Meltdowns and Misinformation

What do we actually know about Japan's nuclear crisis?

BY JOSEPH CIRINCIONE | MARCH 18, 2011

To state the obvious, the nuclear crisis in Japan is bad and will get worse. Despite the heroic efforts of the remaining workers at the nuclear complex, it seems likely that two reactor cores will melt down and two spent fuel ponds will ignite, spewing radioactivity into the ground, air, and water. But beyond concern for the workers and those in the surrounding region, the international public has reacted to the unfolding disaster with understandable -- but nonetheless irrational -- fear for their own safety. Potassium iodide pills have been flying off the shelves in California over fears that the radiation will cross the Pacific. Hoax text messages have spread fears of contamination across Asia from the Philippines to India. In China, stores are selling out of iodized salt, as people frantically hoard it in the mistaken belief that it will counteract radiation.

It might be tempting to blame hysterical media coverage for this reaction, but in this case, most coverage I've seen has actually been fairly sober and cautious. The bigger problem has been the overly optimistic scenarios and conflicting information released by Japanese authorities. The public, not only in Japan but worldwide, simply no longer believes those in authority who tell them they are not in danger. This will make it difficult to manage the public response to the crisis going forward and may pose a grave risk for the future of the nuclear industry.

As of day eight of the crisis, here is a brief roundup of what we actually know about the situation unfolding in Fukushima.

A small group of workers, at one point as few as 50, are racing to do what 800 workers failed to do: cool the nuclear fuel inside three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. The latest available data shows that water levels inside reactors 1, 2, and 3 have fallen to cover only about half then length the fuel rods, allowing them to overheat and begin to crack. Reactor 4 does not have fuel in its core.

These three reactors contain about 200 metric tons of lightly enriched uranium; reactor 3 also contains plutonium fuel. The cores are beginning to melt. In a full meltdown, this molten fuel could drip down, burning through the steel reactor vessel and possibly breaching the concrete containment vessel -- the last line of defense before a large radioactive release. Based on radiation detection by monitors deployed by the Comprehensive-Test-Ban-Treaty Organization, it does not appear that this has yet occurred. Detection of large amounts of zirconium and barium inside the reactors would signal that a large meltdown had taken place.

Photos of the plant show that a series of hydrogen gas explosions has blown off the sides and roofs and compromised the integrity of several structures. The containment walls at reactors 2 and 3 were damaged and may have been breached. Primary and backup cooling systems are not working at reactors 1, 2, and 3. Radioactive steam appears to be leaking from these buildings. These reactor buildings also store spent fuel rods in large pools -- containing several times as much radioactive material as the reactors themselves. Two of these pools have been damaged, and the vital water that was cooling the spent fuel has drained. Without water, these fuel rods will begin to overheat, and the rods' coverings could catch fire. There are 1,760 metric tons of spent fuel in these ponds (with an additional 1,000 tons in the nearby reactor 5 and 6 complex).

The ponds contain many billions of curies of radiation that could easily exceed those associated with the reactor cores by a factor of five to 10. They have no containment structures, and radioactive smoke from these fires would spew directly into the atmosphere. Efforts by Japanese military and police to refill the ponds with water dropped from helicopters or by water cannons appear to have failed.

The biggest worry is that a spent fuel fire could contaminate the immediate area so badly that reactor workers would no longer be able to keep working to cool the overheating reactors. Then two scenarios will unfold, both far worse than authorities imagined just seven days ago.

The best worst-case scenario is that only two spent fuel ponds -- at reactors 3 and 4 -- catch fire and that the meltdowns at reactors 1, 2, and 3 are largely contained by the concrete walls surrounding the reactors. Toxic smoke would still spread massive amounts of radioactive contamination over the surrounding environment.

The worst worst-case scenario is that all three reactors with fuel in their core and all four fuel pools overheat and two or more reactors breach the concrete containment structures, burning through into the broader environment.

In either case, severe amounts of radioactive contamination will spread over tens, hundreds, or even thousands of square miles. In either case, radioactive contamination will spread over land and water, posing serious health hazards to life within 50 miles of the complex.

In an effort, perhaps, to keep the public calm, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) which owns the reactors, and the Japanese government which regulates them have limited the information released and constantly portrayed the situation as under control. The facts have spoken otherwise. The widening gap has now triggered a collapse of confidence on the part of the Japanese public and, it appears, the U.S. government. Brookings Institution scholar Daniel Kaufmann notes that TEPCO "infuriated Japan's prime minister, who learned of the first plant explosion at reactor 1 on Saturday from watching TV." In the early days of the crisis, TEPCO officials denied that water levels had fallen in reactors and fuel storage pools, but hours later announced extraordinary measures to pump new water in.

JIJI PRESS/AFP/Getty Images

 

Joseph Cirincione is president of the Ploughshares Fund and author of Bomb Scare: The History and Future of Nuclear Weapons.

DAVID LITTLEBOY

9:01 AM ET

March 19, 2011

Under control hasn't been claimed.

Your statement that the Japanese government and TEPCO have been claiming that the situation is under control is false. They've been very clear that there's a problem, it's serious, and that they are doing such and such in an _attempt at getting it under control_. That's what someone who understands Japanese (has worked as a translator for 20 years) and has a technical background (MIT, '76) hears when they listen to what the government actually says. (Now if you had criticised the TEPCO head office spokespersons as seeming completely incompetent, I'd agree with you. But that's a different question.)

 

W7VOA

9:53 AM ET

March 19, 2011

Agree that "under control" not claimed

I've been working this story on the ground in Japan for eight days. I agree with David -- there's been no assertion (as of 2349JST Saturday) that this is "under control." Prime Min. Kan on Friday evening called it "extremely serious" or "very grave" (depending on which translation you prefer) and expressed hope it would all be under control quite soon. CCS Edano on Thursday called the water dousing attempt a "last ditch" effort (to avoid catastrophe). And TEPCO, as David points out, has been bumbling and contradictory but even they did not have the audacity to say it was under control.

Sunday or Monday we might start to hear that kind of positive from the lips of TEPCO and GOJ but with enough errors being committed in the response and reporting I think it's important to clear the record.

 

TJNEWMAN

1:33 PM ET

March 19, 2011

The Future of Nuclear Energy

As for the future of nuclear energy, perhaps unpopular outcry will be logical, but I suspect it will be based on emotion.

The thing is, there are far safer ways to generate nuclear power, such as passively cooled micro reactors and Thorium based reactors. The later actually help with the disposal of our stock of nuclear waste. But the US, Japan, and the rest of the world are saddled with using old technology.

I have waffled over the years on nuclear energy, and my current position (tepidly pro) may change. But it’s always been clear that the US needs a comprehensive energy plan (nuclear being part of the mix) that doesn’t depend on fossil fuels, with the result of contributing to emissions, mountain top removal, and driving up national debt, by our brute sourcing from developing countries. Alaska is no solution either.

 

PNPHOWARD

3:23 PM ET

March 19, 2011

Unwarranted criticism of Japanese government

I take objection to the claim here that the Japanese government has been less than open. I have been following the Japanese coverage closely, and have seen with my own eyes that Prime Minister Kan and Chief Cabinet Secretary Edano have spoken responsibly in the most difficult situation imaginable and have done a good job in keeping the public and the media informed quickly and accurately. The insinuation here that they have been claiming that all is under control is as wrong as can be. I have to presume that the author of this article can't speak Japanese, and so can't understand what the government is actually saying. If he could, he surely wouldn't have made that claim.

The performance of TEPCO's senior management in sharing information really has been a problem, but that is the fault of TEPCO's senior management. The government seems to have done everything in its power - including a direct rant from the Prime Minister - to get TEPCO's senior managers to live up to their responsibility. Saying that, there's a huge distinction between the performance of TEPCO's senior management (scandalous) and rank and file staff (heroic).

 

JOECIRINCIONE

7:00 PM ET

March 19, 2011

Criticism of TEPCO and Japanese Government Widespread

I appreciate the defenses of TEPCO and the government of Japan that have been posted. This is a very difficult situation. I do believe, however, that from the beginning both the government and TEPCO failed to tell the public the truth about the crisis. I am not alone in this view. A good New York Times review can be found here: http://nyti.ms/fnQxoJ

The story says in part:

"Foreign nuclear experts, the Japanese press and an increasingly angry and rattled Japanese public are frustrated by government and power company officials’ failure to communicate clearly and promptly about the nuclear crisis. Pointing to conflicting reports, ambiguous language and a constant refusal to confirm the most basic facts, they suspect officials of withholding or fudging crucial information about the risks posed by the ravaged Daiichi plant."

While pointing often to the "challenging situation," officials from the very first days sought to calm fears with statements that understated the severity of the crisis. For example, an AP story from 3/11 quotes Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano as saying "With evacuation in place and the ocean-bound wind, we can assure the safety" of the population. This was when the evacuation zone was 3 kilometers. It was soon expanded to 10 kilometers. This is the kind of misinformation that I believe has induced the very panic and mistrust the officials sought to avoid.

My criticism, by the way, is mild compared to many. See this history of TEPCO from Japan Today: http://bit.ly/eBsniJ

 

EHKUSO@GMAIL.COM

2:36 AM ET

March 20, 2011

Defense of Tepco and Japanese government

I see no one defending Tepco. Quite early on Tepco faced hostile questioning from Japanese reporters at its press conferences. In one I saw, the questioning was so hostile I thought the Tepco mouthpiece might start to cry. It has been criticized in NHK and newspaper commentary. Kan has been rather feeble but Edano has been very good. What has been said in AP reports on New York Times articles is completely irrelevant. You will only have a sense of what is being said and how it is being said if you listen to the press conferences, listen to the expert commentary that follows on NHK or other television stations, and read the transcripts (in Japanese) of various official statements. Basing your article on snippets from English language sources rather than the original Japanese is itself misinformation of the first order.

Earl H. Kinmonth
Tokyo, Japan

 

PNPHOWARD

7:23 AM ET

March 20, 2011

Japanese government and TEPCO

I commend you on your hindsight. If you (and Mr Edano) knew on 11 March (i.e. the day of the earthquake) that the situation at the Fukushima plant was going to turn out the way it has, you should have written an article about it on 12 March and would have won a Pulitzer Prize. Criticising Mr Edano for not having briefing the public on the serious nuclear problem BEFORE it had happened is more than a little unfair.

Your rebuttal to the comments following your article only serve to confirm my suspicion that your article is based on selective quotes from selective articles from the English-language media, not information from the source - Edano and Kan's public statements - perhaps because you don't understand Japanese.

Despite the title of your rebuttal, I don't see anyone praising TEPCO as such (only the heroically brave cannon fodder they are sending in to clean up after their mess.)

 

SHERRY8

10:50 PM ET

March 19, 2011

Nuklear...the power that used to be

We all know the danger of nukclear plant if leakage occurs. The Japanese government has obviously taken a drastic actions in trying to contain the blasts. The power plants have stood for so many years without any untowards catastrophe. But the recent natural disaster of earthquake and tsunami have definitely taken a heavy impact on the plant. No one can beat natural disaster such as these magnitude. No matter how sophisticated your equipments may be, the natural disaster always wins... foot massager reviews

 

ONEUNSTUCKINTIME

3:02 AM ET

March 20, 2011

The Folly of Man

And herein lies the folly of man, so drunk on comfort that we must exploit those things we neither fully understand nor are able to fully control. The Earth is a tumultuous place. We are fools to think that because we crawl about it like an infestation that we own it.

 

LADY

3:41 PM ET

March 21, 2011

Thank You

I commend you on your FORESIGHT.

You were one of the first and few to sound an honest and truthful alarm.

Thank you for your courage in speaking openly on a taboo matter.

 

ENNISP

11:49 PM ET

March 21, 2011

Joe Cirincione's 'meltdown'

I hope that Mr. Cirincione will soon be able to acknowledge the breathtaking scale of falsehood, exaggeration, and fear-mongering contained in his March 18 post, “Meltdowns and Misinformation.”

At the time Mr. Cirincione was undergoing his own analytical meltdown, I wrote a piece on the Fukushima problem titled: “Japan’s Nuclear Problem: An End in Sight?” (www.dispatchjapan.com), which outlined the steady progress engineers and other workers on-site were making toward restoration of power and water-pumping capabilities in the crippled reactors, putting stabilization at hand. No great insight on my part; I just listened to the assessments of skilled radiologists and nuclear engineers, who largely found themselves drowned out by the screams of hyped 'reporting.'

In fact, just two days before, on March 16 – at the moment the NRC’s Gregory Jaczko was delivering his alarmist testimony before Congress – it was already evident that efforts to keep the reactors and storage ponds supplied with sufficient water were actually working. Jaczko had barely completed his testimony when the NRC began to back away from his seemingly authoritative claim that the storage pool at reactor #4 was empty. It wasn’t empty.

But Mr. Jaczko’s testimony, and the NRC’s highly-political decision to recommend to American citizens in the area an evacuation zone far larger than that suggested by Japan, had the effect of inducing panic among many Americans. In the next few days, we will witness the embarrassing spectacle of upwards of 15,000 US personnel and dependents arriving on the West Coast from Japan, fleeing the country out of false fears of radiation contamination.

Mr. Cirincione’s commentary, along with many others like it, contributed to the thoroughly-avoidable panic.

 

DAVID LITTLEBOY

10:38 AM ET

March 22, 2011

Cecking out Mr. Cirincione's

Cecking out Mr. Cirincione's wiki page, I see that he's a good guy who has let his axe to grind (one (nonproliferation) I strongly agree with, by the way) run away with him. What he isn't aware of is how incredibly good the Japanese government spokesperson, Mr. Edano, has been (and is continuing to be) throughout this crisis. I listen to his press conferences, observe his control of a lot of detailed data and his ability to explain what's going on, and I turn to our CEO and ask "Are you sure this bloke doesn't have an engineering degree?" Perhaps Mr. Cirincione failed to notice that the LDP were voted out of office, and that the ruling party in Japan is now the DPJ. Under Kan and Edano, Japan is running in "FEMA under Clinton" mode. Had the old LDP, the folks who brought you Japan, Inc. and TEPCO, still been in power, it could have been a "FEMA under Bush" class disaster. The Japanese are very very lucky.

 

DOMINOMAN

7:41 PM ET

April 16, 2011

I have been following the

I have been following the Japanese coverage closely, and have seen with my own eyes that Prime Minister Kan and Chief Cabinet Secretary Edano have spoken responsibly in the most difficult situation imaginable and have done a stavkove kancelarie good job in keeping the public and the media informed quickly and accurately. The insinuation here that they have been claiming that all is under control is as wrong as can be. I have to presume that the author of this article can't speak Japanese, and so can't understand what the government is actually saying. If he could, he surely wouldn't have made that claim.The performance of TEPCO's senior management in sharing information really has been a problem, but that is the fault of TEPCO's senior management. The government seems to have done everything in its power - stavkove kancelarie including a direct rant from the Prime Minister - to get TEPCO's senior managers to live up to their responsibility. Saying that, there's a huge distinction between the performance of TEPCO's senior management.just two days before, on March 16 – at the moment the NRC’s Gregory Jaczko was delivering his alarmist testimony before Congress – it was already evident that efforts to keep the reactors and storage ponds supplied with sufficient water were actually working. Jaczko had barely completed his testimony when the NRC began to back away from his seemingly authoritative claim that the storage pool at reactor #4 was empty.