fukushima

Fukushima 12th anniversary vigil in London

12 years ago, the worst nuclear power accidents in the world happened at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.

12 years later, 3 reactors are still melting down and radioactive wastewater is generated everyday. Over 1.3 million tonnes of contaminated is going to be discharged into the Pacific from spring this year.

On top of this, the Japanese government recently announced a change in energy policy to encourage the restart of idled nuclear power plants and build more new Small Module Reactors.

To remember the victims of the nuclear accident and oppose these disastrous decisions, Japanese Against Nuclear held a vigil on Friday 10th March 2023 in front of the Japanese Embassy, joined by London CND members.

A message from a victim follows.


Hello,

My name is Akiko MORIMATSU.

The Great East Japan Earthquake of March 11, 2011 was followed by the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident. What happened to us, the residents of Fukushima?  What damage did the people living near the plant suffer? I would like to tell you about it in a concrete way.

On March 11, 2011, I was living in Koriyama, a town in Fukushima Prefecture, located about 60 km from the Fukushima Daiichi plant. There were four of us. Me, my husband and two children. A 5-month-old girl and a 3-year-old boy.

First of all, I would like to tell you that when a nuclear accident occurs, regardless of our age or sex, whether we are for or against nuclear power, we are all confronted with the problem of exposure to radioactivity. Radiation is invisible and colourless. There is no pain or tingling on the skin. And there is the issue of low-dose radiation exposure. At a great distance, you are exposed to low doses of radiation. Besides the fact that radiation cannot be perceived by the senses, people do not die instantly.

In this context, we, living 60km from the plant, lost our home in the Great Earthquake, and then after this natural disaster, we suffered a man-made disaster: the nuclear accident.

Of course, we did not hear the explosions at the nuclear power plant, nor did we see the damaged plant buildings directly. We only learned about the accident through the news on TV. Apart from that, there was no way to know that an accident with explosions took place. There was no way of knowing the exact situation of the Fukushima Daiichi plant, nor how much radiation we would be exposed to. We didn’t know how much radiation we had to endure, because neither the state authorities nor the operator TEPCO provided accurate information. We, the people living near the plant, had to make many decisions in this ignorance.

I’m going to tell you about the most difficult thing I have had to do in the last 12 years since the accident. After the explosions at the nuclear power plant, we were well aware of the explosions… But we, who were 60 km away from the plant, were not evacuated by force. Apart from the evacuation order, there was also a confinement order. Gradually, within a radius of 2 km, then 3 km around the nuclear power plant, the population was forcibly evacuated. The circular mandatory evacuation zone gradually expanded. And from 20 to 30 km from the power plant, there was the order to stay indoors. That was the order given by the government. But we, 60 km away, did not receive the confinement order. We were not evacuated either. We were left on our own without any protection.

In this situation, I learned from the TV that the tap water, the drinking water, was contaminated. The first information I got was about the tap water in Kanamachi in Tokyo. They had found radioactive substances in the water. It was on a television program.

The Kanamachi water treatment plant was 200 km from the Fukushima Daiichi plant. We were only 60 km from the plant. Within the 200 km radius, the radioactivity increased, and with the rain radioactive substances contaminated the drinking water. Since the tap water at 200 km from the plant was contaminated, the water at 60 km had to be contaminated without any doubt. So, we learned about the radioactive contamination of our drinking water from the TV news.

Up to that point, it was known that radioactive material had been dispersed, but at 60km, there were no orders to evacuate or to stay indoors. There were repeated statements from the Prime Minister’s Office that there would be no immediate impact on health. The issue of exposure was indeed on our minds. But when I found out that the water in Tokyo was contaminated, and that the water in Fukushima was also contaminated, I realised that I was unknowingly drinking radioactive water. But even after learning this fact, I had to continue drinking the water. And so did my two children, aged 5 months and 3 years. My 5-month-old daughter was clinging to life through breast milk from a mother who was drinking contaminated water.

We also heard on the news that there had been a huge radioactive fallout in and around Fukushima, that shipments of leafy vegetables had been suspended, that farmers were going to lose their livelihoods, and that there had been suicides of desperate farmers. They had lost all hope in the future of their profession. All this we heard on TV.

So, we learned that there really was radioactive contamination. I learned that the farmers had milked the cows, but since shipping was no longer possible, they had to dump the milk in the fields.

As a nursing mother in Fukushima, I thought that we were also mammals like the cows. We humans were also exposed to high doses of radioactivity in the air, and we had to drink tap water, knowing that it was polluted.

I heard about the biological concentration. Milk was even more radioactive than water. That’s why the milk had to be thrown away. Yet I was drinking radioactive water, I was breastfeeding my 5-month-old daughter, and my milk concentrated the radioactivity.

I didn’t want to be exposed to radiation myself, and of course I didn’t want my five-month-old child to be exposed to radiation. But we were totally denied the right to choose to refuse exposure. Above all, a baby can’t say she doesn’t want to drink breast milk because it is contaminated. My three-year-old son brought me a glass when he was thirsty, saying “mummy, give me a glass of water”. Knowing that the tap water was contaminated, I was obliged to give him this water.

This is my experience.

The will to avoid exposure, the right to avoid exposure, are fundamental rights to protect life. Their violation is the most serious of all the damages caused by the nuclear accident. I think this issue should be at the heart of the nuclear debate.

I am not the only one who gave poisoned water to our children. Many people living in the area affected by the nuclear disaster had the same experience.

In order to avoid repeating these experiences and to improve the radioprotection policy, I would like you all to think together about the real damage caused by a nuclear accident, starting with whether you can drink radio-contaminated water. I think that this would naturally lead to a certain conclusion.

The most serious damage I suffered from the nuclear accident was that I was subjected to radiation exposure that was not chosen and was avoidable. 

This is the most serious damage to which I would strongly like to draw your attention.

Akiko Morimatsu


Testimony first published here.


FUKUSHIMA: ANOTHER PROBLEM - David Polden

FUKUSHIMA: ANOTHER PROBLEM!

- David Polden -

First published in Kick Nuclear January newsletter


At Kick Nuclear’s Friday vigils outside the Japanese Embassy (for details see front page) we have begun handing out a new Fukushima Nuclear Disaster 2022 Update that I’ve written (copies sent at request)

In this update I talked about the continuance of the disaster, including the problem of dealing with well over a million tonnes of radioactive water already, and continually rising, being stored in tanks as a result of the need to keep the reactors’ melted-down fuel cool by pouring water down through the ractors.  Japan’s current plan is to dump all this water in the Pacific, after it has been subject to a treatment process that removes a lot of the radioactivity, but not all (It doesn’t remove the tritium or all of other radio nucleides), thus polluting the Pacific.

What I completely overlooked however was the problem of what to do with the of course this doesn’t result in a diminution of the radioactivity involved, it just means it gets highly concentrated in a much smaller volume.  The resulting mixture is characterized as “slurry”.

“But where to put it?” an article dated 10/1/22 by Robert Hunziker in Counterpunch asks.

He continues, “How to handle and dispose of the radioactive slurry…is almost, and in fact may be, an impossible quagmire.  It’s a big one as the storage containers for the tainted slurry quickly degrade because of the high concentration of radioactive slurry.  These storage containers…in turn, have to be constantly replaced as the radioactivity slurry eats away at the containers’ liners.

“Radioactive slurry is muddy and resembles a shampoo in appearance, and it contains highly radioactive strontium readings that reach tens of millions of Becquerel’s per cubic centimeter.  Whereas, according to the [US Environmental Protection Agency], 148 Becquerel’s per cubic metre…is the safe level for human exposure.  Thus, tens of millions per cubic centimetre is “off the charts” dangerous!  Instant death…

“Since March 2013, TEPCO has accumulated 3,373 special vessels that hold these highly toxic radioactive slurry concentrations.  But, because the integrity of the vessels deteriorates so quickly, the durability of the containers reaches a limit, meaning the vessels will need replacement by mid-2025.

“Making matters ever worse…the NRA [US Nuclear Regulatory Authority] has actually accused TEPCO [the Tokyo Electric Power Company] of “underestimating the impact issue of the radioactivity on the containers linings,” claiming TEPCO improperly measured the slurry density when conducting dose evaluations.  Whereas, the density level is always highest at the bottom, not the top where TEPCO did the evaluations, thus failing to measure and report the most radioactive of the slurry.  Not a small error.

“As of June 2021, NRA’s own assessment of the containers concluded …31 radioactive super hot containers had…reached the end of operating life…another 56 would need replacement within the next 2 years.

“Transferring slurry is a time-consuming highly dangerous horrific job, which exposes yet a second issue of unacceptable risks of radioactive substances released into the air during transfer of slurry.  TEPCO expects to open and close the transfers remotely.  But, TEPCO, as of January 2, 2022, has not yet revealed acceptable plans for dealing with the necessary transfer of slurry from weakening, almost deteriorated containers, into fresh, new containers.  (Source: TEPCO Slow to Respond to Growing Crisis at Fukushima Plant, The Asahi Shimbun, [2/1/22]

“Meanwhile, additional batches of a massive succession of containers that must be transferred to new containers will be reaching the end of shelf life, shortly.

“Another nightmarish problem has surfaced for TEPCO…In the aftermath of the 2011 blowup, TEPCO stored radioactive water in underground spaces below two buildings near reactor No.4. Bags of a mineral known as zeolite were placed to absorb cesium. Twenty-six tons (52,000 lbs.) of bags are still immersed with radiation readings of 4 Sieverts per hour, enough to kill half of all workers in the immediate vicinity within one hour. The bags need to be removed.

“TEPCO intends to robotically start removing the highly radioactive bags, starting in 2023, but does not know where the bags should be stored. Where do you store radioactive bags containing enough radioactive power to kill someone within one hour of exposure?...”