Posted on 03/15/2011 1:35:02 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
IT'S not bad enough that thousands of people may be dead from Japan's earthquake and devastating tsunami. No, the media is instead obsessing over a nuclear reactor that has killed no one and probably never will.
This scaremongering over the crippled Fukushima nuclear complex is extraordinary. Already anti-nuclear activists, rebadged as nuclear "experts", are out spreading terror.
And what's a nuclear holocaust story without Helen Caldicott, actually a paediatrician and anti-nuke hysteric? So there she was, too, on 3AW, warning that if the reactor blew up, "hundreds of thousands of Japanese will be dying within two weeks of acute radiation illness", with countless more later suffering an "epidemic" of cancers.
But wait. Time to check the facts and get some perspective.
Let's start with Ruff. If the Fukushima reactor indeed becomes a "Chernobyl disaster", it will still be as nothing compared with the devastation the Japanese have already suffered.
Right now, rescue workers are combing through the ruins of the seaside cities swamped by the tsunami, looking for 10,000 missing people.
By contrast, Chernobyl, the world's worst nuclear power station disaster, is known to have killed no more than 65.
Yes, I know this doesn't fit with all the horror stories that activists and journalists spread about Chernobyl.
Yes, I know that even the Gillard Government's Education Minister, Peter Garrett, has warned that the 1986 explosion at Chernobyl's shambolic nuclear reactor "caused the deaths of more than 30,000 people".
I know that Sweeney's ACF once published on its website a paper claiming the death toll was actually 250,000 people. And I heard Caldicott on Wednesday trump them all by insisting "nearly a million" died.
But the most reliable assessment of the deaths in that iconic disaster comes instead from the Chernobyl Forum, which represents Ukraine, Russia and Belarus, as well as all relevant United Nations agencies, including the World Health Organisation and International Atomic Energy Agency.
After reviewing countless studies, the forum in 2005 concluded much of the reporting of the deaths was a beat-up.
"Claims have been made that tens or even hundreds of thousands of persons have died as a result of the accident. These claims are highly exaggerated."
In fact, there was "no demonstrated increase in the incidence of solid cancers or leukemia due to radiation in the most affected populations", and no "clear and convincing evidence for a radiation-induced increase in general population mortality".
There was only one exception: thyroid cancer in children, which killed 15. Thankfully, this is treatable, which is why the Japanese authorities are handing out iodine tablets.
To those 15, the Chernobyl Forum added 28 reactor workers who died from acute radiation sickness, three more who died at the explosion from other causes, and 19 who died over the years that followed, from various causes related to the blast.
The deaths of these 65 people is undoubtedly a tragedy. But when set beside the 10,000 feared drowned by this tsunami , they are almost as nothing.
And they represent a fraction of the heartache caused not by the Chernobyl explosion but by the panic merchants who stampeded more than 200,000 women from Italy to Norway into having abortions, through a baseless fear their children would be deformed.
But is Fukushima even likely to become a "Chernobyl-type disaster'?
No, say the true experts.
First, "there is no possibility of a nuclear explosion," Richard Wakeford, of the University of Manchester's Dalton Research Institute, says.
Ziggy Switkowski, former chairman of the Australian Nuclear and Scientific Organisation agrees. There just isn't enough uranium in the reactor.
And don't let the breathless reports of the explosions already at the Fukushima complex fool you.
They are not nuclear explosions, but the detonation of hydrogen released through the emergency cooling process.
These explosions, outside the steel and concrete containment vessels in which the nuclear fuel is held, are very different to the ones at Chernobyl, which occurred within the vessel and tore apart the reactor.
That in turn caused the graphite used in that reactor to catch fire and burn for four days, releasing plumes of highly radioactive waste into the air.
Fukushima, though, uses not graphite but water, which does not burn. What radioactivity has been released is some caesium-137 and iodine-131 carried with the steam that's been vented to ease pressure in the reactors, where the cooling systems have been crippled.
Not healthy, but so far not likely to kill you even if you breathed deeply. And the winds are taking it out to sea.
So far, the vessels containing the fuel rods themselves are intact, and the reactor is also built to contain any "meltdown", avoiding the Hollywood scenario of a "China syndrome", in which the molten reactor core burns right through, figuratively, to China.
Much may yet go wrong. More explosions may crack the containment vessels, potentially releasing radiation.
More steam will be vented. But with the area evacuated, the risk of people being killed is close to nil - except for about 50 brave staff who are taking the chance of being blown up.
With luck, the moral of this emergency may turn out to be the opposite of the one now preached by people who prefer myths to fact, fear to understanding.
Fukushima is one of the oldest of the nuclear power stations that supply a third of Japan's electricity, and has been rocked by the worst earthquakes in Japan in a century.
It has suffered multiple failures of its cooling systems. It has been battered by explosions.
And if it can take all that without cracking ...
Add to that the lessons Japan's experts will learn from this, and these grim days may yet mark the time not when the nuclear industry died, but when it learnt how to survive even an apocalypse.
There's Dr Tilman Ruff, actually a Nossal Institute infectious diseases expert and long-time anti-nukes activist, everywhere warning we might be "looking at a Chernobyl-type disaster or worse" and describing in lascivious detail the ways people could get sick from the fallout.
There's Dave Sweeney, actually a professional activist from the Australian Conservation Foundation with a lack of formal qualifications in nuclear science, warning that the reactor was potentially like a kettle without water, and "sooner or later, it superheats and it blows".
If you do decide to, probably the only place you might be able to still find any would be a local "compounding" pharmacy (check your yellow pages). They actually can make them for you at a reasonable price.
Bids on Ebay for 130mg, 14 tablet packs of potassium iodide tablets that used to sell for $10 a pack are over for $300 in most cases.
Some things to remember about the coverage from the chicken little media: Killer Bees, Acid Rain, Global Cooling, Three mile island, Y2K, Global Warming, runaway Toyotas, swine flu, Climate Change, bird flu...
This is a partial list feel free to add to it.
Link that explains exposure and contamination.
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation/contamination.asp
And this one about sheltering in place...why?
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/radiation/shelter.asp
Precisely the problem. Two huge holes in the building. Apparently the explosions and other chaos caused them to stop monitoring the spent fuel rod tanks in #4. Now reports are that #5 and #6 pools are heating. This plant was really a dumb idea and that dumb idea was compounded by not being able to find a safe permanent storage facility for the spent fuel rods far away from any live reactors. This is the folly of man.
I’m a firm believer in Duct Tape, always keep a supply on hand.
If Japan’s nukes have any meaningful effect on the U.S., I’ll buy you a year’s supply. That much I think is a safe bet.
take care...
Good points. But one of these days, they will get a scare right. Everyone was wondering why the US media was silent during the first two nights of the nuclear catastrophe. They either go nuts, or just ignore the problem. Probably just do whatever the Emperor tells them at this point in time. That is why I get the serious news from Japan right now. You can also improve your preparedness plans by watching what the Japanese have to deal with.
I don’t know if this is the time for Godzilla jokes, or if that would be insensitive. I do note that the only way for the media to insert themselves into the story is to keep all their focus on the reactor, rather than reporting on the devastation or relief efforts. As usual, “we’re important” and “be afraid” are the real story.
The duct tape apparently is need to keep the radiated particles out, but if the Santa Ana winds are blowing around here, duct tape wont help much. Just looking to buy a little time, myself.
BTW, after reading the article and about the think tank, the Institute for Science and International Security, its mission and funders, I’ll double it to two-years supply...
:)
Maybe no Japanese civilians will die from radiation but it sure looks like some reactor personnel got high doses. High enough to kill them in a few years
“I heard Caldicott on Wednesday trump them all by insisting ‘nearly a million’ died.”
That’s peanuts compared to the trillions who have died from second-hand smoke. Yes, I realize that sounds ridiculous, but quit confusing me with the facts!
Oh please no - been through the grind already.
BTW send my blessings to reaganaut :)
I’m sure that the Japs are downplaying all this (loss of face, avoiding panic, etc.), but remember Three Mile Island and Chernobyl? They proved that the China Syndrome is a myth. The only dangers are to those in the immediate area, i.e., the rescue workers. Even the media screechers are having to admit that the radiation levels are going down.
Yes, American lives are at risk, but only because we go to help people in emergencies. Heck, even the lily-livered State Department hasn’t decamped from Tokyo.
“What we need is someone good at explaining the difference between radiation emitted by the reactor vs radioactive fallout”
We might start by explaining what “radiation” is, but do you really think it’ll stick in their heads? People can’t be convinced that flying is safer than driving, or that cell phones aren’t sending death rays into their brains. There’s not much hope for education in nuclear science. When power plants enter their consciousness, people think of Chernobyl (the horror-story Chernobyl, not the actual Chernobyl), Three Mile Island (not the actual Three Mile Island), the China Syndrome. Radioactivity brings to mind mushroom clouds, those freaky silohouettes in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, mutants, and giant ants/lizards. What can compete with that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine-131
I-131 can be absorbed through contaminated food, T1/2 about 8 days
The risk of thyroid cancer in later life appears to diminish with increasing age at time of exposure. Most risk estimates are based on studies in which radiation exposures occurred in children or teenagers. When adults are exposed, it has been difficult for epidemiologists to detect a statistically significant difference in the rates of thyroid disease above that of a similar but otherwise unexposed group
I suspect that, in adults, no statistically relevant risk has been demostrated from carcinogenesis. Since uptake is usually from comtaminanted foods, most can be removed by washing
the primary source of uptake to children is generally from the milk cycle.
I-131 falling on grass, cows eat grass,
cow mammary glands concentrate I-131, excreted into milk. Kids drink milk.
Voila, I-131 into children.
an alternative is to drink no milk for about a month
(powdered ok, as well as cheese)
“You’ve forgot the 100.000 who died after Chernobyl on cancer caused by the long term radiation”
I assume your decimal point is supposed to indicate a figure of 100,000. That’s insane.
“So, so far the worst dose has been the same as eating 30 bananas.”
That doesn’t sound very good to me. Bananas are fine and all, but a few per week is enough. Plus, I’m picky, and only like ‘em when they’re really ripe. Eating them before they’ve fully matured would be a chore.
True, I would not like to be a plant worker there. Thank God they are there, but I don’t think I could do it.
“I think that chart (Energy Sources in the U.S.) includes all energy, including vehicles like cars, trucks, aircraft, etc.”
In that case, they’re overlooking all the DeLoreans running on Mr. Fusions.
“This is the folly of man”
You’ve hit on precisely why the nuclear scare aspect has overshadowed actual destruction. Natural disasters make for good stories and ratings, but they lack a certain captivation. They’ll never get the press of, say, the royal wedding. Because they are acts of God. We, being people, are interested in people.
People exist within the earthquake/tsunami story, but they can provide no more than anecdotes. Someday someone could write a novel about the hours and minutes of Joe Suzuki’s earthquake day. But without a Nero or Bush II fiddling while Japan burns, it won’t make it into the evening news as anything more affecting than your average “cat in a tree” or ‘Isn’t this cancer kid brave?” story.
The reactor story, contrariwise, has drama. Men built it, and men, as opposed to techtonic plates and waves, have tragic potential.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.