Fukushima residents exposed to far less radiation than thought:
Citizen science usually isn’t this personal. In 2011, roughly 65,000 Japanese citizens living near the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant started measuring their own radiation exposure in the wake of the TÅhoku earthquake and tsunami. That’s because no one, not even experts, knew how accurate the traditional method of estimating dosage–taking readings from aircraft hundreds of meters above the ground–really was…
The scientists concluded that actual radiation doses were roughly 15% of what the helicopters were measuring, scaled to ground level, they reported last month in the Journal of Radiological Protection. That’s four times less radiation than what the Japanese government was previously assuming.
Anti-nuclear activists are reportedly devastated at the results.
The article is technically correct but doesn’t go far enough in outlining the adverse effects of exaggerated radiation dose estimates. With these false high dose estimates, the Japanese government ordered the evacuation of thousands of residents who might be exposed to one-half the amount of dose permitted by ICRP recommendations. These evacuations directly resulted in the death of approximately 2,000 people, nearly all of which would have been avoided if people had simply stayed home.
It should be noted that helicopter surveys have never been and cannot be an accurate measurement of ground level radiation dose.
Fact is, from what is now known from the assessment of ground level radiation measurements by UNSCEAR and IAEA, everyone was safe from harmful radiation dose nearly up to the plant fence line.
The unhinged American anti-NUKE freaks are STILL scouring the West Coast (HER voting bloc.) for Fukushima flotsam and jetsam to “prove” the horrors of NUCLEAR energy. They are STILL testing the shore break for Fukushima fallout. These people are irrationally unhinged. For starters … they have no CLUE about how vast the Pacific Ocean actually is.
In a related story … not a single member of the anti-NUKE Surfrider Foundation has stopped surfing … every single day … on the west coast.
True enough, Kenji, but they were encouraged by the outrageous and alarmist crap coming from the then-Chair of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Greg Jaczko. Protege of Democrat antinuclear Congressmen Ed Markey and Harry Reid, his appointment was shoehorned in by the Democrat controlled Congress in the last year of the Bush Presidency.
Let me guess, David Suzuki could not be reached for comment.
As I say about the disaster “well-wixhers”
Ocean: 50,0000
Atomic Reactor: 0
Schadenfreude: priceless.
Nukophobes are one of the single greatest impediments to solving our energy problems.
Quite right, John.
http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/primary-energy.html
As you can see from the graphs at the front of the BP statistical review, the world consumes about 13,500 million of tonnes of oil annually for all primary energy (of which electricity is about one-third). Even if carbon fuels were completely unavailable for whatever reason, the world’s inventory of fissionable material could supply that 13,500 MTOE for tens of thousands of years.
See, there are benefits of living west of things that blow up in a monsoonal climate. Ask the tuna.
I bet anti-nuclear activists make pretty good radiation shields.
Vastly under reported, is the fact that ZERO fatalities occurred due to the Fukushima plant disaster.
ZERO!
there was an analysis of the fukishima thing and advances in nuke generators on the telly recently.
amazing innovations and brand new designs that for instance use simple gravity to park any runaway molten fuel onto a metal ‘plug’ that melts and drops the uncontrolled reaction in a vault where it disperses to the point the chain reaction calms down and the uranium once again solidifies on its own.
the technology improvements continue, the anti nuke hysteria likewise.
today’s skill testing Q to the anti nuke cadre: when are YOU going to drop your thermostat to just above freezing and discard your digital toys that create huge demands on the grid? friggin hypocrites.
Yes, it was informative, although the young Dr of nuclear physics was also a climate change dupe. Nonetheless, it is still disappointing to see pressure reactors still in vogue.
The real solution going forward, in terms of reactor technology, are thorium, not uranium style, SALT non- pressurized reactors, which avoid the steam pressure failures of typical water cooled reactors. SALT reactors also use most all of the fuel, uranium style only use 5% of their fuel, remarkably.
The challenge for thorium style units, is the fluoride solution is highly corrosive, if that could be overcome, and the nuke freak out syndrome, we could have our energy issues solved for centuriesp
One minor nit to pick, Dan. There were three fatalities at Fukushima. One during the earthquake when the construction crane he was operating fell over. Two others were out in the plant yard when the tsunami topped the seawall.
But you’re quite correct, zero from radiation exposure. None of these had anything to do with it being a nuclear plant.
While Canada’s future is hobbled by politicians primarily concerned with their social media popularity, India is moving ahead to address their energy future.
“The Advanced Heavy Water Reactor design has been made and it will start work next year,” Srinivasan said.
The AHWR will be fuelled by a mix of uranium-233 converted from thorium, and plutonium. Uranium-233 is the reactor fuel for this third stage of the Indian nuclear power programme.
The AHWRs are expected to shorten the period of achieving large-scale utilization of thorium. A second version of the AHWR, being tested, will use low enriched uranium along with thorium.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/science/india-doesnt-lag-in-developing-thorium-fuelled-nuclear-reactor-mr-srinivasan-former-aec-chairman/articleshow/52489649.cms
It’s ironic that India got it’s nuclear start by importing CANDU heavy water reactor technology from Canada, a country which was once at the forefront of nuclear energy development.
Very informative thread.
I’m trying to make sense of the phrase “four times less”
15% is about 1/7.
Good news. Nuclear is absolutely the way to go for lowering carbon emissions.