FUKUSHIMA… the ‘Japanese Chernobyl’…a year later and politics still ‘trump’ safety…

Last week, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda declared that nuclear units 3 & 4 at the Ohi Nuclear Plant were safe for operation, based on ‘stress tests’ which were nothing more than computer simulations. However, several weeks ago noted nuclear expert Arnie Gundersen visited Tokyo and collected soil samples, the results of which were damning. Gundersen reported that all of the samples he collected would be qualified as radioactive waste in the United States and would have to be shipped to Texas to be disposed of. Despite this, Prime Minister Noda is still lobbying to restart nuclear reactors, fearing power losses in the hot summer. Should the Ohi nuclear plant and other unnamed plants not be restarted, the plant operator—Kansai Electric—would only generate some 80% of previous electric output. This raises serious questions about the safety of the Ohi Nuclear Plant, and the Japanese Prime Minister’s decision to declare it safe for operation.

Reports Leaking Citing 14 Reactors in Similar Condition as Fukushima..

Reports are emerging from Japan of mutated plants in Tokyo, as seen in a video on Asahi TV, and a former Fukushima Daiichi Reactor Operator claiming falsified data and rewrites of operations reports on ENE News. Even the conservative Bloomberg News has cited similar safety concerns. Jason Clenfield’s piece on March 22, 2011 detailed how engineer Mitsuhiko Tanaka had worked to cover-up a ‘manufacturing defect’ in Fukushima Daiichi No. 4 reactor while employed by Hitachi Ltd. in 1974. Tanaka has since described the reactor as a ‘time bomb’ and has repeatedly tried to alert government officials, only to be ignored. Hitachi spokesman Yuichi Izumisawa confirmed that the company had discussed the issue with Tanaka in 1988 and concluded that no further safety concerns existed, a view which the company has not revised since. 

Kenta Takahashi from the Japanese Trade Ministry’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency was unable to confirm if an investigation into Tanaka’s allegations had been initiated by its predecessor, the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy. Naoki Tsunoda, Tokyo Electric Power Co. Spokesman, declined to comment. TEPCO owns the plant and is the same vendor chosen to build new nuclear plants in the US, as planned by the Obama administration.

The fatal flaw in reactor #4.

According to Tanaka, a mistake in the manufacturing process at the Babcock-Hitachi foundry in Kure City resulted in a reactor pressure vessel with warped walls, causing a height and weight differentiation of more than 34 millimeters. This miniscule difference is a vital safety concern, as it could have resulted in a chain reaction bomb, and the nuclear regulations mandated that the vessel be scrapped. Tanaka further claimed that his boss asked him to reshape the vessel, and workers at the plant covered the damaged vessel with a sheet. To fix the issue, Tanaka used pumpjacks to ‘pop out’ the warped areas on the walls. It is noted that the same ‘protective covering’ of a white sheet is still employed at Fukushima in 2012. The reactor pressure vessel is the sole defense protecting Fukushima’s No. 4 reactor, which was shut for maintenance on 11 March 2011—the day the earthquake and subsequent tsunami hit. Tanaka claims that he could have been the father of a Japanese Chernobyl.

The GE Connection to Fukushima…

Dale G. Bridenbaugh, Gregory C. Minor and Richard B. Hubbard, three former engineers with General Electric (GE), made headlines in 1975 when they resigned in protest over major design flaws in the Mark 1 nuclear reactor designs they were reviewing. Dubbed the “GE Three”, the engineers argued that the Mark 1 system was a disaster in the making, but their warnings went unheeded. Tragically, five of the six reactors at Fukushima-Daiichi are GE manufactured Mark 1 systems, and according to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) data, 23 of the 104 existing nuclear plants in the US also use GE boiling-water reactors with GE’s Mark 1 radiation containment systems. 

In an interview with ABC News on March 15, 2011, Bridenbaugh explained the concerns: “The problems we identified in 1975 were that, in doing the design of the containment, they (GE) did not take into account the dynamic loads that could be experienced with a loss of coolant.” He went on to explain that without a coolant system in play for these ‘boiling water’ reactors, there is no way to prevent spent radioactive fuel from going ‘critical’ and exploding into the atmosphere. 

The GE Three’s warnings have been proven prescient, and their story serves as a stark reminder of the importance of secondary or back-up power generators for public safety. Without such precautions, nuclear reactors such as those at Fukushima are little more than a radioactive time-bomb, “looking for a place to happen.”

Fukushima—revolving door …

The Fukushima disaster of 2011 has raised questions about the leadership of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). According to documents released by WikiLeaks, Tomihiro Tanguchi, head of Safety and Security for the IAEA, had been criticized for his weak management and leadership skills, particularly with regards to the Japanese nuclear industry. In cables sent from the US Embassy in Vienna to Washington DC, it was noted that Taniguchi had been a “particular disappointment” to the United States for his “unloved-step-child treatment” of the Office of Nuclear Security. This was eighteen months before the Fukushima disaster. The incident has highlighted the importance of selecting executives from the scientific community, rather than government or business ranks, for the nuclear industry.

TEPCO’s history of fraud…on top of a flawed Mark 1 design…

The history of TEPCO is one of fraud and malpractice. In 2002, five TEPCO executives resigned over allegations they had falsified nuclear plant safety records, resulting in the shutdown of five reactors. In 2006, the Japanese government discovered false water coolant temperature readings at Fukushima Daiichi in 1985 and 1988, and ordered TEPCO to re-inspect past data. TEPCO was found to have used the bogus data to satisfy mandatory inspections in October 2005. In addition, they have been accused of falsifying inspection records over many years, covering up data about cracks in water circulation pumps and pipes, failing to report cracks in reactor core shrouds, steam dryers, access hole covers, and components associated with jet pumps, faking tests of the leak rate of a Fukushima reactor containment vessel, and deleting written records of cracks in neutron-measuring equipment. Furthermore, eight TEPCO reactors were still operating despite required repairs not being carried out. 

Mitsuhiko Tanaka, the engineer who designed the flawed pressure vessel for Fukushima-Daiichi Reactor #4, is now a whistle-blowing science journalist exposing TEPCO’s ongoing pattern of propaganda, obstruction and outright lies. Tanaka accuses TEPCO of ‘blacking out documents,’ and rigging the computer simulation used to justify restarting additional reactors. TEPCO defends denying full access to scientific records on the grounds that such information constitutes ‘proprietary trade secrets.’ 

Despite the catastrophic events at Fukushima, the Obama Administration has been actively pushing new nuclear plants, with the first two plants to be built at Plant Vogtle (south of Augusta, Georgia). The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has approved these plants, although Chairman Gregory Jaczko of the NRC has expressed his concern that TEPCO will follow the same reckless path it followed regarding Fukushima. Senator Ron Wyden’s recent visit to Japan has also highlighted the potential danger of the spent or irradiated fuel, which is only separated from damage by a ‘small makeshift sea wall’ in the event of another tsunami. Wyden has sent letters of concern to Secretary of State Clinton, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, and Chairman Jaczko of the NRC. It is clear that TEPCO’s history of malpractice and disregard for safety regulations must be taken into consideration before any new nuclear plants are approved.

TEPCO—placing profits above safety….backup generators?

Primary responsibility for the Fukushima-Daiichi disaster lies with TEPCO, as they failed to provide adequate safeguards such as backup power generators. It is increasingly clear that for TEPCO, profits were prioritized over safety. Blame can also be assigned to the Japanese ‘nuclear village’, comprising METI, NISA and the NSC (Nuclear Safety Commission), who have been accused of putting corporate profits ahead of public safety. 

The Japanese Government Investigation Committee found that TEPCO had inadequately prepared for a Station Blackout, including a lack of DC power supplies and operational manuals, no plan for emergency water injection or seawater injection, and no preparation for emergency telecommunications lines. Furthermore, the Committee noted that the emergency power generators were stored in the basement of a turbine building, rather than a more secure reactor building, due to space constraints. This proved disastrous when the tsunami of March 11, 2011 destroyed all 10 water cooled generators in the flood. 

An MIT report into the Fukushima disaster states that emergency backup generators should be well separated into at least two locations, one situated high up and the other down low, and housed in watertight rooms. This is a precaution that many U.S. plants already take, but which TEPCO failed to implement.

In conclusion…

It was not inevitable that the Fukushima-Daiichi accident on March 11, 2011, would result in a loss of life and compromise of environmental security. A potential global environmental catastrophe has been unleashed on all of us as a result of a fatal trifecta of bad planning, fact-flipping, and corporate greed. The most prestigious law firms now propose a legal haven where businesses may commit environmental crimes and hide behind “proprietary trade secrets.” The most egregious of these offences is the final one. A crime against humanity is being committed as the world watches. Future generations’ survival will depend on how we handle this catastrophe. Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear authority, said this:

“Now think about the ramifications for the nation’s capital, whether it is Tokyo or the United States. How would you like it if you went to pick your flowers and were kneeling in radioactive waste? That is what is happening in Tokyo now. And I think that is the point that Chairman Jaczko was trying to make. When the Nuclear Regulatory Commission does it’s cost benefit analyses now, it does not take into account the cost to society if you have to evacuate for generations or if you have to move 100,000 people, perhaps forever.” –Arnie Gundersen

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *