Visiting Fukushima

In May this year we returned to the megalapolis of Tokyo, following our visit to Fukushima prefecture and the site of the destroyed Daiichi reactors.

We carried dosimeters (a device that measures radiation) through the 20 km radius exclusion zone and wore them at the site. At the very foot of reactor unit 1, the dose rate was serious (greater than 400 microsieverts per hour). Just a couple of hundred metres away at the undamaged reactor 6, the rate was normal background (less than 5 microsieverts per hour).

Our cumulative dose for the site visit during the course of that day was about one-seventh the dose we received on our flights to Tokyo.

The nuclear accident destroyed four of the six reactors at this site. The decommissioning will take a long time. But it did not irrecoverably poison a landscape. Formal expert studies have shown that the radiation has caused and will cause no discernible human harm.

Ben Heard and Barry Brook

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Technology & Telco. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Visiting Fukushima

  1. Nic

    People forget the amount of radiation exposed to by simply flying in an aircraft.

  2. Roger

    Apocalypse avoided.

    Will all those who used Fukushima to advocate against nuclear power recant?

  3. notafan

    From Wiki.
    Germany closed down it’s nukes because of this, even though not a single person died from radiation exposure.

    The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster has no confirmed casualties from radiation exposure, though six workers died due to various reasons, including cardiovascular disease, during the containment efforts or work to stabilize the Earthquake and Tsunami damage to the site.[9]

    The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), released a report on the Fukushima accident April 2, 2014. It stated that the scientists have found no evidence to support the idea that the nuclear meltdown in Japan in 2011 will lead to an increase in cancer rates or birth defects.[10]

    None of the workers at the plant have died from acute radiation poisoning

  4. Roger

    Germany closed down it’s nukes because of this

    Meanwhile, they’re facing a power crisis.

    Go figure.

  5. Rabz

    Godzilla could not be contacted for comment.

  6. cohenite

    Brook is a strong advocate of nuclear on account of his loony belief in alarmism but his rational training in science, unlike 97% of the other dickheads, has shown him that renewables are crap.

  7. Driftforge

    Ben Heard has done superb work in bringing the nuclear debate to the table nationally. I’m happy to humour an environmentalist who can get past the scare stories put out about nuclear power, even if they have fallen for the ones regarding climate change.

  8. Bruce of Newcastle

    Its all political. The Left does not want people to explore the actual impact of radiation.

    Chernobyl’s exclusion zone is one of the greatest wastes of real estate for the least of reasons. On the other hand it has turned into a wonderful nature park in the absence of dimwit homo sapiens. Some people though never left, they seem not to have melted or grown extra heads. I suspect that if a study were to be made of them they would be found with less cancer mortality than the rest of the population due to the hormesis effect. But the antinuclear Left never allows such inquiries to be publicised, since that would undermine their propaganda. The nuclear lie was there long before the global warming scam.

  9. Rob MW

    Seems a waste that Oz has the most abundant source of clean nuclear power for a good barbeque and the bastards won’t use it, so the moto is, as long as it can cook me lamb chops, peas and mash I don’t give a fuck. Eat more red meat I say, it drives the environmentalists and political vegans mad and puts more led in the everyday pencil besides………50 million dingos can’t be wrong.

  10. Baldrick

    It’s is estimated that over 1,000 Japanese died as a result of the hyperventilating over Fukushima, taking their own lives.
    To date, there are zero casualties from radiation exposure.

  11. Docket62

    We should be able to have the results “not one person died as a result of radiation exposure” tattooed onto the forehead of every greenie in the country, then withdraw their right to vote and build a reactor in Fitzroy north. For a start….

  12. Sydney Boy

    Don’t worry about the facts. The greenies will never believe you anyway. They are the ones who also came out with this brilliant piece of scare-mongering:

    Seventy years after the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, killing tens of thousands of people, research shows many of the remaining survivors are dying from cancer and other serious illnesses.

    Very old people are dying of cancer? Who woulda thunk it?

  13. Tel

    Formal expert studies have shown that the radiation has caused and will cause no discernible human harm.

    Government funded experts? Totally unbiased then, just like climate scientists.

  14. Tel

    Some people though never left, they seem not to have melted or grown extra heads.

    Old people, their cells don’t divide because they are near the end of their ability to grow and repair tissue… making them automatically radiation hardened. They cannot grow an extra head because they cannot grow anything anymore.

    Don’t do it to babies though.

    Very old people are dying of cancer? Who woulda thunk it?

    The remaining people living around Chernobyl are the ones who have not yet died of any other reason. Since they are old anyhow, and since they are Russian, when some of them do die, no one freaks out over it. And yeah, old people are more likely to get cancer, but the cancer also grows more slowly due to lack of resources, and yeah, old people are more likely to die, that’s how it is.

  15. Bruce of Newcastle

    Old people, their cells don’t divide because they are near the end of their ability to grow and repair tissue… making them automatically radiation hardened.

    No. Opposite. The cell repair machinery doesn’t work so well so ionising radiation is more damaging since damage isn’t being repaired. Cancer occurs roughly proportional to the 4th power of age (eg link). That is an immense hockey stick relationship in cancer in mortality.

    Its unlikely we can live to 150 without serious advances in cancer and cell repair research.

  16. Paul

    Because the Japanese have an impeccable track record for honest and open confronting of the truth, despite the “losing face” thing (often with swords) when truth turns out inconvenient.

  17. nfw

    Nuclear submariners (okay the Brits and Americans, for who knows what the Russians, French and Chinese do) have long worn dosimeters. They pick up more radiation when outside than they ever do in the boats.

Comments are closed.