Propaganda and the Fukushima Nuclear Reactor Accident

"I have the greatest admiration for your propaganda. Propaganda in the West is carried out by experts who have had the best training in the world -- in the field of advertising -- and have mastered the techniques with exceptional proficiency ... Yours are subtle and persuasive; ours are crude and obvious ... I think that the fundamental difference between our worlds, with respect to propaganda, is quite simple. You tend to believe yours ... and we tend to disbelieve ours." -- a Soviet correspondent based five years in the U.S.


I have been accused of many things during the short life of this blog. Most recently I have been called "propagandist for the nuclear industry" besides a lot of four letter words and anal orifices. On top of that, also in my life, I have been called many bad names and, unfortunately, done many bad things more times than I care to, or could possibly, remember. Yes. I have done many bad things in my life and I've lied before and tricked people. I have been a sh*thead many more times than I care to recall.


I want to brag, here, though, that I think I am a big enough man to admit it. I'm sorry about those things. I am trying to live right now and to make up for my past wrongs whenever and where ever I can.

No matter what I do or write on this blog, though, I keep getting attacked for being an apologist for the nuclear industry or accused of being "pro-nuclear power." That is patently false. I am not pro-nuclear power excepting for the fact that I believe, in this day and age, we have no viable cheap alternative for energy. I certainly do not like the pollution that coal and oil cause and the illnesses that come with (not to mention the wars).


This article is for those of you who are on the fence and still haven't made up your mind if the situation at Fukushima is safe for you and your family or not.


First, my disclaimer: I've said it over and over that I believe the worst thing that could happen to us is to lose a cheap and clean source of energy. Our other alternatives for energy are not clean (oil, coal) and neither are the remainders cheap or even conceivably efficient until, most probably, the next century. It has been proven that the claims by the IPCC that "80% of our energy needs could be met by renewables by 2050" is pure science fiction; so where does that leave us?


I know of one acquaintance who tells me that he has a friend who said he wishes Japan would abolish nuclear power forever and hoped we could go back to living like the days of the Edo period." You know, the days of old Japan when Samurai and Geisha were running around?.... Really! This guy said this. My only retort to that is, "You mean the Edo period like when Japan was a desperately poor country and most people were starving? Gee, that sounds like a fun and realistic vision for the future! I'm sure today's youth in Japan will be into that big time! Sweet!"


Sounds like paradise to me. I wonder what this hippie dreamer would do without his iPod and Nike hiking shoes as some Samurai chased him down wanting to whack off his blond locks for a trophy? Seriously folks, there are foreigners who have very weird ideas like this running around Japan. I've met one before! Anyhow....


I'm not anti-nuclear power nor am I pro-nuclear power. I just want to cut through the propaganda and BS and get to the truth. Regular readers of mine will know from this blog or Lew Rockwell that I am definitely anti-government in any way shape or form and am always very skeptical of what those clowns in the government say. I am also very skeptical of what passes for "news" in the media today.


Recently, I have been railing on both the government, the media and a sensationalist named Arnie Gundersen. It seems to me that you have here different entities that are all saying various things about the Fukushima disaster and, if you bother to investigate, (which I have) you'll find that they all have an agenda.


I don't have any agenda except wanting to get the truth out. As an ex-news person, I know how to check information - which is something that it seems that 97% of the people are incapable of doing by themselves - I do this because it is the field that I am expert in.


Everyone has a motivation for everything they do.


Here is what I can srumise Arnie Gundersen's motivations are. You check these things by examining a person's critics. Asking fans or followers is like asking a hard-core Rolling Stones fan what they think of Mick Jagger. I found this on Atomic Insights by a guy who works in the nuclear industry named Rod Adams. He wrote:



Gundersen is not dumb; you cannot earn an MS in nuclear engineering and be dumb. He is devious and carefully selective of the facts and opinions that he offers, perhaps that is why he is no longer employed in the industry proper and has to try to make his living on the fringes of the technology.


It is my opinion that Arnie Gundersen must be terribly disappointed with the fact that the decommissioning business has been slow ever since nuclear plant owners determined that existing nuclear plants are valuable assets that should be kept running – and producing revenue – for as long as possible. He is probably bitter about the NRC license extension process; I would bet that he entered into the decommissioning business under the assumption that there would be few, if any license extensions. He must have expected that there would be a lot of work for years to come in plant decommissioning. That was a common perception in the mid 1990s, though it was one with which I strenuously disagreed.


Finally, since the decommissioning business has not worked out, I think that he and his wife are now professional fear-mongers (aka “expert witnesses”) who are willing to testify under oath that plant operators should be forced to shut down plants producing a million dollars worth of electricity per day any time someone measures a concentration of a weak beta particle emitter at a level of about 0.0000000000075 grams/liter in a well that is not even used for drinking water. The Fairewinds Associates, Inc. clients pay them to help establish a legal basis for shutting down valuable electricity production facilities AND they take the money!


That would be enough to make me angry even if I did not know that shutting down the plant would simply require expanded operation of coal or methane burning plants.


If you bother to check, you will see that Gundersen has many issues that could be construed as a conflict of interest hence his testimony is suspect.


I don't think it is necessary that I mention how we must be very suspicious and skeptical of whatever the government says about anything. Never trust the government at face value. That's a given, unless you are brain dead. I criticize the government constantly. Of course, TEPCO's announcements about Fukushima are to be taken with a huge grain of salt too.


So take people like Gundersen who are claiming the worst industrial calamity in history, the inept and totally incompetently government and TEPCO, and what have you got?... Different entities all pushing a certain agenda. Who to believe?


There must be, of course, some middle ground. I suspect that, in that middle ground, somewhere lies the truth.


This blog has consistently and repeatedly stated that the situation near and in the nuclear power plant at Fukushima is an extremely serious problem. It is a crisis of epic proportions for the people living near or within the exclusion zone. But for those of us living in Tokyo, upwind and over 230 kilometers away (or farther), it is, as I've said many times, merely an inconvenience - no matter how much some people love having a victim complex.


Like I've stated over and over, I want to get at the truth. Sensationalism and media hype help no one. Nor does lies or cover ups. 


I live in Tokyo, I check the levels of radiation daily. They are safe. We don't drink tap water - never have - (even though those levels are very safe too) and always check where our groceries and produce are from. We don't eat processed foods and over 70% of our diet is raw fruits and vegetables. I suggest that you do the same. I have deemed that our situation here is safe. If the facts change on the ground, I might alter my opinion. Only a fool doesn't alter an opinion once different facts become available.


People making wild claims are guessing. Wild claims are not facts. They are meaningless conjecture.


Now, if I lived in Fukushima, near the nuclear power plants, that would be another story. The radiation levels there are too high. That's a fact. They are so high that even the government has ordered an evacuation. That's a fact. If I lived there, I would have left long ago. The facts insist upon that course of action.


But I don't live there. That's a fact too.


I will say here that, since we have a small child, if we lived in Fukushima, near the damaged nuclear power plants, I would have moved away long ago. Job and work be damned. But in Tokyo, so far away, even with trace elements of radioactive materials being found in tea in some areas (probably you can find traces anywhere in the world anytime of the day), we'll take the risks.... Especially when you weigh the risks intelligently against the benefits.


Toward that end, here is the best, most balanced recent article that I've found on the situation here at Fukushima. This is an article about one of Japan's top radiation treatment specialists who is extremely critical of TEPCO and the Japanese government's handling of the situation at Fukushima (join the crowd, eh?). I quote his article as it is from a critic of the situation. Let's use this to judge our risk here in Tokyo. This radiation treatment specialist is the main focus in an article entitled: Nuclear Workers and Fukushima Residents at Risk: Cancer Expert on the Fukushima Situation: 

Japan's leading business journal Toyo Keizai has published an article by Hokkaido Cancer Center director Nishio Masamichi, a radiation treatment specialist.

Nishio originally called for “calm” in the days after the accident. Now, he argues, that as the gravity of the situation at the plant has become more clear, the specter of long-term radiation exposure must be reckoned with.

Lamenting the poor state of public knowledge of radiation, Nishio writes, “Japan, with its history of having suffered radiation exposure from the atomic bombs, should have the most [direct] knowledge of radiation, but in fact, in the approach to the nuclear accident, has simply fallen into confusion.” He places blame on a number of groups:

1. TEPCO executives, who he accuses of having hidden the truth and prioritized the survival of the company over public health.
2. Bureaucrats who were unable to put together an accurate body of information about radiation effects from which to formulate policy.
3. A prime minister and cabinet lacking both leadership and an appropriate sense of urgency.
4. Politicians who sought to use the crisis in intra- or inter-party struggles.
5. Nuclear industry lobbyists and “academic flunkies” (goyo gakusha) of the government who built up the myth of nuclear safety in the first place.

Looking at these groups, he writes, “I just cannot feel any hope for Japan’s future. These circumstances are simply tragic.”

This sounds terrible, and it is... For the people near the reactors and in Fukushima. But before we go off soiling our pants, we need to read more. He starts to delve into specifics:

Nishio provides a blunt and hard-hitting specialist perspective on major government decisions. Here is a summary of some of his major points:

Workers:

1. He accuses the authorities of prioritizing their own convenience over the lives of nuclear workers. Nishio argues that raising the exposure limit from 100 mSv to 250 mSv can have serious health effects. He also states that reports of poor food and sleeping conditions for workers show that “… they are not even being treated like human beings.”
2. The JSDF helicopters that dropped water on the Fukushima Daiichi reactors and spent fuel pools in the days after March 11 were outfitted with the types of radiation shields used in hospital x-ray rooms. Nisho says that this  was akin to “putting on a lead helmet in order to protect yourself from radiation from space”. The planners, he argues, did not even understand the difference between airborne radiation from a nuclear accident and radiation used in the controlled environment of hospital treatment.
3. Referring to “protective” suits is a misnomer bordering on fraud in Nishio’s view since nothing can offer total protection from radiation exposure.
4. A lack of nutrition and rest can make workers more susceptible to radiation symptoms. Nishio speculates that having the workers sleep together in gymnasium-like barracks with no privacy is simply designed to keep them from running away. Just 30 minutes from the site, he points out, there are empty hotels which could offer those on the front line a quiet, secure place to rest and recuperate.
5. He accuses TEPCO of being up to the old tricks of the nuclear industry: giving dispatch and temporary workers broken radiation monitors, only giving them monitoring devices when they are working despite high levels of radiation throughout the site, and so on.
6. Without accurate assessment of internal radiation exposure through “whole body monitoring”, there is no way to tell how much exposure workers are actually suffering.
7. Measures must also be taken to gauge different types of exposure (i.e. alpha rays from plutonium and beta rays from strontium).
8. Around 5000 workers have worked at the site since March. This number is high, but if radiation release continues, 100 or even 1000 times that number may be needed over time.
9. The MOX fuel in reactor number 3 is particularly dangerous but Nishio doubts that special measures to protect workers are being taken. 
10. “Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Harvest” treatment has been put forward by doctors as a way to minimize the chances of bone marrow deterioration among workers, but this was turned down by the Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan. Nishio asserts that this is evidence that they simply do not grasp the severity of the situation.
11. Apart from the iodine that they are being given, workers should also be taking Radiogardase (Prussian blue insoluble capsules). Not working to bring together the best preventative medicine, Nishio asserts angrily, is an example of “graveyard governance”.

You'll notice that not once, even though highly critical of the handling of the entire situation at Fukushima, does this specialist talk about dangers to, say, Tokyo residents or dangers to people outside of the exclusion zone. He talks specifically about the dangers to workers and people living near the damaged reactors or near or in the exclusion zones. Well, hell yes, it is a clusterf*ck for the people working at the reactor or the people living in the area!!!... Like I said, if I lived around that reactor, I'd have uprooted my family long ago and left... But I can't really say that. Why? I wouldn't live near a nuclear reactor in the first place. 

The doctor then goes on to criticize the situation and handling of that mess for the poor people of Fukushima. He says:

Fukushima Residents:

1. The threat to public health is not simply a matter of distance from Fukushima. Wind patterns and topography are even more important. (The good man is completely right about that see my post about that here). 
2. The release of data from the expensive SPEEDI system, was delayed until March 23. This delay resulted in unnecessary radiation exposure. “It is only conceivable that the high rate of radiation released was not reported because of fears of a panic.”
3. Former Minister for Internal Affairs Haraguchi Kazuhiro has alleged that radiation monitoring station data was actually three decimal places greater than the numbers released to the public. If this is true, it constitutes a “national crime”, in Nishio’s words. He follows with, “Giving us the truth once is much more important than saying ‘hang in there Japan!’ a million times.”
4. According to Japanese law, the rate of radiation exposure permitted for ordinary citizens is 1 mSv / year. This has been raised to 20 mSv / year in a “time of crisis”. Such a dramatic increase in permitted exposure is akin to “taking the lives of the people lightly”. Nishio believes that 20 mSv is too high, especially for children who are far more susceptible to the effects of radiation.
5. Even more important than a permitted 20 mSv exposure rate, however, is the lack of adequate provision for measuring internal radiation exposure among the Fukushima population.
6. The American Academy of Sciences 2008 “Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation” report claims that there is no safe level of radiation exposure. Despite this and other examples of leading research, however, the Japanese government has moved on the assumption that there is no evidence for increased cancer risk at under 100 mSv of exposure. The European Committee on Radiation Risk argues that existing risk models do not take internal exposure into account. High rates of internal exposure will mean a dramatic increase in cancer risk for Fukushima residents, with as many as 400,000 cases predicted by 2061. Nishio argues, however, that these calculations rest on some shaky assumptions and that the number is too high. He believes strongly, however, that internal radiation exposure must be taken seriously by the Japanese government.
7. Comparing the 6.9 mSv exposure from a CT scan to a similar amount of radiation exposure outside of a controlled environment is misleading. Long term exposure and internal exposure can have unpredictable effects on the human body. Comparisons with radiation used in cancer treatment are also scientifically shaky.
8. The large amounts of radioactive waste water at the Fukushima Daiichi site will contaminate the soil and water supplies, significantly increasing the risk of internal radiation exposure.

Once again, I direct you to the fact that, while he is extremely critical of the way this has been handled, he is specifically speaking of a localized area. More proof of this is evidenced in #1 below where he states, "...it is important that every resident in at risk areas be given a device to monitor personal radiation exposure."

Necessary Countermeasures:

1. Among people living in the same area, rates of exposure can vary greatly based on lifestyle and movement patterns. As a result, it is important that every resident in at risk areas be given a device to monitor personal radiation exposure. Apart from protecting individuals and allowing them to make informed decisions about their safety, the data gathered can be used in future medical research and in court cases that will no doubt originate from the Fukushima Daiichi accident.
2. There is little conclusive scientific data on the risks of low level radiation exposure. The government, however, must not let this turn into a case of “we don’t know so we can assume it is safe”. On the contrary, Nishio argues that it is necessary to proceed under the assumption “we don’t know so we must assume that it is dangerous”.
3. Residents must be given real time radiation data as well as the best possible advice about how to decrease their exposure.

I totally agree with this specialist. Now, how does this very critical attack against the japanese government and TEPCO stack up against people like Arnie Gundersen who claim things like dangerous radiation that can't be detected by Geiger counters being found all over Tokyo?

Once again, to repeat, I am not pro-nuclear power and I am not anti-nuclear power. But, one thing for sure is that I am very anti-sensationalist hype and pushing hidden agenda types and will attack them whenever I see the need to.

There's two sides to every story. The truth usually lies somewhere in between. It takes a diligent and fair person to find that truth. Blind acceptance is a fools game.

Don't be a fool. Check the facts. Do the research. Get the truth.


Thanks to What Really Happened.com for the quote from the Soviet correspondent

Jmovie review: Cold Fish/Tsumetai Nettaigyo

From Sion Sono, the director that gave us the amazing Love Exposure comes Cold Fish, another movie that examines repression with results more akin to a Park Chan Wook movie. Fukikoshi Mitsuru is Shamato, a passive fish shop owner who comes home to a young but estranged wife and a daughter who does whatever she wants. It is a family that exists for the mere sake of existing but has there is no connection at all between the members. Making happy faces for the public while being miserable at home.

Very nice cinematography.

A shoplifting incident involving Shamato's daughter gets him involved with Murata (Denden) the owner of this huge fish shop who drives a Ferrari. He seems to take an interest in helping Shamato's family out and with Murata's overbearing and cheerful personality, Shamato can't say no. Murata offers Shamato's daughter a job at his shop which is basically hooters with the purpose of selling fish instead of beer and food.

IMO, boobs can sell anything.

There, the family meet's Murata's very sexy wife Aiko, played by Kurosawa Asuka. Things seem be looking slightly better for Shamato until we see that Muratas are not who they seems to be. To say more would be to spoil the movie but what follows involved murder, mutilation and lots of sex and nudity. I should just use that make this a one line review because the previous sentence should be enough to convince you to watch it.

How I wish I were that finger puppet.

I've always wished that the Japanese could do dark and violent comedies like the Koreans used to do well but the Japanese always had this invisible set of rules and sensibilities that prevent them from getting too gory in their movies and they are only left with B grade gore. Its like the mvie studios are saying movies can't be too violent because people go to movies to escape reality and audiences can only accept slapstick comedy and not dark, ironic comedy.

The hottest scene involving two women and finger puppets on film.

I have no idea how famous Sion Sono is in Japan. I should have mentioned his movies when I was there but I am pretty sure he is more famous overseas. He continues his trademark of using classical music that slowly becomes louder during climatic scenes and at the basic level of the movie goes back to the theme of repression that he handles so masterfully in Love Exposure.

This time it is about Shamato learning to be a man and his seemingly master/disciple relationship with Murata. Makes me wonder who much of Murata choosing Shamato is because he thinks Shamato is easy to manipulate and how much is because he sees so much of himself in Shamato that deep down Murata wants to save him. Got to mention Kurosawa Asuka. She is the very definition of sexy. She's like Kichise Michiko with boobs and she doesn't have to 'protect' her image because she's an actress more than a tv personality.

The only thing that really bothered me was how the movie ended. Just because a movie has lots of violence and gore doesn't mean that it must have a karmic ending. I know its kind of par for a lot of B grade and softcore movies but emotionally it was too nihilistic. Its not that great but its still better than most Japanese movies out there so I think its very worth watching. Just don't eat food at the same time. Now excuse me while I start looking for Kurosawa Asuka movies.

Japan May Be a Man's Country, But the Women Dominate

Japan is often thought of as a heaven for men. Japan is thee Man's Country. There's lots of things here that are very, for lack of a better term, "beneficial" for men. Just a few off the top of my head are the fact that it isn't unusual at all for a 45-year-old or 50-year-old man to have a 20-something-year-old wife; while it is frowned upon, it is also often allowed, that married men have affairs with various women and having a mistress is still common. It is also not considered as "having an affair" by many women when her man goes to a sex parlor or so called hostess club and has his frustrations, er, "relieved."


In my old age, I've come to realize that these types of frivolities are not a benefit but a curse. They just cost money and surely, one woman is trouble enough. Also, at my house, even though I am the boss and Lord King of all I survey, my wife is chief financier and she controls the money and budget.


But I digress...


So, in this country, that has the image of a man's paradise - paradise where a man's virility is often showcased; where the women walk two steps behind the men, it makes me chuckle whenever I see a Japanese men's team getting beat in any world sports game. It doesn't matter if it is baseball, soccer, volleyball, whatever, I've always take secret pleasure in seeing the Japan men's team get beat.


It must be some sort of psychological screw-up in my brain. It's been that way since I was a kid. I've always loved Japan, but I always wanted the Japan men's teams to lose. It didn't matter what it was, but it was usually the Olympics, and the Japanese men's team would consistently come in as an "also ran." I was happy when they lost. 


Which is weird in one way, I always wanted the USA men's and women's teams to lose too, but that wasn't because of the way society is, it's because I want to always cheer for the underdog, and the USA is never the underdog... Ever! I mean, how could you possibly be the underdog when you have all the money, the best facilities, the best trainers, dietitians, drugs, er, I mean, "sports rehabilitation techniques."


But this always wanting the Japan men's teams to lose confused me inside. I mean, if I loved Japan so much, then why did I want their men's teams to always lose? 


I concluded it was because my mom was Japanese and I had this idea that Japan is a very chauvinistic country and that the men dominate the women. I'm sure that I am not the only one with that image in my head either. It must be that everyone thinks so.... Especially us half-Japanese kids who have a Japanese mother that we love dearly...


I guess growing up with the image of a Japanese man treating women as second rate citizens leaves a bad image in the minds of us kids. It isn't always true, of course, I have to deal with my phobias and stereotypes on my own I suppose.


So, it's been OK cheering against the Japanese men's teams because they always lose anyway. Sometimes, I've even felt sorry for them... 


But there is a Japanese team who I always cheer for and I always am extremely happy when they win. Can you guess which team that is?


It's the Japanese women's national team. It doesn't matter what the sport is, I always want the Japanese women's national teams to win. And they do! Last night they knocked out two-time defending champion  Germany out of the World Cup 1 - 0! It was the German Women's Team's first World Cup defeat since 1999! Woo-Hoo! Go Japan! 

Japanese forces penetrate deeply into German territory!

The Japanese national women's teams win and they win often. Recently, just to name a few, they won at Olympic Softball, Volleyball, Marathon, and they've done OK at other sports like table tennis and synchronized swimming (arguably not a sport!)... So I enjoy it when the women's teams win.

Perhaps it is a twisted satisfaction that I get from watching these poor ladies, as representatives of the female half of their society, actually showing the guys how to win.... Something that the guy's teams rarely do (excepting the two times they lucked out in baseball). Perhaps it is because I feel a sort of revenge for my mother.

I don't know what it is. But, when the Japan women's teams win, it feels good just because I get some sort of childish feeling of revenge or satisfaction (even though I don't really care about any sports).

So the Japan women's teams showing the men's teams how to win is great fun. It proves that times they are a changin' and that women are taking their place, slowly but surely, in Japan.... 

That, and the fact that in 80% of all Japanese households, the wife holds the purse strings and controls all the money and finances it makes me wonder if this really is a man's country or is it that the men are all children and the women are the adults and are de facto controlling them!

Of course, that is nonsense and poppycocky. In Japan, men are king. The wives merely win all the time and control the money.

That's all.

Is Fukushima the biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind? A Comparison

Many pundits and supposed experts have claimed that Fukushima "is the biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind."


Sorry to inform you, but I think that is completely false. To even entertain that notion for a second is incredibly arrogant and ethno-centric thinking. It is ignorant and shows a complete lack of knowledge on human history. Be very suspicious of those who make these kinds of idiotic claims as they certainly are not steeped in factual information. But hey, don't believe me, in this article, I will let you be the judge.

SILHOUETTES - GET A JOB

Here is a list from Wikipedia on industrial disasters. This is a heavily edited list. There are many more at the Wikipedia site. I edited out many disasters as I figured that if there weren't at least a few hundred casualties, then it can't be much of a disaster (no disrespect to those who lost loved ones). Especially when you consider that, according to the International Labor Organization, at least 12,250 Chinese workers die in industrial accidents a month, every month, and an estimated 1.2 million people are killed in road crashes each year, and as many as 50 million are injured, a few dozen killed in an industrial accident seems like small potatoes. 


So far the death total from the Fukushima nuclear accident is zero. How many can you count from the list below that are much worse than that?

Chemical industry

• September 21, 1921: Oppau explosion in Germany killing 500–600 people and injuring about 2,000 more.
• 1932-1968: The Minamata disaster in Japan. Over 3,000 people died or suffered various deformities.
• April 16, 1947: Texas City Disaster at least 578 people died and another 3,500 were injured.
• December 3, 1984: The Bhopal disaster in India. Death toll range from 4,000 to 20,000. 
• April 22, 2004: Ryonchon Cargo Explosion at Railway Disaster in North Korea. 3,000 people killed or injured

Construction industry

• January 20, 1909: Chicago Crib Disaster. 100 men died. 

Defense industry

• July 17, 1944: Port Chicago Disaster. 320 people killed. 

Energy industry

• August, 1975: The Banqiao Dam flood in China. 100,000 immediately killed, plus over 150,000 died of subsequent epidemic diseases and famine. Total dead toll around 250,000, making it the worst technical disaster ever happened in history.
• March 16, 1978: The Amoco Cadiz spill. An oil tanker sank spilling of 68,684,000 US Gallons of crude oil (nearly ten times that of Exxon Valdez). This is the largest oil spill of its kind (from an oil tanker) in history.
• April 26, 1986: Chernobyl disaster. At the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Prypiat, Ukraine a test on reactor number four goes out of control, resulting in a nuclear meltdown. The ensuing steam explosion and fire killed up to 50 people with estimates that there may be between 4,000 additional cancer deaths over time. 

Food industry

• January 15, 1919: The Boston Molasses Disaster. Killing 21 and injuring 150.
• September 3, 1991: 1991 Hamlet chicken processing plant fire. 25 deaths.

Manufacturing industry

• January 10, 1860: Pemberton Mill Collapse. 145 workers killed and 166 injured.
• March 20, 1905: Grover Shoe Factory explosion 58 people killed and 150 injured.
• March 25, 1911: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in New York City. 100 garment workers died in fire or jumped to their deaths.
• May 10, 1993: Kader Toy Factory fire in Thailand. 188 workers were killed, mostly young women.

Mining industry

• March 10, 1906: Courrières mine disaster in France. 1,099 workers died, including children.
• April 26, 1942: Benxihu Colliery disaster in China. 1,549 workers died, in the worst coal mine accident ever in the world.
• May 28, 1965: 1965 Dhanbad coal mine disaster in India. 300 miners killed.
• October 21, 1966: Aberfan disaster killing 116 children and 28 adults.

There are many more disasters and accident listed at the Wikipedia site. There's thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, more that are not listed on Wikipedia. Lots of accidents and disasters. Lots of deaths. Fukushima nuclear reactor accident deaths as of today, four months after the disaster began? 0. Zero. None. Nada. Zip. 全然. 無し. ありません。


Oh, and if you want a disaster that displaced more than 1,000 people and is still going on decades later, here's an interesting one:

• May 1962: The Centralia, Pennsylvania coal mine fire began, forcing the gradual evacuation of the Centralia borough. The fire continues to burn in the abandoned borough in 2011, 49 years later (emphasis mine).

These are facts. They are etched into history.


People who make claims like, "Fukushima is the biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind" are stating opinions involved with speculation and conjecture. Anyone care to debate the facts? 

Fukushima Nuclear Disaster News - Debunking Arnie Gundersen

It's really getting tiring debunking everything that clowns like Arnie Gundersen say about Fukushima. It doesn't matter how many facts or data that I link to or how much I try to fact check what this guy says, people still write really stupid (and childishly rude) stuff to me and challenge me on it. 


Of course, I can tell the rude stuff comes from ill-educated hysterical Americans. It's pretty obvious.


What's even more tiring is getting mail from fools who actually believe that things are out of control. It really reminds me of the early days of the Global Warming idiocy. People were foaming at the mouth believing that too because they believed the crap they were told. What was their rationale?


1) It was a government cover up and conspiracy 
2) "They" were lying to us


Why do people think this way?


3) Most people are illogical and cannot have an original thought if it were the last thing they ever did


It's a victory for the public education system that it churns out so many people with such a poor level of education. 


I don't really mind being challenged on what's written here, but let's stick to the points, if we can, shall we? The lunatic fringe writing stuff to me like what I received yesterday was so totally out of whack that I deleted his comments. (Note: I do enjoy every one's comments and appreciate that they take the time to write them, but please do read the rules on commenting before you write. It is foolish to take ten minutes writing something that gets immediately deleted when you could read the rules in two seconds and make sure that doesn't happen).


Some of these guys actually write comments like this:


"Mike, you are full of sh*t... Care to debate me?"


Hmm.... What an intelligent, polite and marvelous argument this guy puts forth. What a fantastic invitation to debate the points. I can tell, by the quality of his writing, it would be like debating Neanderthal man. I don't know how I can counter such an excellently structured argument... 


Perhaps by hitting the table with a crude wooden bat and saying, "Korg no like!"...


Could he possibly mean that he wants to, "debate me on the point of the contents of my body?" If so, no. I do not... If he means that - judging by the excellent logic of his argument shown in his comment - should I debate him on the same level of childish insults as he does by, say, calling his mother various unsavory names? Then, no to that one too. 


I'm sure that his mother is a wonderful woman. Most moms are like that.


So, without further ado, here's another article debunking Gundersen. I hope it will be the last, but, alas, suspect it won't. First up, let's be fair. I will show you both anti-atomic power (Gundersen's comments) and "pro"-nuclear power comments. You be the judge.


From Atomic Insights: 

Arnie Gundersen has been making money by spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about nuclear energy for more than a decade. His career has received a measurable boost since March 11, when a large earthquake and powerful tsunami successfully peeled off most of the many layers of protection at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station.

Ever since that day, Gundersen has been giving scary interviews in a variety of media outlets that include a number of dire predictions. He claimed that the spent fuel pool for unit 4 had gone dry and that he had the video to prove it. That claim remains available on his web site, so he is apparently standing by his early evaluation despite all evidence that contradicts his claim.

(snip) 

He has been making the rounds of the advertiser supported media recently with stories about the dangers of “hot particles” that are so tiny they cannot be picked up by normal radiation detectors. (Note: Radiation can be measured at extremely low levels, far below the levels that can cause human health effects. There is a reason why doctors inject small amounts radioactive materials into their patients as tracers to assist them in diagnosing organ function – those tracers make bodily systems visible without endangering the patient. If the hot particles are so tiny and dispersed that they cannot be detected, they are nothing to worry about.)

You can read more about Gundersen here at Atomic Insights.

Of course, I also blasted Gundersen for these same ridiculous remarks on the very blog in "Wind Patterns and Rainy Season in Japan" where I derailed his ignorant and completely false claims that "the wind was turning and now blowing radiation towards Tokyo." I also dismantled his absurd claims of "anecdotal evidence" of people having a metallic taste in their mouths was proof of Iodine in the air as a byproduct of radiation in "Metallic Tastes in Mouths Proves Nuclear Disaster! Or Does it?"

Finally, and as an aside, one other reader complained that I bashed Gundersen for his foolish claims of radioactive air filters in cars. The reader claimed that he searched for third-party evidence of this claim by Gundersen and could find nothing. This reader then somehow concluded that this fact was proof that I was making up evidence against Gundersen and trying to discredit him (well, that's what he said. Yeah, I know. The logic is quite convuluted...) But I don't want to keep railing on the educational system of the USA. In that post about car air filters I even showed the results of a search in Japanese for what Gundersen was claiming and found nothing excepting links to his absurd claims. See it here in "Radioactive Air Filters in Cars?" 

For today here's more about what Gundersen claimed that is totally disproven by facts on the ground. Gundersen claimed in an article on Al Jazeera:

"So ten to 15 years from now maybe we can say the reactors have been dismantled, and in the meantime you wind up contaminating the water," Gundersen said. 

Is this true? You be the judge. Here's today's news from the Nuclear Energy Institute:

Contaminated Water Levels Beginning to Drop at Fukushima Daiichi

TEPCO is making headway in reducing the volume of contaminated water on site. In the last week, the new water filtration system has treated more than 13,000 tons of water. Recycling the treated water into the plant cooling systems also began last week, and the rate of water accumulation is now being reversed. The company says water levels in the basements of the reactor buildings could drop by more than three feet by next month. About 120,000 tons of water have accumulated in basements at the facility and in storage facilities. 

This seems to quite directly contradict Gundersen's claims, no? 

The article continues:

Also, the company has installed steel plates at the seawater intake structures for Fukushima reactors 1 through 4, closing off a path for leakage of contaminated water from the reactors to the ocean.

So, judging from the news these last two days, here are the facts and the timetable settled so far:

1) Radiation levels at the crippled plants are expected to be within safe limits so that human engineers can reenter the plants on July 17, 2011. That's eight days from today.

2) The contaminated water is being cleaned and contaminated water levels are dropping.

3) Radioactive water leaks have been stopped.

Of course this disaster at Fukushima is bad. But considering the claims of just a few shorts months, even weeks ago, when Gundersen was claiming:

"Fukushima is the biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind. Fukushima has three nuclear reactors exposed and four fuel cores exposed. You probably have the equivalent of 20 nuclear reactor cores because of the fuel cores, and they are all in desperate need of being cooled, and there is no means to cool them effectively."

Gundersen likes to use words like "maybe" (see above) and words like "probably." That means that he is just guessing. Also, don't look now, but the reactors were being cooled months ago.

As far as being the biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind, I'm sure that is debatable. I'm sure people near the BP oil disaster that has already killed at least eleven men and sickened hundreds, if not thousands, of people; as well as killing wildlife in the hundreds of millions if not more, would strongly disagree with you Gundersen.

So far the death tally from Fukushima nearly four months later: Zero. 

These are facts indelibly etched into history...Care to debate me?

Note: In my next post, I blow this, "Fukushima is the biggest industrial catastrophe in the history of mankind" claim to pieces. That claim is pure and total nonsense. How can people be so arrogant and ignorant of history to even entertain such a thought? Read it here.

Japan is a Great Country for Drinking, Smoking and Freedom - A Hangover is a Trophy!

If you want to drink and/or smoke freely, even in public, Japan is heaven. If you want to stop drinking or smoking, Japan is not the best place to be. This is a very free country. I can walk down any street and drink booze in public. Smoking is not prohibited in privately owned buildings. That's the way it's supposed to be. I didn't smoke last night. I quit smoking more than 2 years ago. But I sure drank a lot!


Last night I went to the Who the Bitch concert in Shibuya, and drank way too much. It was great. 


I was dreaming of staying in bed all day... Or at least sleeping late... Alas, I cannot. For one, I still feel a bit drunk. For two, I have to work. For three, I must write his blog.


By the way, the Who the Bitch show was classic! I haven't seen a band that good in a long time. This band is destined for great things. I'm destined for, at least, a full day of hangover.

WHO THE BITCH - SUPERSTAR

For most people, having a hangover is a bad experience but I've learned that that kind of thinking is the wrong way to look at a hangover. If you think, "Oh, I feel terrible. I have a hangover. I drank too much last night." Then you will spend the day feeling poorly. Feeling poorly is not fun.


Get rid of that negative thinking. Here's the best way to deal with a hellacious hangover that was taught to me by Ray Hearn who owns a music label and concert promotion company here in Tokyo called Beat Ink; Ray says that you shouldn't think, "I feel terrible. My head hurts and I have a hangover!" You should think that your hangover is a sort of a trophy. You should say, "Wow! What a wild night I had last night! I drank way too much. What fun! What decadence!" If you do and say this, then your friends will envy you rather than feel sorry for you.


The hangover is a trophy and that trophy is proof positive of a wild and fun night out last night. So wear your hangover trophy proudly!


Stay positive like that. Don't feel sorry for yourself and remember that the hangover is merely a question of time; it is going away very soon. The memory of a great and fun night will always be with you.


The "trophy" that is your hangover is going to fade away. Enjoy it while you can. 


Trust that I am REALLY enjoying mine right now. 


------


Thanks to Ken Nishikawa!