 |
|
| >>back to Proletarian index |
>>view printer-friendly version |
|
|
| Proletarian issue 57 (December 2013) |
|
| Fukushima – a global threat that requires a global response |
|
| Nuclear energy must be taken out of the hands of the profiteers and put firmly under the control of the masses, who can decide how best to use it in their interests. |
|
|
|
This article by Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers is reproduced from truth-out.org with thanks.
The information contained in this article gives a graphic indictment of the reckless, even genocidal insanity of capitalism, with its never-ending thirst for maximum profit at any cost.
Although the authors of this article have concluded that the only sensible reaction to the crisis at Fukushima is a completely nuclear-free world, it is our belief that, under a planned socialist economy, where science is used to solve humanity’s problems and meet our real needs, it is quite possible that society could find a way to harness nuclear technology safely.
Neither the misuse of technology nor the rampant disregard for safety shown by the capitalists gives us any reason to assume that nuclear might not form part of the solution to humanity’s quest for energy sources that can be harnessed safely and cleanly.
As socialists, we must learn to distinguish between the technology and its implementation; between the knife and the person who wields it. A knife can just as well be used to butcher as person as to chop a tomato; should we therefore stop producing knives? Or should we put our efforts into learning how to handle knives safely, and into creating a society in which people are not filled with the kind of rage and frustration that drives them to kill?
What is very clear, however, is that the necessary research will not be funded by crisis-ridden capitalism, and nor will the necessary safety procedures ever be implemented while there are bigger profits to be had by ignoring them!
The story of Fukushima should be on the front pages of every newspaper. Instead, it is rarely mentioned. The problems at Fukushima are unprecedented in human experience and involve a high risk of radiation events larger than any that the global community has ever experienced. It is going to take the best engineering minds in the world to solve these problems and to diminish their global impact.
It is clear that the problems at Fukushima demand that the world’s best nuclear engineers and other experts advise and assist in the efforts to solve them. Nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen of fairewinds.org and an international team of scientists created a 15-point plan to address the crises at Fukushima.
A subcommittee of the Green Shadow Cabinet (of which we are members), which includes long-time nuclear activist Harvey Wasserman, is circulating a sign-on letter and a petition calling on the United Nations and Japanese government to put in place the Gundersen et al plan and to provide 24-hour media access to information about the crises at Fukushima.
The problems of Fukushima
There are three major problems at Fukushima:
1. Three reactor cores are missing.
2. Radiated water has been leaking from the plant in mass quantities for two-and-a-half years.
3. Eleven thousand spent nuclear fuel rods, perhaps the most dangerous things ever created by humans, are stored at the plant and need to be removed. 1,533 of those are in a very precarious and dangerous position.
Each of these three could result in dramatic radiation events, unlike any radiation exposure humans have ever experienced. We’ll discuss them in order, saving the most dangerous for last.
Missing reactor cores
Since the accident at Fukushima on 11 March 2011, three reactor cores have gone missing. There was an unprecedented three-reactor ‘melt-down’. These melted cores, called corium lavas, are thought to have passed through the basements of reactor buildings 1, 2 and 3, and to be somewhere in the ground underneath.
Harvey Wasserman, who has been working on nuclear energy issues for over 40 years, tells us that during those four decades no one ever talked about the possibility of a multiple meltdown, but that is what occurred at Fukushima.
It is an unprecedented situation to not know where these cores are. Tepco is pouring water where they think the cores are, but they are not sure. There are occasional steam eruptions coming from the grounds of the reactors, so the cores are thought to still be hot.
The concern is that the corium lavas will enter or may have already entered the aquifer below the plant. That would contaminate a much larger area with radioactive elements. Some suggest that it would require the area surrounding Tokyo, 40 million people, to be evacuated. Another concern is that if the corium lavas enter the aquifer, they could create a “super-heated pressurised steam reaction beneath a layer of caprock causing a major ‘hydrovolcanic’ explosion”.
A further concern is that a large reserve of groundwater that is coming in contact with the corium lavas is migrating towards the ocean at the rate of 4m per month. This could release greater amounts of radiation than were released in the early days of the disaster.
Radioactive water leaking into the Pacific Ocean
Tepco did not admit that leaks of radioactive water were occurring until July of this year. Shunichi Tanaka, the head of Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority, finally told reporters this July that radioactive water has been leaking into the Pacific Ocean since the disaster hit over two years ago.
This is the largest single contribution of radionuclides to the marine environment ever observed, according to a report by the French Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety. The Japanese government finally admitted that the situation was urgent this September – an emergency they did not acknowledge until two-and-a-half years after the water problem began.
How much radioactive water is leaking into the ocean? An estimated 300 tons (71,895 gallons/272,152 litres) of contaminated water is flowing into the ocean every day.
The first radioactive ocean plume released by the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster will take three years to reach the shores of the United States. This means, according to a new study from the University of New South Wales, the United States will experience the first radioactive water coming to its shores sometime in early 2014.
One month after Fukushima, the FDA (the US Food and Drug Administration) announced it was going to stop testing fish in the Pacific Ocean for radiation. But independent research is showing that every blue-fin tuna tested in the waters off California has been contaminated with radiation that originated in Fukushima.
Daniel Madigan, the marine ecologist who led the Stanford University study from May of 2012 was quoted in the Wall Street Journal saying, “The tuna packaged it up (the radiation) and brought it across the world’s largest ocean. We were definitely surprised to see it at all and even more surprised to see it in every one we measured.”
Marine biologist Nicholas Fisher of Stony Brook University in New York State, another member of the study group, said: “We found that absolutely every one of them had comparable concentrations of caesium 134 and caesium 137.”
In addition, Science reports that fish near Fukushima are being found to have high levels of the radioactive isotope cesium-134. The levels found in these fish are not decreasing, which indicates that radiation-polluted water continues to leak into the ocean. At least 42 fish species from the area around the plant are considered unsafe. South Korea has banned Japanese fish as a result of the ongoing leaks.
The half-life (time it takes for half of the element to decay) of caesium 134 is 2.0652 years. For caesium 137, the half-life is 30.17 years. Caesium does not sink to the ocean floor, so fish swim through it. What are the human impacts of caesium?
When contact with radioactive caesium occurs, which is highly unlikely, a person can experience cell damage due to radiation of the caesium particles. Due to this, effects such as nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and bleeding may occur. When the exposure lasts a long time, people may even lose consciousness. Coma or even death may then follow. How serious the effects are depends upon the resistance of individual persons and the duration of exposure and the concentration a person is exposed to, experts say.
There is no end in sight from the leakage of radioactive water into the Pacific from Fukushima. Harvey Wasserman is questioning whether fishing in the Pacific Ocean will be safe after years of leakage from Fukushima. The World Health Organisation (WHO) is claiming that this will have limited effect on human health, with concentrations predicted to be below WHO safety levels. However, experts seriously question the WHO’s claims.
The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Radiation is in the process of writing a report to assess the radiation doses and associated effects on health and environment. When finalised, it will be the most comprehensive scientific analysis of the information available to date, examining how much radioactive material was released, how it was dispersed over land and water, how Fukushima compares to previous accidents, what the impact is on the environment and food, and what the impact is on human health and the environment.
Wasserman warns that “dilution is no solution”. The fact that the Pacific Ocean is large does not change the fact that these radioactive elements have long half-lives. Radiation in water is taken up by vegetation, then smaller fish eat the vegetation, larger fish eat the smaller fish and at the top of the food chain we will find fish like tuna, dolphin and whales with concentrated levels of radiation. Humans at the top of the food chain could be eating these contaminated fish.
As bad as the ongoing leakage of radioactive water is into the Pacific, that is not the largest part of the water problem.
The Asia-Pacific Journal reported last month that Tepco (the Tokyo Electric Power Company who own the Fukushima plant) has 330,000 tons of water stored in 1,000 above-ground tanks and an undetermined amount in underground storage tanks. Every day, 400 tons of water comes to the site from the mountains, 300 tons of that is the source for the contaminated water leaking into the Pacific daily. It is not clear where the rest of this water goes.
Each day, Tepco injects 400 tons of water into the destroyed facilities to keep them cool; about half is recycled, and the rest goes into the above-ground tanks. They are constantly building new storage tanks for this radioactive water. The tanks being used for storage were put together rapidly and are already leaking. They expect to have 800,000 tons of radioactive water stored on the site by 2016.
Harvey Wasserman warns that these unstable tanks are at risk of rupture if there is another earthquake or storm that hits Fukushima. The Asia-Pacific Journal concludes: “So at present there is no real solution to the water problem.”
The most recent news on the water problem at Fukushima adds to the concerns. On 11 October 2013, Tepco disclosed that the radioactivity level spiked 6,500 times at a Fukushima well. “Tepco said the findings show that radioactive substances like strontium have reached the groundwater. High levels of tritium, which transfers much more easily in water than strontium, had already been detected.”
Spent fuel rods
As bad as the problems of radioactive water and missing cores are, the biggest problem at Fukushima comes from the spent fuel rods. The plant has been in operation for 40 years. As a result, they are storing 11,000 spent fuel rods on the grounds of the Fukushima plant. These fuel rods are composed of highly radioactive materials such as plutonium and uranium. They are about the width of a thumb and about 15 feet long.
The biggest and most immediate challenge is the 1,533 spent fuel rods packed tightly in a pool four floors above Reactor 4. Before the storm hit, those rods had been removed for routine maintenance of the reactor. But now they are stored 100 feet in the air in damaged racks. They weigh a total of 400 tons and contain radiation equivalent to 14,000 times the amount released by the Hiroshima atomic bomb.
The building in which these rods are stored has been damaged. Tepco reinforced it with a steel frame, but the building itself is buckling and sagging, vulnerable to collapse if another earthquake or storm hits the area. Additionally, the ground under and around the building is becoming saturated with water, which further undermines the integrity of the structure and could cause it to tilt.
How dangerous are these fuel rods? Harvey Wasserman explains that the fuel rods are clad in zirconium, which can ignite if they lose coolant. They could also ignite or explode if rods break or hit each other. Wasserman reports that some say this could result in a fission explosion like an atomic bomb, others say that is not what would happen, but agree it would be “a reaction like we have never seen before; a nuclear fire releasing incredible amounts of radiation”, says Wasserman.
These are not the only spent fuel rods at the plant; they are just the most precarious. There are 11,000 fuel rods scattered around the plant – 6,000 in a cooling pool less than 50 meters from the sagging Reactor 4. If a fire erupts in the spent fuel pool at Reactor 4, it could ignite the rods in the cooling pool and lead to an even greater release of radiation. It could set off a chain reaction that could not be stopped.
What would happen? Wasserman reports that the plant would have to be evacuated. The workers who are essential to preventing damage at the plant would leave, and we will have lost a critical safeguard. In addition, the computers will not work because of the intense radiation.
As a result, we would be blind – the world would have to sit and wait to see what happened. You might have to not only evacuate Fukushima but all of the population in and around Tokyo, reports Wasserman.
There is no question that the 1,533 spent fuel rods need to be removed. But Arnie Gundersen, a veteran nuclear engineer and director of Fairewinds Energy Education, who used to build fuel assemblies, told Reuters ”They are going to have difficulty in removing a significant number of the rods.” He described the problem in a radio interview:
“If you think of a nuclear fuel rack as a pack of cigarettes, if you pull a cigarette straight up it will come out – but these racks have been distorted. Now when they go to pull the cigarette straight out, it’s going to likely break and release radioactive caesium and other gases – xenon and krypton – into the air. I suspect come November, December, January we’re going to hear that the building’s been evacuated, they’ve broke a fuel rod, the fuel rod is off-gassing.”
Wasserman builds on the analogy, telling us it is “worse than pulling cigarettes out of a crumbled cigarette pack”. It is likely they used salt water as a coolant out of desperation, which would cause corrosion because the rods were never meant to be in salt water. The condition of the rods is unknown. There is debris in the coolant, so there has been some crumbling from somewhere.
Gundersen added: “The roof has fallen in, which further distorted the racks,” noting that if a fuel rod snaps, it will release radioactive gas which will require at a minimum evacuation of the plant. They will release those gases into the atmosphere and try again.
The Japan Times writes: “The consequences could be far more severe than any nuclear accident the world has ever seen. If a fuel rod is dropped, breaks or becomes entangled while being removed, possible worst-case scenarios include a big explosion, a meltdown in the pool, or a large fire. Any of these situations could lead to massive releases of deadly radionuclides into the atmosphere, putting much of Japan – including Tokyo and Yokohama – and even neighbouring countries at serious risk.”
This is not the usual moving of fuel rods. Tepco has been saying this is routine, but in fact it is unique – a feat of engineering never done before. As Gundersen said:
“Tokyo Electric is portraying this as easy. In a normal nuclear reactor, all of this is done with computers. Everything gets pulled perfectly vertically. Well nothing is vertical anymore, the fuel racks are distorted; it’s all going to have to be done manually. The net effect is it’s a really difficult job. It wouldn’t surprise me if they snapped some of the fuel and they can’t remove it.”
Gregory Jaczko, former chairman of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission concurs with Gundersen, describing the removal of the spent fuel rods as “a very significant activity, and ... very, very unprecedented”.
Wasserman summed the challenge up: “We are doing something never done before – bent, crumbling, brittle fuel rods being removed from a pool that is compromised, in a building that is sinking, sagging and buckling, and it all must done under manual control, not with computers.”
And the potential damage from failure would affect hundreds of millions of people.
The solutions
The three major problems at Fukushima are all unprecedented, each unique in their own way and each has the potential for major damage to humans and the environment. There are no clear solutions, but there are steps that need to be taken urgently to get the Fukushima clean-up and decommissioning on track and minimise the risks.
The first thing that is needed is to end the media blackout. The global public needs to be informed about the issues the world faces from Fukushima. The impacts of Fukushima could affect almost everyone on the planet, so we all have a stake in the outcome. If the public is informed about this problem, the political will to resolve it will rapidly develop.
The nuclear industry, which wants to continue to expand, fears Fukushima being widely discussed because it undermines its already weak economic potential. But the profits of the nuclear industry are of minor concern compared to the risks of the triple Fukushima challenges.
The second thing that must be faced is the incompetence of Tepco. The company is not capable of handling this triple complex crisis. Tepco “is already Japan’s most distrusted firm” and has been exposed as “dangerously incompetent”. A poll found that 91 percent of the Japanese public wants the government to intervene at Fukushima.
Tepco’s management of the stricken power plant has been described as a comedy of errors. The constant stream of mistakes has been made worse by constant false denials and efforts to minimise major problems. Indeed, the entire Fukushima catastrophe could have been avoided.
“Tepco at first blamed the accident on ‘an unforeseen massive tsunami’ triggered by the Great East Japan Earthquake on 11 March 2011. Then it admitted it had in fact foreseen just such a scenario but hadn’t done anything about it.”
The reality is that Fukushima was plagued by human error from the outset. An official Japanese government investigation concluded that the Fukushima accident was a “man-made” disaster, caused by “collusion” between government and Tepco and bad reactor design.
On this point, Tepco is not alone; this is an industry-wide problem. Many US nuclear plants have serious problems, are being operated beyond their life span, have the same design problems and are near earthquake faults. Regulatory officials in both the US and Japan are too corruptly tied to the industry.
Then, the meltdown itself was denied for months, with Tepco claiming it had not been confirmed. Japan Times reports that “in December 2011, the government announced that the plant had reached ‘a state of cold shutdown’. Normally, that means radiation releases are under control and the temperature of its nuclear fuel is consistently below boiling point.”
Unfortunately, the statement was false – the reactors continue to need water to keep them cool, the fuel rods need to be kept cool – there has been no cold shutdown.
Tepco has done a terrible job of cleaning up the plant. Japan Times describes some of the problems:
“The plant is being run on makeshift equipment and breakdowns are endemic. Among nearly a dozen serious problems since April this year there have been successive power outages, leaks of highly radioactive water from underground water pools – and a rat that chewed enough wires to short-circuit a switchboard, causing a power outage that interrupted cooling for nearly 30 hours. Later, the cooling system for a fuel-storage pool had to be switched off for safety checks when two dead rats were found in a transformer box.”
Tepco has been constantly cutting financial corners and not spending enough to solve the challenges of the Fukushima disaster, resulting in shoddy practices that cause environmental damage. Washington’s Blog reports that the Japanese government is spreading radioactivity throughout Japan – and other countries – by burning radioactive waste in incinerators not built to handle such toxic substances. Workers have expressed concerns and even apologised for following orders regarding the ‘clean-up’.
Indeed, the workers are another serious concern. The Guardian reported in October 2013 on the plummeting morale of workers, problems of alcohol abuse, anxiety, loneliness, post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. Tepco cut the pay of its workers by 20 percent in 2011 to save money, even though these workers are doing very difficult work and face constant problems.
Outside of work, many were traumatised by being forced to evacuate their homes after the tsunami; and they have no idea how exposed to radiation they have been and what health consequences they will suffer. Contractors are hired based on the lowest bid, resulting in low wages for workers.
According to the Guardian, Japan’s top nuclear regulator, Shunichi Tanaka, told reporters: “Mistakes are often linked to morale. People usually don’t make silly, careless mistakes when they’re motivated and working in a positive environment. The lack of it, I think, may be related to the recent problems.”
The history of Tepco shows we cannot trust this company and its mistreated workforce to handle the complex challenges faced at Fukushima. The crisis at Fukushima is a global one, requiring a global solution.
In an open letter to the United Nations, 16 top nuclear experts urged the government of Japan to transfer responsibility for the Fukushima reactor site to a worldwide engineering group overseen by a civil-society panel and an international group of nuclear experts independent from Tepco and the International Atomic Energy Administration (IAEA).
They urge that the stabilisation, clean-up and decommissioning of the plant be well-funded. They make this request with “urgency” because the situation at the Fukushima plant is “progressively deteriorating, not stabilising”.
Beyond the clean-up, they are also critical of the estimates by the World Health Organisation and IAEA of the health and environmental damage caused by the Fukushima disaster and they recommend more accurate methods of accounting, as well as the gathering of data to ensure more accurate estimates. They also want to see the people displaced by Fukushima treated in better ways; and they urge that the views of indigenous people who never wanted the uranium removed from their lands be respected in the future, as their views would have prevented this disaster.
Facing reality
The problems at Fukushima are in large part about facing reality – seeing the challenges, risks and potential harms from the incident. It is about Tepco and Japan facing the reality that they are not equipped to handle the challenges of Fukushima and need the world to join the effort.
Facing reality is a common problem throughout the nuclear industry and those who continue to push for nuclear energy. Indeed, it is a problem with many energy issues. We must face the reality of the long-term damage being done to the planet and the people by the carbon-nuclear-based energy economy.
Another reality the nuclear industry must face is that the United States is turning away from nuclear energy and the world will do the same. As Gary Jaczko, who chaired the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the time of the Fukushima incident says: “I’ve never seen a movie that’s set 200 years in the future and the planet is being powered by fission reactors – that’s nobody’s vision of the future. This is not a future technology.”
He sees US nuclear reactors as aging, many in operation beyond their original lifespan. The economics of nuclear energy are increasingly difficult as it is a very expensive source of energy. Further, there is no money or desire to finance new nuclear plants. “The industry is going away”, he said bluntly.
Ralph Nader describes nuclear energy as “unnecessary, uneconomic, uninsurable, unevacuable and, most importantly, unsafe”. He argues it only continues to exist because the nuclear lobby pushes politicians to protect it.
The point made by Nader about the inability to evacuate if there is a nuclear accident is worth underlining. Wasserman points out that there are nuclear plants in the US that are near earthquake faults – among them are plants near Los Angeles, New York City and Washington, DC. And Fukushima was based on a design by General Electric, which was also used to build 23 reactors in the US.
If we faced reality, public officials would be organising evacuation drills in those cities. If we did so, Americans would quickly learn that if there is a serious nuclear accident, US cities could not be evacuated. Activists making the reasonable demand for evacuation drills may be a very good strategy to end nuclear power.
Wasserman emphasises that as bad as Fukushima is, it is not the worst-case scenario for a nuclear disaster. Fukushima was 120km (75 miles) from the centre of the earthquake. If that had been 20km (12 miles), the plant would have been reduced to rubble and caused an immediate nuclear catastrophe.
Another reality we need to face is a very positive one, Wasserman points out: “All of our world’s energy needs could be met by solar, wind, thermal, ocean technology.” His point is repeated by many top energy experts: in fact, a carbon-free, nuclear-free energy economy is not only possible, it is inevitable. The only question is how long it will take for us to get there, and how much damage will be done before we end the ‘all-of-the-above’ energy strategy that emphasises carbon and nuclear energy sources.
Naoto Kan, prime minister of Japan when the disaster began, recently told an audience that he had been a supporter of nuclear power, but, after the Fukushima accident, “I changed my thinking 180-degrees, completely”. He realised that “no other accident or disaster” other than a nuclear plant disaster can “affect 50 million people ... no other accident could cause such a tragedy”.
He pointed out that all 54 nuclear plants in Japan have now been closed and expressed confidently that “without nuclear power plants we can absolutely provide the energy to meet our demands”. In fact, since the disaster, Japan has tripled its use of solar energy, to the equivalent of three nuclear plants. He believes: “If humanity really would work together ... we could generate all our energy through renewable energy.”
For references, see truth-out.org/news/item/19547-fukushima-a-global-threat-that-requires-a-global-response
|
|
| >>back to Proletarian index |
>>view printer-friendly version |
|
|
|
|
|
