concentrates on effects to humans, all life is sensitive to 

nuclear radiation exposure, including plants, fungi, insects spiders, birds, fish, 

and other animals (23). The best-studied group near Chernobyl (birds) shows 

a 50 percent decrease in species richness and a 66 percent drop in abundance in 

the most contaminated areas, compared with normal background in the same 

neighborhood (24). 

More importantly, the findings reported here, plus the disease patterns that 

developed after Chernobyl, indicate that public health personnel can anticipate 

and plan to put in place diagnostic and treatment procedures. Given the con- 

tinued high levels of radioactive iodine, it is predicted that the incidence of 

thyroid disease, including thyroid insufficiency in newborns and thyroid cancer 

in children and adults, will increase (4, 25). 

The health effects of exposure to radioactivity from the Fukushima meltdowns, 

both in Japan and around the world, will take a long time to fully assess. The 

paucity of data from the U.S. EPA is unfortunate and will hamper future studies. 

A quarter of a century after the Chernobyl disaster, and more than 60 years after 

the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, compilations of health casualties 

are still being updated. It is critical that research should proceed with all due 

haste, as answers are essential to early diagnosis and treatment for exposed 

people, particularly children and the very young." 

(Mangano & Sherman, Increase of U.S Mortality and Fukushima Fallout, 2011-2012)

Altough this is by far not a finished study, it gives disturbing and inconveniant hints that even low-level radiation doses cause serious health problems. The whole study can be read here:Mangano & Sherman Study







* Email correspondance with Dr. Janette Sherman from February, 8th 2012.

Interview avec Stéphane L' Homme (Francais & English)

Aujourd'hui en interview, Stéphane L'Homme: De 2002 à 2010 il fût le porte-parole du "Réseau Sortir du Nucléaire. Avec Stéphane, qui préside également "l' Observatoire du Nucléaire", nous avons parlé de Fukushima, les "stress tests" et Cattenom.


We spoke with Stéphane L'Homme, longtime the figurehead of French coordinated anti-nuclear action. Stéphane told us about Fukushima, the European Stresstests and Cattenom. He presides over the "Observatoire du Nucléaire, France"






Presque un an après l' accident de Fukushima, la situation au Japon reste très inquiétante. Comment evaluez-vous la situation au Japon?


Comme en Ukraine et en Biélorussie, les pays les plus contaminés par la catastrophe nucléaire de Tchernobyl (26 avril 1986), le Japon n'est qu'au début d'un drame dont les conséquences vont s'aggraver au fil des années. Des millions de gens sont touchés par la radioactivité et la santé de la population va se dégrader pendant des décennies. D'ores et déjà, à peine un an après le début de la catastrophe, certaines études montrent que "30% des enfants de Fukushima présenteraient des lésions thyroïdiennes notables"   (cf http://bit.ly/zEnZUF )
D'autre part, les coeurs des réacteurs accidentés sont toujours en fusion, de la radioactivité est continuellement rejetées dans l'environnement, et une aggravation du drame est hélas encore possible... 

En France, plusieurs stations nucléaires ont été bâti dans des zones de séisme? Quel est le risque réel de ces stations?


Le risque sismiques en France est moindre qu'au Japon... mais les centrales françaises sont moins résistantes : elles ont été construites par rapport à leur risque sismiques théorique. Ce qui fait que, finalement, le risque d'accident nucléaire en France suite à un séisme est aussi important qu'au Japon ! Il "suffit" que l'épicentre d'un séisme soit très près d'une centrale française pour que la situation soit grave, voire même comparable à Fukushima. Sans oublier les innombrables autres causes possibles : erreurs de conception, de maintenance, d'exploitation, etc




Que pensez-vous des "stress-tests" en Europe après Fukushima? Dans la plupart des cas, on y propose seulement des investissements gigantesques?


Ces "tests" ont fait l'objet de marchandages nauséabonds dans le but de protéger la continuation de l'industrie nucléaire. Par exemple, l'autorité de sûreté française a obtenu que le risque de crash d'avion ne soit pas pris en compte : en effet, aucune centrale française ne résisterait !Pour autant, un certain nombre de mesures "post-Fukushima" ont été annoncées, comme la mise en place pour chaque réacteur d'un moteur de secours bunkérisé et situé en hauteur. Lorsque ce sera fait, dans de longues années, cela n'assurera pas pour autant la sûreté (le risque zéro n'existe pas !), mais cette affaire démontre l'incompétence des gens qui exploitent le nucléaire. Nous avons donc eu beaucoup de chance jusqu'à présent...


En tant que Luxembourgeois en regarde toujours avec inquiétude sur Cattenom et Fessenheim..?


Ces deux centrales sont tout aussi dangereuses que les autres, avec quelques particularités : Fessenheim est la plus vieille, Cattenom une des plus puissantes... Il y a donc que quoi être inquiet mais il faut comprendre qu'une catastrophe nucléaire, même si elle a lieu au Sud de la France, contaminerait le Luxembourg... et toute l'Europe !




Récemment dans le "Journal International du Cancer", une nouvelle étude a démontré le lien entre les leucémies infantiles aux environs des centrales nucléaires. Le nucléaire a-t-il alors pas besoin d'un accident pour poser des risques de santé?


Effectivement, même en fonctionnement "normal" (c'est à dire hors accident ou incident), une centrale nucléaire rejette de la radioactivité dans l'aire et dans l'eau. Ces rejets,même faibles,posent de vrais problèmes de santé publique, comme montré par une récente étude en France, ou par une grande étude universitaire menée en Allemagne par l'Université de Mayence.
D'autre part, même en fonctionnement "normal", une centrale nucléaire produit des déchets radioactifs qui vont rester dangereux pendant des millénaires. C'est injustifiable. 


Fukushima a fait revivre les mouvements anti-nucléaires à travers le monde. En France pour la première fois, le nucléaire est aussi un sujet d'élection dans les "Présidentielles"? Donc la question s'avère : En France, à quand la sortie du nucléaire?


La question du nucléaire est effectivement discutée, enfin, mais l'arrêt des centrales ne semble hélas pas probable : le pouvoir pronucléaire est au sommet de l'Etat, à la tête des principaux partis, à la direction des principaux médias, etc. Il semble que seul un Fukushima français contraindra ces gens à reconnaître... que cela peut se produire. Quant à la population, elle est ballotée entre la réalité du drame de Fukushima et la propagande pronucléaire officielle, et elle se préoccupe plutôt de ses problèmes immédiats comme la chômage, la précarité... En résumé, il y a hélas de quoi être très pessimiste...

ENGLISH:

Nearly one year after the Fukushima incident, the situation in Japan is still very severe. How do you evaluate the situation?


In Ukraine and Belarus, the countries most contaminated by the Chernobyl nuclear disaster (April 26, 1986), Japan is only the beginning of a tragedy whose consequences will worsen over the years. Millions of people are affected by radioactivity and population health will deteriorate for decades. Already, just a year after the start of the disaster, some studies show that "30% of children in Fukushima would present significant thyroid lesions" (cfhttp://bit.ly/zEnZUF). Furthermore, the reactor cores are still uneven fusion, radioactivity is continuously released into the environment, and a worsening of the drama is unfortunately still possible ...

In France, many nuclear stations are built in seismic areas. What is the real risque of these power plants in an eventual case of seismic activity?


The seismic risk is lower in France, but the French plants are less resistant: they were built from their theoretical seismic risk. So that, finally, the risk of a nuclear accident in France following an earthquake is as important as in Japan! If the epicentrer of an earthquake is very close to a French central, this can result in a serious situation. even comparable to Fukushima. Not to mention the countless other possible causes: design errors, maintenance, operation, etc. 

What do you think of the "stress tests" performed in Europe as a reaction to Fukushima? In most cases, the expert only propose gargantuan investments?

These "tests" have downplayed risks in a  nauseating way, in order to protect the continuation of the nuclear industry. For example, the French safety authority has obtained the risk of plane crashes is not taken into account: indeed, no central French would not resist! However, a number of measures "Post Fukushima" were announced, as for instance the introduction for every reactor of a "bunkered" emergency engine and one place higher above. Once that is done, in many years, this will not necessarily ensure safety (zero risk does not exist!), But this case demonstrates the incompetence of the people who operate nuclear power. So we were very lucky so far.

As a Luxembourger, we always look with mixed feelings toward Cattenom and Fessenheim, what can you tell us about these NPPs*? (nuclear power plants) 


Both plants are just as dangerous as the others, with some peculiarities: Fessenheim is the oldest, Cattenom one of the strongest ... There is therefore something to be worried but we must understand that a nuclear catastrophe, even if it takes place in the South of France, would contaminate Luxembourg and throughout Europe!

Recently in the "International Cancer Journal", a new study revealed that there is a link between child leukemia rates being higher around NPPs. Nuclear Power is thus not only harmful during an accident but also a serious health risk even if there's no accident?


Indeed, even in "normal" functioning (ie excluding accident or incident), a nuclear station rejects radioactivity in the area and in water. These releases even low, pose real public health problems, as shown by a recent study in France, and a large university study conducted in Germany by the University of Mainz. Moreover, even in "normal" functioning, a nuclear power plant produces radioactive waste that will remain dangerous for thousands of years. It is unjustifiable.

Fukushima has reanimated many anti-nuclear movements around the world. Even in France, the nuclear issue seems to be adressed for the first time in a French Election campaign. So the question remains, when will we see a nuclear-free France?


The nuclear issue is actually discussed, finally, but stopping nuclear power seems unfortunately unlikely: The biggest pro-nuclear lobby is at the top of the state, at the head of the main parties at the direction of the major media. It seems that only a French Fukushima would change these people to recognize ... that this can happen. As for the population, they are torn between the reality of the drama of Fukushima and pronuclear official propaganda, and is concerned rather its immediate problems such as unemployment, insecurity ...
In summary, there is unfortunately very much to be pessimistic .






Savoir plus sur Stéphane / More on Stéphane Wikipedia: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stéphane_Lhomme


Blog personel / Personal Blog: 
http://stephanelhomme.free.fr/  http://stephane-lhomme.blogspot.com/

Observatoire du Nucléaire: http://observ.nucleaire.free.fr/


Lien vers "Insecurité Nucléaire"
http://www.amazon.fr/LInsécurité-Nucléaire-Bientôt-Tchernobyl-France/dp/2913492401/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1327876951&sr=8-1
Le livre de Stéphane, qui donne un bon résumé sur les enjeux du nucléaire.


Photo:
(c) blogger.com/stephane-lhomme

N.B
Stéphane nous a transmis ces réponses par Courriel. Rien n'a été changé.
Stéphane sent his answers by email. No changes were performed to the interview.

Fukushima: Bad news in 2012

So far only bad news in 2012 around the crippled reactors of Fukushima. (1) Japanese scientists are still baffled about the whereabouts of the nuclear melted core material. The search for the highly radioactive core material is indeed a tricky one. In Chernobyl, the so called "elephant's foot" the congealed and melted portion of reactor material and fuel rods was only discovered months after the reactor catastrophe(2). Experts in Japan are now trying to find the location of the meltdowns by using x-ray technology. However high doses of radiation continue to be measured at the site of the reactor. During an endoscopic video mission when workers inserted a camera into the reactor core, the Olympus camera had tremendous problems to keep the images clear: Radiation was even visible on the film(3), a phenomenon which was also observed in some film reels shot in Chernobyl. The camera used for the "reactor endoscopic" was built to withstand radiation up to 1000Sv. Steam in the containment vessel of the reactor and high radiation levels limited the clarity of the images, but they raise the possibility that melted fuel at the bottom of the vessel may not be adequately covered by water, according to nuclear experts. TEPCO officials had calculated that the water level in the No. 2 reactor was about 4.5 meters, but the endoscope was lowered for inspection work within the reactor about 4 meters from the vessel bottom, and the water level could not be confirmed. TEPCO officials said it appeared likely that the water level was less than 4 meters from the bottom. TEPCO had stated that it believed some of the nuclear fuel in the reactor had melted and fallen to the bottom of the containment vessel, but the endoscope did not capture images of it. A thermometer was attached to the endoscope and recorded a gas temperature near the lower half of the containment vessel of 44.7 degrees.(4) In other news it was the announcing of the Japanese Government to nationalize TEPCO for at least 10 years. While this will definitely insure rapid payments and repairs for the victims of the nuclear disaster, the taxpayers of Japan will be likely the ones to pay in the end for the cleanup of the catastrophe.(5) The European "Stress Tests" overshadowed once again the situation in Japan. As TEPCO and the Japanese government and thousands of workers struggle to get the situation under control, little people outside of Japan do care about the growing insecurity and problems in the region.


The endoscopic camera inside of Fukushima-Daiichi Unit II

Pipes and emergency pipes laid during the first month of the evacuation at the power plant continue to burst under the freezing temperatures. Asahi News reports that:

... Some 7,800 liters of water leaked from a fuel rod storage pool and reactor cooling systems in the disabled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant on Jan. 29 [...] after pipes ruptured because of freezing weather. [...] The leaked water was supplied from a nearby dam to cool reactors and processed radioactive water. [...] Decommissioning the reactors at the facility is expected to take decades. But with problems still occurring even now, it remains uncertain how long the process will take. [...] (5)

Further reports show that even more radioactive water was realeased and more pipes are bursting: 

More than 8 tonnes of water have leaked from Japan’s stricken nuclear power plant after a frozen pipe burst inside a reactor buiding [sic] [...] Kyodo, quoting [Tepco], said the water had leaked from the No.4 reactor when a pipe “dropped off” [...] “The total amount of leakage from the reactor was initially estimated to be 6 litres, but the utility revised the figure later Wednesday, adding that the leakage appears to have started at around 5 p.m. (0800 GMT) Monday,” Kyodo said. “The utility plans to check whether there are similar cases in the other crippled reactors,” it added. (6) 

Since many of the sources of the bursting pipes are from Tepco, and in regard of their terrible information policy, we might in mind that the reports are falsified and that the real situation is actually worse.

Heart failures, and Growing heart problems in Fukushima area:
More and more news of children and new-born babies who suffer from complex cardiologic complications are reported from Japan. (7) Prof. Busby, analyzed the data comparing them to Dr. Bandazhevskiy's studies of cardiovascular complications of the "Chernobyl children"(8). Unfortunately only few scientists have investigated this phenomenon. This leads to incomplete and unsound statistics and in the end, much more people are affected by health problems caused by radiation.

Prof. Busby explains his findings:

Sources:
(1) http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120120f1.html
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corium_%28nuclear_reactor%29#Chernobyl_accident
(3) http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/01/result-of-endoscope-operation-on-1192012/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FukushimaDiary+%28Fukushima+Diary%29
(4) http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201201200044 (5) http://af.reuters.com/article/commoditiesNews/idAFL3E8CK3MG20120121?sp=true Picture: Asahi
(5) http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201201300042
(6) http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/major-new-leak-at-japans-nuclear-plant-kyodo
(7) http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20120123p2a00m0na014000c.html
(8) http://www.bsrrw.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/caesiumheart-Fuku-6-m.pdf