One Fukushima resident's impassioned plea

[Art_from_Ark]

While heading toward a train station in Tokyo the other night, I came upon a man who was speaking to a crowd from atop a light van. He is a resident of the town of Namie, about 8 miles from Fukushima Dai-ichi. He was giving an impassioned speech about the conditions in his town. People there are full of despair, he said. Evacuees are still living in temporary housing. Many people there can't plant crops, raise livestock or go back to their homes.

Speaking in one of the glitziest parts of Tokyo, he noted that his town had provided energy to the city for 40 years, but now his town has been all but forgotten. He noted that Germany and other European countries have plans to phase out nuclear energy, and asked his country to focus on developing renewable and safe energy sources.

Here are some pictures of the devastated power plants:


The Japanese words and phrases in this picture have the following meanings:
東電、国は大損害つぐなえ！ TEPCO, Japanese government, compensate us for this massive damage!
波江　福島 Namie, Fukushima
決死救命,団結希望 We ask for solidarity-- it's a matter of life and death.
原発爆発で牛達を見捨てざるを得ない、無念の波江町... The mortified town of Namie was forced to abandon its cattle because of the nuclear explosions...




Is all of this energy-consuming glitziness really necessary?

[madokie]

1. Nuclear

Is not the answer to any of our energy needs. Never was and never will be. If not for our (US) governments feel for a need for the Bomb there wouldn't be any nuclear power plants anywhere in the world today. Not only that we'd have a whole new plan in place concerning how we make our electricity, how we use that electricity.

Every time I read one of these articles I'm reminded of the wisdom in our stopping PSO from building a nuclear power plant 21 miles up wind from where I live today

[nationalize the fed]

2. Lots more on the way

If the Gov is serious about climate change why are plants being proposed for coastal areas?

Location of Projected New Nuclear Power Reactors

For applications that have been received by the NRC, you may select a site name to view the NRC's website for the specific COL application. Websites for the remainder of the applications will be created when they are received.



http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/col/new-reactor-map.html

As of 2014, the U.S. nuclear industry began a new lobbying effort, hiring three former senators — Evan Bayh, a Democrat; Judd Gregg, a Republican; and Spencer Abraham, a Republican — as well as William M. Daley, a former staffer to President Obama. The initiative is called Nuclear Matters, and it has begun a newspaper advertising campaign
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_renaissance_in_the_United_States

Using nuclear fission to boil water to spin turbines is insane.
Assuming future generations will handle the contamination and de-commissioning should be illegal.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Ok to answer your question as to why we place them near water

it is because these things need a lot of water. And I mean industrial quantities of the stuff. Why you will not see them anywhere in the middle of a desert

Now, I would like you to complete the exercise and point out to how many of these plants are beyond fantasy planning stage? On the other hands, SONGS is closed now. That real plant is fifty miles up the road from where I type.

[nationalize the fed]

21. "it is because these things need a lot of water"

But we're told the sea will rise. Why would nuclear plants be located in places that one day will be underwater, if we're to believe the things the gov spouts about climate change? Rivers work, just check out Chernobyl - well, until what couldn't happen happened). Pripyat has 360 city panoramas now BTW. You can see inside the buildings, the base of the ferris wheel and more. If you have google earth. I assure you that "standing" (or peeking) at the base of the Pripyat ferris wheel is an eerie experience.

Why you will not see them anywhere in the middle of a desert

Uh huh.

The Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (33°23′21″N 112°51′54″W) is a nuclear power plant located near Tonopah, Arizona, in western Arizona, It is located about 45 miles (80 km) due west of downtown Phoenix, Arizona, and it is located near the Gila River, which is dry except during the rainy season of the late summer.

Construction cost: $5.9 billion (That's a lot of money to boil water)

Now, I would like you to complete the exercise and point out to how many of these plants are beyond fantasy planning stage?

I'm concerned that they're planned at all.

Using nuclear fission to boil water to spin turbines is insane.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. if we're to believe the things the gov spouts about climate change?

It is not the government spouting that. IT IS SOLID SCIENCE. Climate Change is not a matter of debate, in my view has not been a matter of debate for the last ten years.

But that is all I need to know about you.

That said, some of these plants have been in the planning stages since three mile island failed and before that, which is well before Climate Change became more real beyond some academics in colleges and universities. By the way, 97% of scientists that have looked at it, agree it is happening. In fact, most of them are. And it is tsk, tsk, human caused.

As I said, point to any of them that has moved from NEPA, and Scoping documents. In fact. I will be impressed if any of them have moved that far. Why I called it fantasy planning, likely none of them will ever become real. On the other hand, San Onofre Nuclear Station (SONGS) is now closed for operations, early from when it was planned, due to a little greed on the part of the utilities involved.

Check out when Three Mile Island happened.

[nationalize the fed]

26. "But that is all I need to know about you."

Come on, you're better than that. I've read your posts for awhile now.

Whether climate change is real or not, the answer is here.

The Fuel Cell revolution has begun. The age of Hydrogen is here.

No more wars for oil. No more nukes. No more fracking.
And no one -or government- can stop it now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Whether it is real or not

You don't believe it's even real.

As to fuel cell, here is a huge news flash, it is one of the solutions. Replacing fossil fuels will require multiple approaches.

[FBaggins]

37. Did you look at the image?

As I said, point to any of them that has moved from NEPA, and Scoping documents. In fact. I will be impressed if any of them have moved that far. Why I called it fantasy planning, likely none of them will ever become real.

You missed that four reactors on that map are now roughly half-way complete. The only "fantasy" would be in the mind of someone who thinks that none of them will be built when five units are currently under construction.

And they aren't the only ones past the NEPA stage (by which I assume you mean the environmental review). The South Texas Project passed that a few years ago. Levy County completed theirs a couple years ago (though the project is on hold). Turkey Point's is due to go to the EPA in a few months (and the request to move forward just went to the state today). Fermi's is done. William States Lee is done. So is Comanche Peak.

So I guess you'll now confess to being impressed?

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. From your source, **1988**

and it is near a source of water. And they need to keep it more than just rainy season, because those things needs monstrous amounts of water to keep at operating temps.

Now perhaps, my calendar is wrong, but it reads 2014

[Packerowner740]

30. Really?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Verde_Nuclear_Generating_Station

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. Did you look at the photo attached to the wiki entry?

That blue stuff is water.

Reservoir, or lake, or river or ocean, they all have the wet stuff.

[FBaggins]

33. Did you?

You said that "you will not see them anywhere in the middle of a desert"

That one (the largest power plant in the US by total generation) is in the middle of the dessert. It's a few miles from a small river... but that's dry most of the year.

Cooling is provided by treating the sewage of nearby municipalities.

Yes... they're generally near bodies of water (though often man-made)... but that isn't why they're in coastal states.

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. Yes I did, my point stands

They need industrial quantities of the wet stuff and mostly are placed near natural bodies.

I expect you to take this the wrong way, as usual, so this is the last response to you on this thread.

[FBaggins]

36. Nope.

You know very well what the context of your post was. You were trying to say that the need for lots of water was why most of the proposed new plants are in coastal states. That was your point.. and it simply isn't true.

They're in those states because of comparatively favorable regulatory environments and greater public support. A water supply sufficient to cool a reactor doesn't have to be anywhere near the coast. A number of plants were built where there was no body of water... so they created one.

I expect you to take this the wrong way, as usual, so this is the last response to you on this thread.

And I expect that neither of us really thinks that anyone else buys that. We both know why you won't respond. You didn't have a leg to stand on and recognize that the more you squirm, the more embarrassing that would be.

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Wrong sparky.

But you knew that.

Have an excellent evening

[Packerowner740]

45. They created the "wet stuff"

It isn't there naturally so your argument that it needs to be near a body of water is wrong. They obtained the body of water while or after it was built.

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. My point stands, they need water,

Have an excellent day

[Packerowner740]

47. This point?

"you will not see them anywhere in the middle of a desert "

[bananas]

5. Al Giordano has a No Nukes Oral History Project

If you have (or someone you know has) memories about these events (or related ones from 1973 to 1982), we’d like to be able to include them in the final version of this work. Please contact Al Giordano at [e-mail] to arrange an interview, or write your answers to those of the “45 questions” at this link that pertain to your own experience.

See the thread in Good Reads: http://www.democraticunderground.com/101692889

[hunter]

7. Oh, I have stories, tales too ticklish to tell...

... but I am a gentleman.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hunter/34

There are certain sorts of developers, fossil fuel people, and insiders of the Military Industrial Complex who have profited immensely from the no-nuke movement.

My own disillusionment began when I saw the no-nuke activists telling lies as boldly naked as the lies of nuclear industry publicists. It also bothered me that so many anti-nuclear activists seemed to be innumerate.

My own inner pendulum eventually swung from "no-nuke" to "better than fossil fuels." That's where I was at when I first started posting on DU.

I'm now in a place where I am adamantly against fossil fuels, automobiles, and our consumer society. I'm essentially indifferent to nuclear power.

If we as humans are to progress we have a lot of messes to clean up. Problems related to nuclear power are almost negligible in comparison to the ongoing catastrophe of fossil fuel use and the twisted economic ideology that calls environmental destruction "productivity." That doesn't mean I support nuclear power. There's not much of anything I support in our overheated industrial society. I wish everyone would just chill out, read a book, go for a walk, take care of the children, practice effective birth control, and generally quit trashing our home planet.

I've little doubt the people of Fukushima who were relocated have good reason to complain. Management of the accident was a clusterfuck from the beginning.

Even so the waters of the tsunami took many more lives than the nuclear leaks ever will. It's possible that other non-nuclear toxins spilled by the tsunami are every bit as horrible as the radioactive toxins spilled by the power plant, but nobody measures these sorts of toxins, they are simply accepted in our everyday life.

[Art_from_Ark]

24. One difference between the tsunami and the nuclear explosions

is that the tsunami was a natural, unavoidable disaster, while the nuclear disaster was man-made and could have been avoided.

Another difference is that a couple hundred square miles of land around the Fukushima Dai-ichi complex is still deemed to so radioactive as to be uninhabitable. Even 3 years after the disaster, there are still many places where hourly radiation readings exceed 5 microsieverts. By comparison, the normal background radiation level in Tokyo is about 0.04 microsievert/hour.

http://fukushima-radioactivity.jp/

And there is also the increase in health-related problems in areas that are just outside of the 12-mile exclusion zone.

[hunter]

25. There are metrepolitan areas all over the world with houly readings greater than...

... 5 microsieverts an hour.

It's difficult to attribute health problems to the continuing radiation, especially in such a stressful situation, made even more stressful by misinformation from all camps; pro-nuclear, anti-nuclear, and dissembling corporate and public officials.

Quite a few people have tried to attribute certain clusters of health problems to normally operating nuclear power plants. I'm most familiar with the "studies" around California's closed Rancho Seco nuclear plant.

The area around Rancho Seco is a toxic swamp of agricultural and industrial chemicals, yet certain activists were quick to attribute any and all health problems to the power plant.

This sort of unhelpful "research" is even worse in Fukushima because that plant leaked very significant amounts of radioactive toxins into a place with low natural background radiation so the levels are easily measured and the voices are much louder. Even so, sorting any health signal from the noise is not a trivial task.

One thing I've learned about disasters like this: Should I ever experience such, I'm not evacuating without my animal companions, and I'll do my best to return home when, by my own diligent research, I decide the risk is acceptable, even if it involves civil disobedience and so long as I'm not getting in the way of remediation work.

Oddly my own family lived near California's Santa Susana reactor when it suffered a partial meltdown. But those were the days of atomic wonder and Cold War secrecy, so there was no panic. The site is within easy walking distance of a family home and I've visited it a few times in my usual pedestrian and random jogger manner.

The nuclear toxins on that site are probably no big deal at this point, it's the non-nuclear crap that worries me. Radioactive stuff is easier to find because it sings out to radiation detectors. It's the silent, non-radioactive toxins that get you.

[Art_from_Ark]

42. If 5 microsieverts per hour was so safe,

don't you think the Japanese government would be allowing people to return to the 12-mile exclusion zone?

We're talking ~125 times higher than normal local radiation levels here!

And for comparison, the ambient radiation in Denver, Colorado, which has one of the highest ambient radiation levels in the US, is only about 1.3 microsieverts per hour.

[hunter]

43. Why shouldn't they?

They let people live in places with trucks, buses, and automobiles that spew all sorts of carcinogenic mutagenic toxins. Not to mention traffic accidents that kill and maim people. The Japanese government does, in fact, encourage the motor industry.

Toxins are toxins, radioactive or not. Accidents are accidents. It's all bad.

I was a little kid in Los Angeles back when there was lead in gasoline. I'm certain that wasn't good for the development of my nervous system. It's likely that lead toxicity increased the violent crime rates in cities. There are similar problems with commonly used pesticides.

The radiation contaminating the areas surrounding the nuclear plant is more akin to radon problems than some general measure of radioactivity in Denver. Just as it's possible to reduce radon leaking into a home from the basement it's possible to clean up hot spots and reduce personal exposure to the radioactive toxins spilled by the power plant.

Somebody who might smoke or drive a car, yet still worries more about the risk of these radioactive toxins, they haven't got a clear idea about the magnitude of the risk.

The tsunami spilled all sorts of toxins, but those may go unmeasured because the focus is on the radioactive toxins, which also happen to be among the easiest to measure.

Anyways, I wish we could figure out some way to gracefully retire our high energy, high intensity world civilization. The seas will rise. We can make a thoughtful retreat, or we can fight an insane war with nature and among ourselves that nobody will win.

[Art_from_Ark]

44. Japan has one of the most stringent car inspection systems in the world

There aren't a lot of smoke-belching vehicles on the road, and the few that are like that won't pass the next inspection until the problem is fixed. Also, places like Tokyo have placed severe restrictions on particulate emissions by diesel-burning vehicles. There is increasing public pressure to have a cleaner environment in Japan, with the national and local governments promoting all sorts of public health policies, and much progress has been made in that area since I've been living in Japan.

Also, there is a steady stream of radiation coming from the reactors. That is why there is a distinct pattern of high radiation levels downwind from the reactors that has continued unabated for more than 3 years. If it was simply a matter of "cleaning up" the radiation in that area to return ambient radiation to normal levels, they would have done that a long time ago, like when they removed tons and tons of dirt from schoolyards and parks in my area that had radiation levels that were only 1/10 of the 5 microsievert/hour level.

[RobertEarl]

27. That is sad, Ark

Yes, Fukushima could have been avoided.

So... why wasn't it? Money and greed. And stupidity and denial that radiation is some nasty stuff.

And what I fear is there will be more communities suffering a similar fate. We have to safely end and close down nuclear power plants, as the Japanese people have so far been successful at doing.

Know that at least some of us are aware and concerned, and wish a speedy recovery for the people of Japan.

[FBaggins]

28. Of course there's the even larger difference.

The tsunami actually happened.

There were no nuclear explosions.

the nuclear disaster was man-made and could have been avoided

"could have been avoided" is not the same thing as a "man-made" disaster. If an earthquake knocks down a building... you might find that there were steps that could and should have been taken to avoid the collapse... but it's still the earthquake that knocked down the building.

the tsunami was a natural, unavoidable disaster

There were thousands of deaths from the tsunami that could have been avoided. Better alarms, more practice, better protective measures, different zoning... all kinds of things. It's why a tsunami in the third world kills hundreds of thousands while in Japan a larger tsunami kills a fraction of that amount - they're better prepared.

But it was still the tsunami that killed the people who would otherwise have survived. It was not a man-made disaster. There were no doubt any number of older people who didn't head for safety when the alarms went off... even though their children had told them for years to take such drills seriously. Is it no longer the tsunami that killed them just because they should have known better?

And there is also the increase in health-related problems in areas that are just outside of the 12-mile exclusion zone.

Not really. There's an increase of people who think that their health problems are caused by radiation. That's not the same thing.

Roughly 40% of the population is diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives. I wouldn't be surprised if 50-75% of the people who are diagnosed this year (who live near fukushima) will believe that the nuclear disaster caused it. That's just human nature.

Believe it or not... there are reportedly a large number of people who have the wild notion that their nose bleeds are the result of radiation (and a popular manga is pushing the idea).

[RobertEarl]

31. What a callous disregard you have

These people have had their homes irradiated and you sit there and tell them not to worry? Even give them health advice?

I don't think they need you giving them any advice at all.

[FBaggins]

34. Lifting people out of ignorance is hardly a "callous disregard"

Now... your relationship with the truth OTOH...

[Art_from_Ark]

39. A Japanese government-appointed panel concluded the explosions were a "man-made disaster"

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/0705/Japanese-panel-Fukushima-a-man-made-disaster-video

[Art_from_Ark]

40. The explosions were called "hydrogen explosions"

but hydrogen explosions in themselves do not release a stream of radiation that continues for more than 3 years and leave vast areas of land uninhabitable. For all intents and purposes, they were nuclear explosions.

[Art_from_Ark]

41. Let me tell you some things about the tsunami

I have been to that area of Japan that was affected by the tsunami-- all the way from Miyako in Iwate Prefecture down to the port of Hitachinaka on the Ibaraki coast and beyond. A lot of those coastal towns, especially in the northern areas, are hemmed in by the sea on one side, and mountains on the other. In some places, there was less than a 30-minute time window to get to higher ground, and tsunami warnings were issued immediately.

However, this was an unprecedented tsunami in places from Sendai on down the coast to Ibaraki. Even when there were tsunamis in the past, they were just a few feet in height at most, with most of those being a foot or less. Thus, when the first tsunami warnings were issued, people who were on slightly higher ground could have shrugged them off, especially if they were in an area that had never experienced a devastating tsunami.

Sendai had another set of problems, in that it has more than a million population, making it Japan's largest city between Tokyo and Sapporo. It is a major port with a well developed seawall. Please tell me what you would have done if you had been in the port area (confirmed tsunami height: 25-40 feet) when the tsunami alarms started going off? Say you were on foot and the nearest shelter was a 2-story building-- would you have headed there? If you had been in a car, would you have headed for the hills? What about all those other cars, in a city of 1 million, that were also headed for the hills? Would you have stayed in your car, hoping that the traffic jam would not be so bad and that you could escape the tsunami? Or would you have abandoned your car and tried to enter some building, which would have created a bottleneck for the cars behind you? Would you have abandoned your car when you saw the water rushing onto the street, at a rate that might have swept you away if you had tried to get into it?

Now let's assume you were riding in a coastal train that was thrown off its tracks by the earthquake. How would you have gotten out of that mess, and escaped the tsunami?

Or say that you were on the coastal side of the train tracks in Minami-sanriku. If you are on foot, what do you do? Get into the elevated train station (which ended up being inundated)? If you are at home, and one of your family members is in town on an errand, do you evacuate immediately? Or do you wait for them to come back?

If you are in a car on the seaward side of the tracks, you have essentially two ways to make it away from the sea-- both ways are by going under the elevated train tracks. But lots of other people want to go in the same direction, and they're coming from all other directions. How do you deal with that? How do you train for that? And when it's finally your turn to cross under the train tracks, after waiting for 15 minutes, how do you deal with the slow line of evacuating cars that is being held up at the very front by a driver who may be oblivious to the situation (even with the warnings blaring) and thinks he has to obey the 30mph speed limit no matter what?

Or let's say you are driving along the two-lane coastal highway, and you come to a place where the earthquake has made the road impassable. You're a little too far away to distinctly make out the tsunami alerts being broadcast over loudspeakers, but you hear on the radio that there is a tsunami warning issued for your area. On one side, you see a 15-foot drop to the sea. On the other side, you see a very steep hill, with snow cover, that has no visible trails. What do you do?

Or let's say that you were in a house on a coastal lowland that was a mile, or even two miles, from the sea. Would you have had the sense of urgency to try to evacuate immediately? Or would you have thought you were safe, being so far from the sea?

I hope you start to get the idea that given the unprecedented height (up to 65 feet http://www2.ttcn.ne.jp/honkawa/4363b.html ) and extent of the tsunami (300 miles of coast), the geographical and demographic conditions of the worst-hit areas, and various other constricting factors, that it is doubtful that better zoning, more training, and additional warnings would have saved *thousands* of lives that ended up being lost. And as you yourself noted, because of Japan's advanced systems, the death toll wasn't in the *hundreds of thousands*.

[Art_from_Ark]

8. Oklahomans were able to stop Black Fox

while Missourians were voting 2-to-1 to construct the Callaway nuclear facility. Oklahoma seemed to be a fairly liberal place back in the '70s. What happened?

[madokie]

9. Late '70s, early '80s

we had a lot of people move to our state, mostly from northern states. We had a lot of jobs and people flocked in. It changed our politics totally. I remember when you had to look long and hard to find a republicon, not so much anymore. For the most part our local elections all go to dems. In many local elections there won't even be a republicon run, that used to really be the case.

We had people like Fred Harris in the senate and he was about as liberal as anyone.

[Art_from_Ark]

10. That sounds like what happened in NW Arkansas as well

I remember a guy in Benton County telling me back in 1974 that he was a Republican "to try to provide a little balance to all the Democrats". But lots of out-of-staters were moving in, not only job-seekers, but also rich retirees moving into Bella Vista. Today, Benton County is nearly always 60% red in national elections.

[Enthusiast]

3. Kicked and recommended!

We need a world wide moratorium on new nuclear power plants. There are viable alternatives that won't be as profitable. And that is the problem.

[watoos]

4. Did we just give up,

or is it not feasible, to build thorium powered nuclear plants? I mean you can walk around with thorium in your pocket. I know, but you can't refine thorium to build nuclear weapons.

[Art_from_Ark]

11. I wouldn't walk around with thorium in my pocket

It's still considered a hazardous by-product of rare earth mining.

That's one reason why China has cornered the world market in rare earths. Nearly all rare earth ores contain thorium, and most countries with rare earth ores outside of China have stayed away from mining and refining those ores because of the problems associated with handling the thorium by-product. China, on the other hand, considers it to be potential fuel, and is running tests with molten salt reactors that are powered by thorium obtained from its rare earth mines.

[Art_from_Ark]

6. Here's his group's web site

Not only is he an impassioned advocate for improving the lives of people in Fukushima and developing safe, renewable energy, his group also runs a sanctuary for abandoned cattle and other critters.

http://fukushima-farmsanctuary.blogzine.jp/

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. I wish I could say I was surprised

this happens every disaster... insert country here. The directly affected population is forgotten after the critical phase.

[Art_from_Ark]

15. The speaker was noting that people who are not directly affected

by this disaster want to put it out of their minds, and, as if to make his point, lots of people were just brushing past a lady who was trying to hand out pamphlets describing the situation in his town. They just couldn't be bothered even to take and read a pamphlet about this on-going disaster in their own country

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. I could regale you with similar stories

from the US, or Mexico. As a former disaster worker it was neigh impossible to keep attention after the cameras left.

Why money gathered in the first two weeks is almost all that is collected.

It is time for me to kick some to the haiti relief fund. And that is the reason.

[Art_from_Ark]

19. I was a bit disgusted by that kind of behavior,

but at the same time, I was heartened by the response of the people who had stayed to listen to him-- they gave him a nice ovation after he had finished talking.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Good, I hope they get some cash

it sounds like they need it. This is not a surprise either. It is disgusting but humans can be a tad of leave me alone, I don't want to think about it.

And thanks for the reminder. I am making a point of kicking some to the Haiti relief fund every quarter. It is what I can afford. And I am expecting to have to kick some money to climactic change derived disasters this year.

[JEB]

14. Privatize the profits and when the risk comes home to roost

let the poop fall on the little people.

[Art_from_Ark]

17. And the poop is falling

The national sales tax in Japan was recently increased from 5% to 8%, and they're going to increase it to 10% next year. Guess who the sales tax increase hits the hardest?

[JEB]

18. We are all paying a huge cost for our atomic adventures.