Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Over a Million Tons – Failed Fukushima Water Treatment

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2020

In August 2018, Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco), admitted that the “Advanced Liquid Processing System” or ALPS filters had failed to remove deadly radioactive materials from waste cooling water, putting the lie to its repeated assurances that ALPS would remove everything but tritium—the radioactive form of hydrogen.

News services noted, “The tritium-tainted water piling up at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear [reactor site] has been found to contain other radioactive substances, defying the defunct plant’s special treatment system, Kyodo News has learned.”

Nine years since the disaster began, tons of cooling water are still constantly poured over the amassed (melted) uranium fuel underneath destroyed reactors 1, 2, and 3 at Fukushima. Three mounds of thousands of tons hot, molten uranium fuel wreckage have to be cooled constantly to prevent new fires, explosions and major radiation releases.

Tepco told the public that iodine-129, ruthenium-106 and technetium-99 failed to be filtered by ALPS. Unlike the cesium-137 and strontium-90 that have reportedly been captured by the system and which have radioactive half-lives of roughly 30 years, iodine-129 has a half-life of 15.7 million years and persists in the environment for 15.7 million years (ten half-lives). Ruthenium-106 has a half-life of 373 days and persists for 10 years; technetium-99’s half-life is 211,000 years and it persists for 2.11 million years.

Tepco said in 2018 it had not checked the levels of radioactive materials in each tank. As of Jan. 23, 2020, there were over 680 tanks on site holding 1,184,858 cubic meters—over a million tonnes—of the liquid radioactive waste.

—JL

— Citizen’s Nuclear Information Center (Tokyo), “Current State of Post-Accident Operations,” April 3, 2020; BBC, “Fukushima: Radioactive water may be dumped in Pacific,” Sept. 10, 2019; Water Technology.com, “Fukushima Plant’s ALPS Treatment System in Trouble,” Aug. 27, 2018; and Japan Times, “ALPS System at Fukushima No. 1 Plant Failing to Remove More Than Tritium from Toxic Cooling Water,” Aug. 19, 2018

Filed Under: Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Contamination & Radioactive “Hot Spots” in Fukushima Endanger Returnees, Olympic Games

One of the 70,000 workers involved in cleanup efforts after the Fukushima disaster indicates bag placement of radioactive waste from Fukushima.
Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2020

A March report by Greenpeace Japan, “Radioactivity on the Move 2020,” is a stark reminder of the daunting and endless radiation hazards caused by the triple reactor meltdown of 2011 at the Fukushima-Daiichi complex.

In Fukushima Prefecture, spring snow melt and heavy rains remobilize stocks of radio-cesium in forests, hill slopes, and floodplains that were heavily contaminated by the radiation disaster, and that then contaminate areas downstream—frustratingly, even areas that were already decontaminated. “… as a result of the contamination in 2011, these uphill forests serve as a long-term source of radioactivity for the areas below. The principle radioactive source, cesium-137, has a half-life of 30 years, and therefore will remain a hazard for around ten half-lives, or 300 years.

Conducted soon after the October 2019 Typhoon Hagibis, which was one of the most powerful typhoons in 100 years, the group’s survey “observed concentrated radiation levels throughout Fukushima Prefecture, including significant radiation hotspots….” Building on its 2016 report “Radiation Reloaded,” Greenpeace’s extensive radiation survey raises alarms about the re-contamination caused by Hagibis, “which released radioactive cesium [downhill] from the forested mountains of Fukushima prefecture which make up 70% of the region, and which cannot feasibly be decontaminated.”

The report paints an accusatory picture of Japan’s government, “Which continues to push its propaganda of normalization in Fukushima,” in order to convince the public in general and evacuees in particular that it is safe to return to their houses. The report notes that “the Japanese government remains committed to policies which aim to pressure tens of thousands of Japanese Internally Displaced Persons  to return to their former homes.”

The government’s resettlement push is also motivated by the huge economic investment in hosting the postponed summer Olympics. The games have been put off until July 23, 2012, not because of the radioactive dangers documented and presented to the government by Greenpeace Japan, but because of the coronavirus pandemic.

One example of the government’s recklessness, is its arbitrary setting of radiation exposure allowances. Global standards for radiation exposure are set by the International Commission on Radiation Protection, and the maximum exposure for the general public in Japan was one (1) milliSievert per year (mSv/y) until 2012.

But in April 2012, the government increased the maximum annual exposure twenty-fold, to 20 milliSieverts per year (20 mSv/y). This eye-popping increase of allowable exposure applies across-the-board to infants and children, while girls and women are all known to be more vulnerable to the harmful effects of radiation than adult men. Greenpeace says this was done “as part of its strategy to lift evacuations orders.”

The typhoon’s recontamination and resulting levels of potential radiation exposure have caused a “… radiological situation in Fukushima prefecture, specifically in both the open and exclusion zones of Namie, Iitate, and Okuma, [that] leads Greenpeace Japan to conclude that levels remain too high for the safe return of thousands of evacuees to these areas,” the report says. “Namie, Iitate, Okuma and Futaba remain highly contaminated.”

In its consideration of areas where evacuation orders have already been lifted, the report is highly critical. “Japanese government maintains that exposure to 20 mSv/y is acceptable in these lifted evacuation order areas. This is despite clear scientific evidence of the cancer risks from low dose radiation exposure in the 1-5 mSv/y range, which the Japanese government continues to disregard.”

Decontamination efforts have been a large part of the government’s strategy of returning people to areas hit with radioactive fallout. Yet decontamination has been less effective around houses located close to hillside forests, “where decontamination is not possible.”  Unfortunately, the report notes, “radioactivity from the non-decontaminated forest might re-contaminate the already decontaminated area below and closer to houses.”

In addition, radioactive particles and organic matter carried down from forests and fields with heavy rains and typhoons “will create continuing, subsequent influxes of radio-cesium in lakes and coastal ecosystems for years and decades to come,” the report notes. “In particular, typhoons cause significant increases in cesium discharges into the Pacific Ocean.”

The survey also discovered high levels of radiation and multiple radiation “hotspots” in Fukushima City, the J-Village sports complex and along the route of the Olympic Torch run. These findings directly challenge the government’s “propaganda narrative” leading up to the Olympic Games, and endanger athletes and everyone else involved with the games.

—JL

 

Filed Under: Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Reactors at War

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2020

Defense News reports that US military planners are seeking design ideas for small nuclear reactors that can supply electricity to combat operations in war zones. The Pentagon has given contracts to BWX tech, Westinghouse GS, and X-energy, launching a two-year design competition for a small reactor made to be “forward deployed with forces outside the United States.” Lt. Col. Robert Carver, a Pentagon spokesman told Defense News the reactor(s) would serve “a variety of [military] missions such as generating power for remote operating bases.”

The competition is for a small, portable prototype reactor potentially used in the midst of combat-riddled wars of occupation. The Pentagon’s spokespersons refer repeatedly to the plan’s “safety.” Carver told Defense News the plan “involves the development of a safe, mobile and advanced nuclear micro-reactor.” And program manager Jeff Waksman said in a Pentagon statement, that the plan’s “uniqueness lies in the reactor’s mobility and safety.”

While a more dangerous wartime target can hardly be imagined, the poison-powered war plan is only one of two. Pentagon and Department of Energy workers are currently running a pilot scheme for a small reactor, testing it at the DOE’s civilian Idaho National Laboratory, according to Pentagon spokesman Lt. Col. Mike Andrews.

Edwin Lyman, director of the Nuclear Safety Project at the Union of Concerned Scientists, believes that the Pentagon has “consistently underestimated” the “spectrum of mission risks posed by these micro-reactors,” especially in war zones. Reactors could be attacked or radioactive fuel material could be stolen and used in potential “dirty bombs.” -JL

—Defense News, March 9, 2020

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, War

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch 2 Comments

About John’s Recovery

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2020

We expect many of our readers have heard and been concerned about John LaForge, our long-time Co-director, regarding his cancer care and prognosis. We’re pleased to report that John’s treatment has been successful, it was merely a “stage 1”, and he believes he is cancer-free. John will continue living in Hamburg for a few months longer and keep on with his health and well-being regime, including heavy metal detoxification, etc., which can prevent a possible recurrence. We will see over the next few years whether John’s alternative treatments are the best way to prevent a return of his cancer. He is resuming most of his regular Nukewatch work. For some this is great news, for others a warning.

— Bonnie Urfer

I am deeply grateful for and humbled by the outpouring of love and support that made my alternative care here in Germany possible. Your financial gifts covered the costs of surgery and the other medical bills, relief that brings the tangible benefit of reduced stress. Please forgive me if you didn’t get a personal note of thanks. Not knowing the language here, confronting the diagnosis, and dealing with the coronavirus restrictions could have been overwhelming, but the generosity of family, friends and comrades have saved the day.

— John LaForge

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Office News, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Uncategorized

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Some Lessons Learned about Radiation in Medicine

  • Radiation after lung surgery may be harmful (Associated Press, Milwaukee Journal, July 24, 1998)
  • A full-body CT scan equals about 500-to-700 ordinary chest X-rays (“Are Body Scans a Scam?” Newsweek, May 19, 2002 https://www.newsweek.com/are-body-scans-scam-145379; & “Death Rays,” Newsweek, April 2, 2014 https://www.newsweek.com/2014/04/11/death-rays-248079 )
  • Medical X-rays May Join Carcinogen List–Early CT Scans Linked to Latent Cancers (USA Today, Dec. 31, 2002)
  • Report Links Increased Cancer Risk to CT Scans (Associated Press, New York Times, Nov. 29. 2007 https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/29/us/29scan.html)
  • A single chest CT scan is about 100 times the dose of a standard chest X-ray (“CT Scans: Too Much of a Good Thing?” Newsweek, Dec. 5, 2008; https://www.newsweek.com/ct-scans-too-much-good-thing-83391)
  • FDA scientist Julian Nicholas testified he was fired after he opposed the approval of CT scans for colon cancer screening on safety grounds (AP, Mpls StarTribune, March 31, 2010 https://www.seattletimes.com/business/scientist-fda-suppressed-imaging-safety-concerns/)
  • “Overused CT scans expose patients to deadly levels of radiation” (Cardiologist Rita Redberg & radiologist Rebecca Smith-Bindman, “We Are Giving Ourselves Cancer,” New York Times, Jan. 31, 2014 https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/31/opinion/we-are-giving-ourselves-cancer.html)
  • 70 million CT scans done in the US in 2007 could lead to 29,000 future cancers (National Institutes of Health, “Cancer Risks Associated with External Radiation From Diagnostic Imaging Procedures,” fn. 128, “Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007,” Archives of Internal Medicine, Dec. 14, 2009, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3548988/; and Janet Epping, “Link Between X-Rays And Increased Childhood Leukemia Risk,” Medical News Today, Oct. 6, 2010 www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/203521.php?sr&trendmd-shared=1)
  • In 2012 the Institute of Medicine found that medical imaging is one of the leading causes of breast cancer (“Death Rays,” Newsweek, April 11, 2014, newsweek.com/2014/04/11/death-rays-248079.html)

-JL

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Uncategorized

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • …
  • 223
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch