So very heartbreaking reading this. It's simply un-imagineable what these people, their pets, cattle, etc, are experiencing every single day. Going to sleep at night must be their only escape from the reality of their every day life.
My deepest heartfelt compassion & prayers go out to all that are suffering in that region.
Fukushima is Japanese For “It’s Much Worse Than You Thought”
I’m astonished that this interview ran on CNN. I had concluded that nothing short of a China Syndrome event could make the US media mention that still unfolding disaster again.
Now that we have an admission from TEPCO that there was a complete meltdown of three cores, and we’re seeing radiation pop up in the US and other places around the world, I can only wonder how long the end game of this mess will be. We’re certainly not at the end game yet, but assuming the latest estimates of a complete, cold shutdown of the site by late 2012 are reasonably accurate, then it’s certainly not too early to contemplate what comes next. As Michio Kaku points out, what to do with the newly radioactive water that’s piling up in Japan (at a rate of about 500 tons every day) is a gigantic issue. Essentially, they’re exchanging an almost unthinkable problem now for a smaller, but still huge, one down the road a bit. I suspect that just about everyone’s guess is right, and they will eventually wind up dumping this radioactive water at sea simply because there’s no better alternative.
Once again: The evidence continues to accumulate that we’ve already reached our peak competence for managing technology that carries such staggering potential for human and environmental harm. I often refer to the hurdles for any new technology to go from “it worked once in the lab” to “time to mass produce and ship it”. With some technologies, like nuclear fission-powered electricity plants, a significant issue in that journey has very little to do with the technology itself, and is almost purely a function of how our institutions choose to use it. Make an assumption that there will always be enough cooling water in a given spot (and never a dangerous flood), so we can put a nuclear plant where it’s economical or convenient or politically viable? Sure. Sounds safe to me. Cut corners and ignore the advice of experts on design and construction details? Why not — who will ever know? Let the regulating body sit in the cozy pocket of the industry it’s supposed to be regulating? Why, that’s just a pro-business attitude from nasty old government. What could possibly go wrong?
Eventually there will be books written and documentaries made that reveal all the ugly details of what went wrong at Fukushima, including the blundering and lying that followed. Right now, I don’t think I could bear to read/watch such an account.
For those just joining the conversation here who haven’t heard this from me before, let me make it clear: I am not anti-nuclear power. I am, however, vehemently anti-stupidity and anti-greed, especially when those human traits lead to the nightmare event(s) we’re trying desperately to prevent in Fukushima. As soon as we demonstrate that we know how to build, manage, and decommission nuclear power plants in way that doesn’t resemble a drunk and blindfolded tightrope walk over a shark tank, I will be the loudest proponent of nuclear power one could imagine, simply because that’s how much we need a low-carbon source of nuclear power. So far, claiming we know what we’re doing with nuclear power assumes facts not in evidence.
About Lou GrinzoLou Grinzo is a writer and researcher residing in Rochester, NY. He blogs at The Cost of Energy (http://www.grinzo.com/energy/)
