This morning's New York Times is reporting evidence that the Japanese government may now be following the sad example blazed by the TEPCO utility management in not immediately and accurately reporting all known information about the nuclear crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.
In their article entitled "Anxiety Up as Tokyo Issues Warning on It's Tap Water, David Jolly and Denise Grady reveal descriptions of unexplainable high levels of radiation, including Iodine 141, in the tap water in Tokyo, and several other cities.
Ei Yoshida, head of water purification for the Tokyo water department, said at a televised news conference that iodine 131 had been detected in water samples at a level of 210 becquerels per liter, about a quart. The recommended limit for infants is 100 becquerels per liter. For adults, the recommended limit is 300 becquerels. (The unit is named for Henri Becquerel, one of the discoverers of radioactivity.)
And, then follows these alarming reports of big increases in radiation detected in the Japanese ecosystem with this curious quote, from an "inside source."
Despite the frequent rain in recent days, it was not entirely clear why the levels of iodine were so high, said a senior Western nuclear executive, noting that the prevailing breezes seemed to be pushing radiation out to sea. “The contamination levels are well beyond what you’d expect from what is in the public domain,” said the executive, who insisted on anonymity and has broad contacts in Japan.
It was possible that the levels were an indirect indication that the problems at the plant were deeper than had been publicly acknowledged.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
"Well beyond what we would expect from what is in the public domain" seems to me to be Japanese "diplomatic-speak" for "there is another domain -- the data that is in the "non-public doman." Or what we here might call "a cover-up."
And, a MSNBC reporter just asked "How do radiation levels in Japan go from safe one day, to significantly unsafe, in a vast region, the next day."
There are many other sad revelations in this morning's NYT article, as well as another article on the escalating controversy over the safety of spent fuel rods, by Matthew Wald, that confirms assertions I've been making agreesively here ever since the Robert Alvarez article on March 15, 2011. I will discuss these other issues in comments, or separate diaries.
Here I want to highlight our attention on the importance of immediate, and complete disclosure of all known data about crises of this sort to maintain the credibility of the government, international organizations, and especially Tepco, the owner and operating utility.
TEPCO has an absolutely dreadful reputation, for withholding important information, not only from the people, but also the government of Japan.
Just last week, we heard that the Prime Minister was so furious at the executives at TEPCO that he was overheard using profanity, which in Japanese culture is rare, if not unheard of.
But, even the US has extensive data on the exact levels of radiation of all of the other isotopes at levels all across the plume that now reaches California, in what are reported as low amounts, or "safe amounts." While I believe levels in the US are within the limits of safety, as reported, I believe we should see the exact data at all detected locations in this trans-pacific plume.
As part of our nuclear warfare cabability we have detectors and special aircraft, satellites, and other sensors, for detecting illegal nuclear bomb testing, transport or military use, or terrorist attacks. We are not reporting these details to the public.
I believe the public has a right to now this information. And, or next addition to our Bill of Rights should be that all Americans have a constutional right to know all data, about the safety of the environments we live in.
I believe the amounts, so far, are within the limits we are reporting in Sacremento, but, the public has a right to know what the detected levels are in Japan. American parents with infants, may wish to take the easy precautions to prevent their own children, or unborn fetuses, from radiactive Iodine in any amount.
The possibility that the dose-respone curves used to determine are dramatically "kinked" at exactly those levels we announce are safe, seem unlikely to any familiar with the nature of such curve in reality. The nature of these dose-response curves were controversial, decades ago, when I last took a course in Public Safety at the Harvard Medical School.
Fortunately, strong winds were blowing offshore, but rainfall and natural fall-out pattern will wash most of this into the Japanese marine ecosystem. Issues are already being raised about Japanese seafood exports.
I am proposing that we also add to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that all people have a inherent right to know of any accurate data on the state of safety of the environments we live in.
We are being asked to criticise those writers who are being "alarmists, without the facts," but these criticisms will not be fair if already public data proves that the "authorities," are not being completely candid.
The Prime Minister of Japan, and all involved any conspiracy to suppress vital public information will not only dishonor themselves, their government credibility, and the Japanese people, but also be quilty of "crimes against humanity," if they have another, secret "domain" of data we are not hearing about.
I also call on President Obama to re-assure the American people, that he, the NRC, and the American military will promptly, and comletely inform the American, and Japanese people of any and all classified information we may have of the current, and past release dates.
No, one individual or group is actually qualified, nor legitimately empowered, to censor this information on behalf of the "public good." Many qualified international experts, regulatory bodies, such as the IAEA, as well as the world wide academic community require all information to make informed judgements in their own fields of expertise.
And, the entities directly involved in the management of this crisis, and information, has to many real conflicts of interest, and appearence of conflict of interest. Common sense ethics dictate that they recuse themselves of any power of decision-making on what information to make public.
For example, I certainly hope, it doesn't turn out that TEPCO management has been slow on the release of information about the real severity of this nuclear crisis because of a conflict of interest, involving, their current critical financial negotiations about their debt refinancing.
I also first learn of this tantalizing revelation at the end of the first article.
The economic cost of the disaster has hit the Tokyo Electric Power Company, which operates the crippled nuclear plant and is in negotiations with its bankers for loans of as much as $24 billion, according to a person with direct knowledge of the situation who asked not to be identified.
So, a company who could be immediately bankrupted by bad information about the extent of the release is deciding how much information to release to the government, and public? This is unacceptable.
And, let's also note that the rules of the IAEA, allow the local country of a crisis to do the complex calculations that determine an accident's "level." Japan was too late in upgrading the severity level of this accident from 4, to 5, the level of the 3 mile Island accident. Chernonbyl was a 7 on this scale.
The French group already believed that data from four days ago, or so justified a rating of 6, which I agree with. This means their has been significant release of radiation outside of the immediate area. This is now confirmed. When will the Japanese government allow confirmation that this is already a level 6 accident. I will review the criteria, formula, and rulings on how this formula is calcuated, in a separate comemnts below, or diary.
This is a "sort-of" logarithmic scale, BTW, so I think we are already at a state where we should be arguing in public about the details that might make this release a 6.3 to a 6.5. But, this is not my area of expertise so I speak here only as a "concerned citizen." But, a very well educated citizen who is perfectly capable of following any mathemetical or complex description of the real data, and real formulas which are not being dicussed adequately now in public.
I warn the IAEA, the US Government, and all associated scientists that we risk our own credibility if they do not join in demanding greater openese from the Japanese.
Credibility which will be severely missed if this accident evolves, or already has evolved, to a level 7 or higher. Our statements that the public should not panic, will be ineffective, and even backfire, if we squander our integrity and credibility now.
And, seriously risk being indicted for "crimes against humanity" if serious harm comes to people due to the lack of complete, prompt, and honest disclosure of the truth.