Prime Minister Naoto Kan is under increasing pressure, from both within his own party and outside, to step down as prime minister and let someone else have a go on Japan's leadership carousel.
Today more than 60 members of his own party, the Democratic Party of Japan, met to discuss ways of ousting their PM. This is on top of the opposition attacking him for weeks for his 'failure' to bring the nuclear incident under control and otherwise deal with the aftermath of the calamities last Month.
However one of the issuse for his own party is that there is currently no clear alternative to Kan. The most likely candidate, former foreign minister Seiji Maehara, was forced to resign just before the quake due to an absurd 'only in Japan' money scandal where he unknowingly took donations from a non-Japanese citizen. It's a real shame he couldn't have hung on for another week, because after the quake everything else was forgotten for a while, and Maehara may have been able to take over by now. The only other name being thrown around is the old indefatigably corrupt and disingenuous Ichiro Ozawa. Him becoming PM would be the equivalent of Nixon being elected to the Whitehouse a year after resigning over Watergate. But hey, it could happen in the Fantasy Land that is Japan. Rumour has it that he is only interested in becoming PM because as head of state he will be immune from prosecution for all his various scandals.
The weirdest part is that there is no real reason for Kan to go. I think he's done an extraordinary job. I want to have his children. The evacuees are being housed and fed. Reconstruction is progressing. Even Tepco has been roundly castigated. Daily press conferences were held during the worst of the crisis and it was clear even to me that his government was doing the best it could. The only thing I could disagree with is the passing of the bill to fund compensation and reconstruction using...
... my pension funds.
Wednesday, 27 April 2011
Friday, 22 April 2011
Cost of disasters to be paid for out of what?!
Japan today widened the evacuation zone to more areas outside of the 20km exclusion zone around Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. The new areas includes tens of thousands of people and thousands of farmers. The prime minister explained that cumulative radiation exposure posed a health risk to residents.
Except that it won't. That is, unless there is evidence I'm not aware of that radiation levels in those areas are higher than what is safe for humans. The move is merely precautionary in nature, and will cost millions of dollars.
Tepco president Masataka Shimizu today confronted angry evacuees in a shelter in Fukushima, apologising to them individually in an effort to repair Tepco's tortured public image. He copped a fair amount of abuse for his efforts; some people blamed him for their homelessness; others demanded compensation, one guy suggested he move the nuclear power plant next to his home in Tokyo. It's understandable that evacuees were pissed off, but ... really, people. None of the evacuees offered him thanks for decades of cheap, safe, carbon-neutral energy. Nobody thrust the plans for a working fusion energy plant into his outthrust hands, and nobody vowed to cut their own personal energy use by 80% so that the whole country could be powered by renewable sources.
The next news announcement really made my day. The government announced a new supplementary fiscal budget to pay for reconstruction after the quake, tsunami and nuclear emergency. It will cover rebuilding infrastructure, subsidising the recreation of the fishing industry, evacuation and accommodation for hundreds of thousands of people, compensation for farmers affected by radiation etc etc. All in all, 4 trillion yen, about 45 billion Australian dollars... to be paid for...out of funds set aside to cover the gap in the pension plan!
And just to top it off, Tokyo Disneyland is now open.
Except that it won't. That is, unless there is evidence I'm not aware of that radiation levels in those areas are higher than what is safe for humans. The move is merely precautionary in nature, and will cost millions of dollars.
Tepco president Masataka Shimizu today confronted angry evacuees in a shelter in Fukushima, apologising to them individually in an effort to repair Tepco's tortured public image. He copped a fair amount of abuse for his efforts; some people blamed him for their homelessness; others demanded compensation, one guy suggested he move the nuclear power plant next to his home in Tokyo. It's understandable that evacuees were pissed off, but ... really, people. None of the evacuees offered him thanks for decades of cheap, safe, carbon-neutral energy. Nobody thrust the plans for a working fusion energy plant into his outthrust hands, and nobody vowed to cut their own personal energy use by 80% so that the whole country could be powered by renewable sources.
The next news announcement really made my day. The government announced a new supplementary fiscal budget to pay for reconstruction after the quake, tsunami and nuclear emergency. It will cover rebuilding infrastructure, subsidising the recreation of the fishing industry, evacuation and accommodation for hundreds of thousands of people, compensation for farmers affected by radiation etc etc. All in all, 4 trillion yen, about 45 billion Australian dollars... to be paid for...out of funds set aside to cover the gap in the pension plan!
And just to top it off, Tokyo Disneyland is now open.
Tuesday, 19 April 2011
Robots in the nuke plant... fearmongering moves to North Korea
For the last 3 days, U.S.- made robots have been inspecting the conditions inside the nuclear reactor buildings at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. They have found - wait for it - high levels of radiation, which I found about as shocking as say, detecting high levels of radiation next to a damaged nuclear reactor. So shocking that I can barely raise the energy to mention it. The robots couldn't really do much - just roll in, take some video and radiation measurements, and then retreat in the face of scattered debris on the ground.
Meanwhile the centre of world fear-mongering may have moved to that most reliable and objective of medias, state-owned North Korean television. "The crisis is getting more serious," it was reported yesterday. "Even a month after the accident, we see no prospects of getting radioactive leakages under control."
There you have it, a source you can trust.
In other bad news, more examples of ugly discrimination against perceived radiation victims are popping up. The so-called 'radiation certificates' are still in wide circulation, and there have been reports that people from Fukushima have been refused entrance to hotels in other prefectures, and that children have been bullied. There is even the extraordinary case of a an eight-year-old child who lived 20 kms from the nuclear site being refused entry into a Fukushima hosptial as she had no non-radioactivity certification; her father told Japan's Mainichi newspaper that he was shocked that their appointment at the hospital had been cancelled.
Discrimination of different kinds is rife in Japan, but this kind of thing is particularly unsavoury. Haven't victims of the earthquake and tsunami suffered enough?
Meanwhile the centre of world fear-mongering may have moved to that most reliable and objective of medias, state-owned North Korean television. "The crisis is getting more serious," it was reported yesterday. "Even a month after the accident, we see no prospects of getting radioactive leakages under control."
There you have it, a source you can trust.
In other bad news, more examples of ugly discrimination against perceived radiation victims are popping up. The so-called 'radiation certificates' are still in wide circulation, and there have been reports that people from Fukushima have been refused entrance to hotels in other prefectures, and that children have been bullied. There is even the extraordinary case of a an eight-year-old child who lived 20 kms from the nuclear site being refused entry into a Fukushima hosptial as she had no non-radioactivity certification; her father told Japan's Mainichi newspaper that he was shocked that their appointment at the hospital had been cancelled.
Discrimination of different kinds is rife in Japan, but this kind of thing is particularly unsavoury. Haven't victims of the earthquake and tsunami suffered enough?
Saturday, 16 April 2011
So they're evacuating because...?
The media reported today that radiation levels in Namie, 30 km from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, were significantly higher than normal. The accumulated radiation level stood at 17,000 microsieverts since the March 11 incident. Namie is one of the areas being considered for evacuation.
But how much is 17,000 microsieverts? Well, it's 17 millisieverts. 100 millisieverts over the course of a year is barely cause for alarm...current radiation workers at Fukushima have had their acceptable levels raised to 250, though this is because of the emergency situation. And even that is not...anything that can reliably be linked to danger.
These evacuations are causing extraordinary disruption to the lives of tens of thousands of people, costing millions of dollars in the short-term, tens of millions in the long-term, and damaging the production capacity of one of Japan's largest agricultural areas.
Is it really worth it?
But how much is 17,000 microsieverts? Well, it's 17 millisieverts. 100 millisieverts over the course of a year is barely cause for alarm...current radiation workers at Fukushima have had their acceptable levels raised to 250, though this is because of the emergency situation. And even that is not...anything that can reliably be linked to danger.
These evacuations are causing extraordinary disruption to the lives of tens of thousands of people, costing millions of dollars in the short-term, tens of millions in the long-term, and damaging the production capacity of one of Japan's largest agricultural areas.
Is it really worth it?
Wednesday, 13 April 2011
Another Chernobyl?
The Japanese authorities declared yesterday that Fukushima was a 'Level 7' accident, on the same level as Chernobyl, on the international nuclear incident scale.
I am aware of international paranoia about Fukushima, but I am nevertheless surprised at this.
In the Chernobyl accident, an entire reactor melted down, spewing radioactive material high into the atmosphere where it spread to vast areas around it. About 30 people died directly from radiation. The number of long-term deaths caused by Chernobyl depends on what you read, but estimations range from zero to several tens of thousands Even Wikipedia, which I consider in general the best source of information on the plant, seems unsure, suggesting anywhere from 500 to several thousand. One issue is that thryoid cancer, the main cancer caused by Chernobyl, has very low incidence rates and a high survivability. Not only that, but health conditions in the region around the plant are generally not very good in any case, so it's hard to differentiate Chernobyl-induced disease from the usual alcoholism and other health afflictions of the region. But certainly mainstream experts suggest many people were adversely affected.
In Fukushima nobody at all has died from radiation. Two people were reported to have been exposed to dangerous levels but it seems like they never got sick. As for radiation releases, the total amount of radiation released is less than 10% of that released by Chernobyl, and much more localised. So I am baffled by the decision to place Fukushima in the same band as Chernobyl. '7' is supposed to be the highest on the scale: what are they going to do in a genuine catastrophe?
It was also announced that a few areas outside the current 30 km exclusion zone will be evacuated, as occupants staying for an entire year will absorb about '20 millisieverts' of radiation, which is substantially greater than background radiation. Well, okay, you might think. Sounds dangerous. But some google searching reveals that 20 millisieverts is well...not very much at all. More than background, sure. But the maximum permissable amount of radiation absorbed over the course of a year is set at 50 millisieverts for American nuclear power plant workers. And the absolute minimum amount that is said to be linked to cancer is 100 millisieverts. In any words, the amount of radiation accumulated by residents who lived for a year in these areas would be one-fifth of that required to be linked to any cancer. In addition, as work progresses at the plant, steadily but slowly, radiation levels will decrease so that residents would be absorbing less and less.
Baffling.
I am aware of international paranoia about Fukushima, but I am nevertheless surprised at this.
In the Chernobyl accident, an entire reactor melted down, spewing radioactive material high into the atmosphere where it spread to vast areas around it. About 30 people died directly from radiation. The number of long-term deaths caused by Chernobyl depends on what you read, but estimations range from zero to several tens of thousands Even Wikipedia, which I consider in general the best source of information on the plant, seems unsure, suggesting anywhere from 500 to several thousand. One issue is that thryoid cancer, the main cancer caused by Chernobyl, has very low incidence rates and a high survivability. Not only that, but health conditions in the region around the plant are generally not very good in any case, so it's hard to differentiate Chernobyl-induced disease from the usual alcoholism and other health afflictions of the region. But certainly mainstream experts suggest many people were adversely affected.
In Fukushima nobody at all has died from radiation. Two people were reported to have been exposed to dangerous levels but it seems like they never got sick. As for radiation releases, the total amount of radiation released is less than 10% of that released by Chernobyl, and much more localised. So I am baffled by the decision to place Fukushima in the same band as Chernobyl. '7' is supposed to be the highest on the scale: what are they going to do in a genuine catastrophe?
It was also announced that a few areas outside the current 30 km exclusion zone will be evacuated, as occupants staying for an entire year will absorb about '20 millisieverts' of radiation, which is substantially greater than background radiation. Well, okay, you might think. Sounds dangerous. But some google searching reveals that 20 millisieverts is well...not very much at all. More than background, sure. But the maximum permissable amount of radiation absorbed over the course of a year is set at 50 millisieverts for American nuclear power plant workers. And the absolute minimum amount that is said to be linked to cancer is 100 millisieverts. In any words, the amount of radiation accumulated by residents who lived for a year in these areas would be one-fifth of that required to be linked to any cancer. In addition, as work progresses at the plant, steadily but slowly, radiation levels will decrease so that residents would be absorbing less and less.
Baffling.
 |
| The emperor visits an evacuation centre styled by new fashion designer '100 yen' |
Sunday, 10 April 2011
U.S. revising 80 km exclusion zone
In the wake of declining radiation levels and increasing evidence Tepco has the long-term situation at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant under control, the U.S. is now said to be rethinking its 80km exclusion zone around the plant.
In fact, it's becoming increasingly clear the original recommedation was pulled out of somebody's arse in a paranoid fit. According to Associated Press, on Thursday U.S. nuclear officials told an independent panel that the recommedation was based on imcomplete information and assumptions about the reactors' condition that have since proven false.
In actuality there was very little need for any exclusion zone from the beginning. On only one day (March 15th) radiation levels actually dangerous to human health were detected, and that was at the main gate. Of course, an exclusion zone of some kind was and is both sensible and appropriate. But a little perspective is in order. Nobody has actually died from radiation poisoning. Indeed, only three people are reported to have been exposed to dangerous levels, and to my knowledge they didn't develop any symptoms. In fact, nothing has been reported about them for several days, and I think it safe to assume they have either been released (to face a lifetime of discrimination) or are still under observation in hospital.
While it's true the Fukushima plant crisis is a major disaster, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, probably billions, the bulk of expense will come from dealing with public fears of radiation and relatively little will be spent because of radiation itself.
In fact, it's becoming increasingly clear the original recommedation was pulled out of somebody's arse in a paranoid fit. According to Associated Press, on Thursday U.S. nuclear officials told an independent panel that the recommedation was based on imcomplete information and assumptions about the reactors' condition that have since proven false.
In actuality there was very little need for any exclusion zone from the beginning. On only one day (March 15th) radiation levels actually dangerous to human health were detected, and that was at the main gate. Of course, an exclusion zone of some kind was and is both sensible and appropriate. But a little perspective is in order. Nobody has actually died from radiation poisoning. Indeed, only three people are reported to have been exposed to dangerous levels, and to my knowledge they didn't develop any symptoms. In fact, nothing has been reported about them for several days, and I think it safe to assume they have either been released (to face a lifetime of discrimination) or are still under observation in hospital.
While it's true the Fukushima plant crisis is a major disaster, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, probably billions, the bulk of expense will come from dealing with public fears of radiation and relatively little will be spent because of radiation itself.
Friday, 8 April 2011
In praise of the Japanese government.
There has been a lot of criticism of Naoto Kan's administration since the quake. There have been accusations that they haven't been on the ball, they've have kept the public in the dark, they have let Tepco come close to destroying Japan etc. You will even hear many many people openly doubt what the government says about radiation levels in the air and food. I find this idea particularly distasteful.
Usually I am no fan of the Japanese government but I think they are doing a sterling job. I'm so impressed, in fact, that I'm considering staying in Japan far longer than I would have.
Firstly, the suggestion that we are being lied to about radiation levels is just absurd. Radiation levels are independently verifiable, and the amount of measuring going on makes the idea of a vast shadowy conspiracy simply unfeasible. For example, radiation is being measured in over 1,400 places in Fukushima prefecture alone. Reported radiation levels in different kinds of seafood and agricultural products are so specific, so jargonized and so opaque that it would be senseless to make them up. Instead, rather than a situation where the government telling us it's safe when it's actually dangerous, what is really happening is that the media and the public is indulging in fearmongering and panic, so that danger is created where none exists, and risk is vastly exaggerated. For instance, the increased cancer risk derived from eating 'contaminated' seafood is so negligible that it is completely outweighed by the extra health risk that is incurred when an individual chooses another protein source that is less healthy - such as beef or pork.
In fact, announcements on radiation levels in food are reliable and so precise that they reflect the Japanese penchant to be anal. Considering these measurements, the government takes off the market those products that exceed the set levels of radiation - and those levels themselves are extraordinarily strict. This is because when they were set the authorities wanted to be as thorough and cautious as possible - leaving large margins of safety, mainly because the long-term effects of small radiation levels were largely unknown. In fact, there is very little expert opinion supporting the idea of any ill-effects from very low radiation doses, so in all probability those set radiation levels are, if anything, too low.
When the government does make an announcement about an agricultural product they do so with obvious reluctance. Two days ago they made such an announcement regarding sand lances caught in Kitaibaraki, which has led to a general fishing ban throughout the whole of Ibaraki. Whenever something like this happens the government takes much of the blame. They wouldn't do so unless they had to. So in a sense I enjoy hearing such news, because it means it's trustworthy.
So that's why I trust the Japanese government when they tell me this or that seafood is safe to eat. That, plus the fact I would never be willing to give up sushi.
I also believe that Tepco should not be receiving so much criticism. It is true that they have been involved in safety scandals in the past. For example, in 2002 Tepco admitted they had falsified safety records at the number reactor at Fukushima Daiichi plant. IAEA officials have also issued warnings about Japanese nuclear reactors in the past, especially in regard to massive earthquakes. However there is no serious suggestion that I am aware of that this accident could have been prevented. It was just one of those things, and the Japanese are dealing with it as best as humanly possible.
Usually I am no fan of the Japanese government but I think they are doing a sterling job. I'm so impressed, in fact, that I'm considering staying in Japan far longer than I would have.
Firstly, the suggestion that we are being lied to about radiation levels is just absurd. Radiation levels are independently verifiable, and the amount of measuring going on makes the idea of a vast shadowy conspiracy simply unfeasible. For example, radiation is being measured in over 1,400 places in Fukushima prefecture alone. Reported radiation levels in different kinds of seafood and agricultural products are so specific, so jargonized and so opaque that it would be senseless to make them up. Instead, rather than a situation where the government telling us it's safe when it's actually dangerous, what is really happening is that the media and the public is indulging in fearmongering and panic, so that danger is created where none exists, and risk is vastly exaggerated. For instance, the increased cancer risk derived from eating 'contaminated' seafood is so negligible that it is completely outweighed by the extra health risk that is incurred when an individual chooses another protein source that is less healthy - such as beef or pork.
In fact, announcements on radiation levels in food are reliable and so precise that they reflect the Japanese penchant to be anal. Considering these measurements, the government takes off the market those products that exceed the set levels of radiation - and those levels themselves are extraordinarily strict. This is because when they were set the authorities wanted to be as thorough and cautious as possible - leaving large margins of safety, mainly because the long-term effects of small radiation levels were largely unknown. In fact, there is very little expert opinion supporting the idea of any ill-effects from very low radiation doses, so in all probability those set radiation levels are, if anything, too low.
When the government does make an announcement about an agricultural product they do so with obvious reluctance. Two days ago they made such an announcement regarding sand lances caught in Kitaibaraki, which has led to a general fishing ban throughout the whole of Ibaraki. Whenever something like this happens the government takes much of the blame. They wouldn't do so unless they had to. So in a sense I enjoy hearing such news, because it means it's trustworthy.
So that's why I trust the Japanese government when they tell me this or that seafood is safe to eat. That, plus the fact I would never be willing to give up sushi.
I also believe that Tepco should not be receiving so much criticism. It is true that they have been involved in safety scandals in the past. For example, in 2002 Tepco admitted they had falsified safety records at the number reactor at Fukushima Daiichi plant. IAEA officials have also issued warnings about Japanese nuclear reactors in the past, especially in regard to massive earthquakes. However there is no serious suggestion that I am aware of that this accident could have been prevented. It was just one of those things, and the Japanese are dealing with it as best as humanly possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)