national

IAEA praises Fukushima clean-up

26 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2011 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

26 Comments
Login to comment

..now this will encourage people to return to their home base in Fukushima, ofcourse not, i praise IAEA for clean up :(

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@prospective posters, please read the full report and leave your comment, which part you agree/disagree. That would be helpful for us to understand what to worry or not to worry. Thank you.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

When will they clean up their debris that is drifting to the beautiful coastline of California?

-8 ( +3 / -10 )

@Blair Herron,

Are you in Fukushima? I have only browsed trough the report very quickly, to make any meaningful comment would require some time to read trough the material.

My first impression is that the report is written in such a way, that there is not really very much to agree or disagree with. The only point of disagreement becomes whether or not you agree with the limits that has been set by the government, as IAEA only (or at least mainly) reports on which remediation actions has been tried and whether those actions are effective to reach the set goals.

IAEA does not make any evaluations here on whether the limits set on the government are safe or not, that is up to J gov.

My inner grumpy, cynic, old man views this report as:

Jgov: -The shit has hit the fan IAEA: -What are you planning to do? Jgov: -Well we could try to scoop some of it up? IAEA: -Well done, carry on then.

Bystander: But will the room still not stink for 30 years?

Jgov: eh?

4 ( +4 / -1 )

Since 3/11 my main impression of the IAEA is that it's on the side of Big Nuke!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The IAEA is run under japanese leadership, so how can we make sure this is credible

-4 ( +3 / -6 )

I have given it a once light read. From the report.

The Team was informed that the target for remediation of farm land is the reduction of the total annual dose to the public by 50% in the next two years. This refers only to the areas where the current dose is between 1 and 20 mSv/year. In the long term the total dose should be reduced to under 1mSv/year.

The selection of remedial actions for agricultural land is linked strongly to the threshold concentration of 5000 Bq/kg of radioactive caesium (Cs-134 and Cs-137) in the soil. For a radioactivity concentration in the soil of up to 5000 Bq/kg, reduction of the air dose rate and uptake of radioactive caesium by crops will be envisaged by deep ploughing or appropriate agrochemical and agronomic practices. Above this concentration, topsoil removal will be considered in addition to other practices.

Japanese authorities calculated that 6300 hectares of paddy fields and 2000 hectares of upland fields are characterized by a caesium concentration in soil above the threshold of 5000 Bq/kg.

Since the provisional regulation value for radioactivity in rice, set by the Japanese authorities, is 500 Bq/kg, a conservative transfer factor of 0.1 implies that the temporary permissible concentration for cultivation of rice paddy soil is 5000 Bq/kg.

The Team was informed that the local governments are measuring radioactive caesium concentrations in rice planted and harvested after the accident during the current cropping season of 2011. Based on the data thus obtained, MAFF will calculate transfer factors of radioactive caesium from soil to brown rice and determine the transfer factor as an aid to reaching a decision on the feasibility of rice planting in the 2012 cropping season.

It is expected that availability of caesium for the crops will further decline, due to increased fixation of caesium in the clay-rich soil.

a) Removal of topsoil: In the demonstration sites the following options for removal of topsoil were tested: • Removal of the first 4 cm of topsoil; • Removal of topsoil using soil hardener (3 cm); or • For meadows, removal of grass and upper root-top soil layer (3 cm).

b) Deep ploughing. A less expensive option for decontaminating soil with low level radiation.

c) Draining suspended soil from paddies.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

The government have stated that there are 13,000 sq km of contaminated land across 8 prefectures. It will be impossible to remove that much topsoil in less than decades. It will also create millions of tons of contaminated soil which will need storage.

The exclusion zone should be increased to 40 kms, and include the current "Deliberate Evacuation Area". It should be made permanent for 10 years. The policy should be reviewed every 10 years.

All farming land in East Fukushima should be left unused for 7 years. After that, the land should be tested for radiation levels.

A system of radiation testing and certification should be none by every prefecture. Every farm is tested for radiation and if clean issued a certificate.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Vested interest I hear people say..... Of course.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

IAEA praises Fukushima clean-up

How much were they paid for that? They wanna elaborate what exactly was so good?

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Well, if they have found 3,000 people to work night and day for 8 months in a potentially gene-changing environment, then this has to be one firm measure for congratulations. How many other countries could have done this without mass defections?

As the report is says, there is room for improvement. Perhaps the focus has indeed been too conservative, focusing on the round-about clean-up, but with less aggressive intrusion into the still very nasty areas.

Have Tepco learnt their lesson over the sea wall?

Granted the IAEA are there to make sure the whole world goes nuclear as smoothly and cleanly as possible, so they will naturally take a softly softly approach, but as summaries go, this report seems to be fairly objective.

The truth, though, is that the area is still a hugely intricate challenge and still massively polluted.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The IAEA is a watchdog of sorts but it is at its heart pro-nuclear. No one should think otherwise. I have been disappointed with their wishy-washy response to this disaster. I had expected them to sink their teeth into TEPCO on their previous visits, but they only gave them a nip in the buttocks. The phrasing of their reports seem to make them all too easy to ignore or downplay. I would have liked to have seen some stronger language and sense of urgency.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

IAEA= It All Emerges After

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The Munya Times

They wanna elaborate what exactly was so good?

It's in the report.

zichi, very rational plan, and it makes perfect sense. That means it'll probably never be implemented!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Cheers to Zichi, fact filled posts with no emotional bias. Makes for compelling reading and a serious tone. Also actually made me want to read the report, which I've just started.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

With Amano as Director General, IAEA is no longer an objective body.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I have read the report, but really no need to comment any further than Zichi already did. Just as a small addition to Zichis third post I would say,I think the government should assist any family in affected areas to relocate and make a new life for themselves somewhere else if they wish to do so. Especially if they have children.

As I said before, this really comes down to whether you agree with J-govs risk assessments, rather than the remediation efforts.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

From the UK Telegraph

"Hiroaki Koide, a nuclear physicist at Kyoto University, said he doubted the decommissioning process will go as smoothly as the government hopes.

He said pools for spent fuel remain highly volatile, and cleaning up the three reactor cores that melted down due to a failure of the cooling systems will be a huge challenge.

"Nobody knows where exactly the fuel is, or in what condition," he said. "The reactors will have to be entombed in a sarcophagus, with metal plates inserted underneath to keep it watertight. But within 25 to 30 years, when the cement starts decaying, that will have to be entombed in another layer of cement. It's just like Russian Matryoshka dolls, one inside the other."

And when the journalists were in the plant and their camears were recording, there was a point where a Tepco official requested that the journalists' cameras be pointed downwards as the readings on the dosimeters showed abnormally high levels of radiation being recorded-radiation that is being released into the Japanese environment,at this present moment!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

God speed Japan. Let's hope this report is confirmation that Japan, after struggling mightily at first, has got a good start on the clean-up efforts and can develop the plans and processes necessary to do what must be done over the next couple of decades.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Zichi the map from your link is found ajw Asahi too and it's a little different from the map on the parts of Japan too radioactive to farm article.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Yeah and the maps a little different right. Like there is an area that is a darker purple than on the map from the JT article.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Utrack,

I would not use these maps accept to get an glimpse of what happened neither are high definition which accounts for the difference. Would need to see the original, really.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

okay.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Did the IAEA mention that the clean up work at present is being done in the main by temporary labourers with no health insurance and local amateur volunteers with ridiculously inadequate equipment and no training?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites