# No One Wants You To Know How Bad Fukushima Might Still Be **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 20, 2014, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034 "2014-08-20T20:18:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2014, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/1 "2014-08-20T20:18:09Z")
[This VICE article](http://www.vice.com/read/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be-666) says that the situation at Fukushima is still bad, getting worse in a lot of ways, and possibly will not ever be fully and appropriately dealt with.[ > [@VICE News](#): > > This year marked the disaster’s third anniversary, but new accounts of mismanagement and swelling radiation levels continue to surface. In February, TEPCO revealed that groundwater sources near the Daiichi plant and 80 feet from the Pacific Ocean contained 20 million becquerels of the harmful radioactive element Strontium-90 per gallon (one becquerel equals one emission of radiation per second). Even though the internationally accepted limit for Strontium-90 contamination in water hovers around 120 becquerels per gallon, these measurements were hidden from Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority for nearly four months. As a response, the national nuclear watchdog agency censured TEPCO for lacking a “fundamental understanding of measuring and handling radiation.” > > And last month, TEPCO told reporters that 14 different rice paddies outside Fukushima’s exclusion zone were contaminated in August 2013, after a large piece of debris was removed from one of the Daiichi plant’s crippled reactors. The readings were taken in March 2014, but TEPCO didn’t publicize their findings until four months later, at the start of July—meaning almost a year had passed since emissions had begun to accumulate at dangerous levels in Japan’s most sacred food. > > The list, unfortunately, goes on. This is merely the abridged account of TEPCO’s backpedalling and PR shortfalls. It begs many questions, but the most perplexing one is: Why? Why has a crisis that is gaining traction as the worst case of nuclear pollution in history—worse, emission-wise, than Hiroshima, Nagasaki, or Chernobyl—being smothered with internal censorship? If omission of information isn’t intentional, like Dr. Klein suggests, why haven’t these revelations led to a stronger institutional effort to contain Fukushima and reduce the chance that irregularities go unnoticed or unreported? ]([http://www.vice.com/read/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be-666](http://www.vice.com/read/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be-666)) Thus far my experience with VICE has been very positive: articles seem to be well-researched and well-documented. Analyses seem to be painstakingly complete, taking a multitude of factors into account to form a cohesive picture and to better understand any difficulties or conflicts. So if anyone can find errors in the story or contradictions in source materials, etc. please feel free to call attention to it, because thus far my own experiences are telling me to trust the information as presented in the article. I know we discussed the initial disaster at length here on the Dope, but now that 3 years have gone by, what do we know? What is different? What _needs_ to be done, what is being done, and when will it not need to be done anymore? Is there a time when the international community steps in and supervises the situation and it’s clean-up? Who can declare that what TEPCO is doing is not satisfactory? And how can we know that without the information that TEPCO seems to consistently withhold? ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/2 "2014-08-21T19:37:52Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > [This VICE article](http://www.vice.com/read/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be-666) says that the situation at Fukushima is still bad, getting worse in a lot of ways, and possibly will not ever be fully and appropriately dealt with. It’s no surprise. Chernobyl is still being “dealt with”, which means building an even bigger building over the destroyed reactor and dangerous core material. At some point in the future, when that building starts to crumble, and if there is still an advanced civilization, it’s time to build another one. That situation is an open disaster (no containment building at all), and there is quite simply no way to clean up a ruined reactor core. The partial melt down of TMI took decades to “fix”, as in removing the partially melted fuel, which wasn’t very radioactive, it had only been running for less than three months. But the rest of the contaminated TMI site is still sitting there, they simply put off dealing with the “basement” until they decommission the other reactor. So a very minor (compared to Fukushima of course) reactor disaster (TMI) still hasn’t been dealt with, 35 years later. Neither has Chernobyl, so it’s not actually a surprise that a disaster that is so very very much worse isn’t going well. That data and info is hidden, distorted or simply lied about, no surprise. Why? That is the interesting part. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/3 "2014-08-21T21:12:52Z")
I believe that Japan scaled down their nuclear energy use for a few years, after Fukushima, and there’s been a struggle to get them re-activated. Now that they’ve been turned back on, it’s alright to start releasing negative information about Fukushima again. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/4 "2014-08-21T21:26:36Z")
My take is that a news organization that puts out stories with headlines including the words “No One Wants You To Know” is guilty of the same sort of sensationalism (or worse) than the “traditional” news sources it aims to replace. I gather it would have been less sexy to say “The utility and some Japanese government officials have been delaying release of important information”. I note that the VICE article talks about a reported increase in thyroid cancer incidence in Japanese children from the affected area. What I didn’t see mentioned was the likelihood that the increase [is tied to intensive screening](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140313-fukushima-nuclear-accident-cancer-cluster-thyroid-chernobyl/). The VICE article also heavily quotes Helen Caldicott, whose credibility on the subject of nuclear energy and reactor accidents [is questionable](http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/apr/13/anti-nuclear-lobby-interrogate-beliefs). I think I’d want to confirm allegations in that article with other, more trusted sources. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/5 "2014-08-21T22:57:11Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I believe that Japan scaled down their nuclear energy use for a few years, after Fukushima,. If you call shutting down all 38 of the undamaged reactors “scaling down”, then yeah, they scaled down after 311 > **[Nuclear power in Japan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan#Nuclear_power_plants)** > > Nuclear power generated 5.55% of Japan's electricity in 2023. > The country's nuclear power industry was heavily influenced by the Fukushima accident, caused by the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. Before 2011, Japan was generating up to 30% of its electrical power from nuclear reactors. > After the Fukushima accident, all reactors were shut down temporarily. As of November 2024\[update\], of the 54 nuclear reactors present in Japan before 2011, there were 33 operable reactors but only 13 react... ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/6 "2014-08-21T23:13:43Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > If you call shutting down all 38 of the undamaged reactors “scaling down”, then yeah, they scaled down after 311 > > [Nuclear power in Japan - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan#Nuclear_power_plants) Ah, I thought it was just a few. I also thought I had read an Economist article stating that they were going online… I wouldn’t have guessed that they would be able to operate entirely without nuclear energy. They must be eating through a huge chunk of coal (and presumably running their coal plants beyond capacity…?) ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/7 "2014-08-21T23:21:35Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > The partial melt down of TMI took decades to “fix”, as in removing the partially melted fuel, which wasn’t very radioactive, it had only been running for less than three months. But the rest of the contaminated TMI site is still sitting there, they simply put off dealing with the “basement” until they decommission the other reactor. Given that radioactivity diminishes over time, there actually is some merit to waiting before “dealing with” the TMI basement. Letting a few decades go by can make the site safer to death with. Of course, there are trade-offs in such a wait, but it’s not simply a matter of ignoring the situation. Would you complain that a fire department is not “dealing with” the remains of a burned building if they wait a day or two for the wreckage to cool, find any remaining hotspots, etc. and therefore make it safer for workers to clean up? The thing is, for a nuclear accident the wait isn’t days, it’s decades. Meanwhile, you have to contain the site. For something like Chernobyl or Fukushima that’s not a trivial task. As always, the devil is in the details. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/8 "2014-08-21T23:48:47Z")
A year after the \*Wall Street Journal \*report, TEPCO announced that the Daiichi plant’s meltdown [had released 2.5 times more radiation into the atmosphere than initially estimated](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/world/asia/radioactive-release-at-fukushima-plant-was-underestimated.html?_r=0). The utility cited broken radiation sensors within the plant’s proximity as the main reason for this deficit and, in the same statement, claimed that 99 percent of the total radiation released from the Daiichi plant occurred during the last three weeks of March 2011. That last part turned out to be untrue—a year later, in June 2013, TEPCO admitted that [almost 80,000 gallons of contaminated water had been leaking into the Pacific Ocean every day since the meltdown](http://rt.com/news/fukushima-radioactive-puddle-leakage-710/). As of today, that leak continues. > **[No One Wants You to Know How Bad Fukushima Might Still Be](https://www.vice.com/en/article/kwpxw9/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be-666)** > > The main point of criticism about Japan's largest utility company is rooted in one that countless others have voiced since the beginning: a suspicious disregard for keeping the public informed. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2014, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/9 "2014-08-21T23:55:36Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > It’s no surprise. Chernobyl is still being “dealt with”, which means building an even bigger building over the destroyed reactor and dangerous core material. At some point in the future, when that building starts to crumble, and if there is still an advanced civilization, it’s time to build another one. > > That situation is an open disaster (no containment building at all), and there is quite simply no way to clean up a ruined reactor core. The partial melt down of TMI took decades to “fix”, as in removing the partially melted fuel, which wasn’t very radioactive, it had only been running for less than three months. But the rest of the contaminated TMI site is still sitting there, they simply put off dealing with the “basement” until they decommission the other reactor. > > So a very minor (compared to Fukushima of course) reactor disaster (TMI) still hasn’t been dealt with, 35 years later. Neither has Chernobyl, so it’s not actually a surprise that a disaster that is so very very much worse isn’t going well. That data and info is hidden, distorted or simply lied about, no surprise. > > Why? That is the interesting part. It sucks that you were pretty much exactly right in your initial descriptions of just how bad this incident was and will be. I don’t imagine that any of the people who called you names have withdrawn their criticisms or apologized, have they? ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/10 "2014-08-22T00:12:32Z")
Of course not. Nor am I allowed to start any threads about it. Ever. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/11 "2014-08-22T00:37:04Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Given that radioactivity diminishes over time, there actually is some merit to waiting before “dealing with” the TMI basement. Letting a few decades go by can make the site safer to death with. Of course, there are trade-offs in such a wait, but it’s not simply a matter of ignoring the situation. The problem is that if unremoved fuel is still fissioning, it generates more decay products. I don’t know how long a damaged reactor can continue to “smolder”, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was decades or even centuries. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/12 "2014-08-22T00:55:18Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > Of course not. Nor am I allowed to start any threads about it. Ever. Why not? Says who? ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/13 "2014-08-22T02:25:39Z")
I could explain, but it would no doubt earn another infraction. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/14 "2014-08-22T02:39:22Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > The problem is that if unremoved fuel is still fissioning, it generates more decay products. I don’t know how long a damaged reactor can continue to “smolder”, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was decades or even centuries. To be really pedantic, Uranium fuel is always fissioning. The more concentrated it is, the higher the rate above the background rate for U ore. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/15 "2014-08-22T02:47:40Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Given that radioactivity diminishes over time, there actually is some merit to waiting before “dealing with” the TMI basement. Letting a few decades go by can make the site safer to death with. Of course, there are trade-offs in such a wait, but it’s not simply a matter of ignoring the situation. > > Would you complain that a fire department is not “dealing with” the remains of a burned building if they wait a day or two for the wreckage to cool, find any remaining hotspots, etc. and therefore make it safer for workers to clean up? The thing is, for a nuclear accident the wait isn’t days, it’s decades. Meanwhile, you have to contain the site. For something like Chernobyl or Fukushima that’s not a trivial task. > > As always, the devil is in the details. Beyond that, the TMI basement is contained and not going anywhere. It’s probably safest right where it is; dismantling it and dragging it off somewhere else drastically raises the chances of contaminating all sorts of stuff. ---
**Author:** ![cckerberos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@cckerberos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cckerberos)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/16 "2014-08-22T02:54:35Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I wouldn’t have guessed that they would be able to operate entirely without nuclear energy. They must be eating through a huge chunk of coal (and presumably running their coal plants beyond capacity…?) They’re importing fuel instead, which isn’t doing their economy any favors. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/17 "2014-08-22T04:54:25Z")
Well, FX, you handed out the best ass spanking of the stupid ever seen in these parts. Of course they never took back one word of it. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/18 "2014-08-22T05:27:35Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > My take is that a news organization that puts out stories with headlines including the words “No One Wants You To Know” is guilty of the same sort of sensationalism (or worse) than the “traditional” news sources it aims to replace. I gather it would have been less sexy to say “The utility and some Japanese government officials have been delaying release of important information”. > > I note that the VICE article talks about a reported increase in thyroid cancer incidence in Japanese children from the affected area. What I didn’t see mentioned was the likelihood that the increase [is tied to intensive screening](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140313-fukushima-nuclear-accident-cancer-cluster-thyroid-chernobyl/). > > The VICE article also heavily quotes Helen Caldicott, whose credibility on the subject of nuclear energy and reactor accidents [is questionable](http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/apr/13/anti-nuclear-lobby-interrogate-beliefs). > > I think I’d want to confirm allegations in that article with other, more trusted sources. Thanks for the heads-up about Miss Caldicott; I had never heard of her before the VICE article. Of course, I’ve never heard of the guy who’s blog you linked to either, but he seems to bring up some valid points. The idea that the screening simply uncovered more thyroid cancer than would normally be uncovered doesn’t seem to jive with the statistics and what it seems the numbers should have been, but I’m willing to sit that out and wait to see what future data indicates or to take a look at other evidence. I’ve read more about Iodine 131 tonight than I ever thought I would, for instance. If we take those pieces of info out, tho, **Jack** , does it affect much about the perception of the situation in Fukushima today? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/19 "2014-08-22T05:28:40Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Given that radioactivity diminishes over time, there actually is some merit to waiting before “dealing with” the TMI basement. **Letting a few decades go by can make the site safer to death with.** Of course, there are trade-offs in such a wait, but it’s not simply a matter of ignoring the situation. Excellent autocorrect; had to point it out. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2014, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034/20 "2014-08-22T18:24:48Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > I note that the VICE article talks about a reported increase in thyroid cancer incidence in Japanese children from the affected area. What I didn’t see mentioned was the likelihood that the increase [is tied to intensive screening](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140313-fukushima-nuclear-accident-cancer-cluster-thyroid-chernobyl/). That’s because it isn’t backed up by any science. Your “source” is simply something somebody made up to try and cast doubt on even the possibility that children were exposed to Fukushima radiation. > [@](#): > > I suspect if you took the same number of children in Montana and did the same [screening], you’d probably find a similar ratio. [National Geographic](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/03/140313-fukushima-nuclear-accident-cancer-cluster-thyroid-chernobyl/) See? Who needs science, actual testing, facts, when you can just make something up? And the people who don’t want Fukushima to be a problem will just buy it. The “source” goes on to claim other things it just can’t know, like the exposure rates and amounts. > [@](#): > > Any animal that could be a source of dairy products was banned from food supplies, and water systems were tested for radioactive contamination. So there really was no exposure of children to these high levels of radioactivity. See? They just say something, and it becomes true, because they want it to be true. And these same people think they actually know something. They somehow know more about medicine and the Japanese doctors involved. They are experts about children’s health and radiation exposure and cancer rates. They “know” that if we checked children they would all actually have thyroid cancer rates a hundred times higher than what is currently stated by medical experts. And because the nuclear believer wants this to be true, they simply believe it, and the problem, for them, is solved. It’s fascinating. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-one-wants-you-to-know-how-bad-fukushima-might-still-be/696034.md?page=2)