Japan Today

Japan should stop sending 'confusing messages' on Fukushima: IAEA


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

© 2013 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Some really ignorant comments here from the people assuming the underlying message is simply "japan should not tell the truth". The article was very clear and was pointing out and question Japan's dodgy, inconsistent use of the scale and asking why they dont just simply release all the details of ALL incidents instead of arbitrarily rating one with no back-up information, vague as per usual. They simply want transparency.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

“This would avoid sending confusing messages to the media and the public on a possibly long series of INES-rated events at the lower levels of the scale, for the duration of the entire recovery operation”,

Yes, that is precisely what it would do. IAEA wants to avoid the truth at all costs.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

CraigHicks - That's right.

The back-up generators in the basement could have been located out of the reactor turbine buildings. The danger of back-up cooling failure due to flooding was mentioned by engineers during construction in the 1970s. It was again mentioned in 2004 by the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) but on both occasions TEPCO did nothing. (Blame also lies with NISA for this.)

On another occasion TEPCO were warned that their seawall was not sufficiently high to withstand a tsunami. Again, they did nothing.

In fact, originally, Fukushima Dai-ichi would have been 35 meters above sea level but TEPCO lowered it by 25 meters - to just 10 meters above sea level - to place it on solid bedrock, which is stronger in an earthquake (fair enough), but with the bonus that it would keep the running costs of the seawater pumps low. I just wonder which was the prime consideration here.

Although the original GE design of Fukushima Dai-ichi had the generators in the basement, I also wonder if those plans were drawn up on the assumption that the plant was going to be 35 meters above sea level, not a mere 10.

TEPCO has a long, recorded history of cover-ups, deception and outright lies - which continues to this day.TEPCO is rotten to its core.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

You must read the article correctly. IAEA is not concerned about TEPCO's information policy or even the water mess, no, their only concern is the worlwide media attraction of the recent INES event. They don't want negative PR. Walk on by. Nothing to see here. Fukushima isn't a problem.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

What people know that INES is largely a public relations- not actual hazards- incident assessment. Reading it would place the incident as 2 or 4 (only if it affects food- in other ways its not) given the inconsistent general descriptions. The international press has no understanding of INES because they are lazy incapable of doing the simplest web search and interpretation. Otherwise the IPCC couldn't have got away with some of it of its most ridiculous lies like the lead authors being top experts when they were undergraduates.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Haven't they sent it's a 'state of emergency' message out to the world?

That is as clear as it can get right?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@serrano, @sushisake3 .... "such as the relatively low cost"

As long as the nuclear industry insists on the mantra of "low cost", it will lead to cutting corners and putting safety after cost, and therefore in the longer run more accidents and higher cost. If the plant had simply been built higher up, this accident would not have happened (assuming earthquake was not also involved). That particular design decision NOT to put it higher up was made in consideration of cutting costs.

Anzen dai ichi

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Translation: Stop using the public relations threat system because it confuses international markets about the safety of nuclear power which we want to support. We have to now report on your actions and given the mass incompetence it doesn't look good for anyone to have one of the richest nations on the planet undermining itself and the world. Please have your supervisor contact us for PR lessons. End of Translation

2 ( +2 / -0 )

What? Nothing to see here, just 3elt though's, all good, nothing to see here, move along...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Japan is causing confusion? Don't you mean TEPCO? Quality journalism?

-3 ( +0 / -4 )

Previous similar events were not rated on the INES scale. The Japanese Authorities may wish to prepare an explanation for the media and the public on why they want to rate this event, while previous similar events have not been rated.

Sounds to me like: don't shit in the fan, the global nuclear gravy train has plenty more miles to go

0 ( +0 / -0 )

However, he also accused the international press of not fully grasping the INES designations.

Who cares about scales? What is important as of now is that huge volumes of poisonous irradiated water have been allowed into the ground and global commons (the sea) with untold human and ecological consequences. Japan should be sued for this; otherwise the usual lack of accountability will continue as shown by the PM currently going around selling japan nuke technology even when he knows because to his country's carelessness, the world is going to live with this nuclear pollution nightmare for hundreds of years.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The International Atomic Energy Agency questioned why the leak last week of 300 tons of highly radioactive water merited a rating on its International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), when no other incident since the March 2011 meltdowns had.

IAEA, wake up you damned fools! TEPCO has been lying and covering up since day one of the incident, right from its very first statement on how much radiation was released in the explosion (it turned out to be over double what they originally said). As an international body, I would have thought it was in your interests to promote proper handling of this crisis in order to salvage as much positive opinion as possible regarding nuclear power. Useless, but not as useless as those c**** at TEPCO.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The confusing messages come from TEPCO not having a solid plan and also from governmental media control. Both the gov and TEPCO are downplaying the severity of the situation to avoid the mass panic and international condemnation if the truth is fully exposed. They are facing a China Syndrome which they have no idea how to stop. They have hundreds of tons of radioactive water that they have no way of treating and are rapidly running out of storage for it. They have concealed major radioactive water leaks and keep denying it is reaching the water table. The situation is basically out of control and they are doing their darnedest to keep it from the media. It's now 2.5 years since the meltdowns and it is still getting worse. Do they know what a project manager is? They don't seem to have any goal related strategy and just keep fumbling through the f/ups with duct tape and apologies. Japanese people should be both embarrassed and outraged, but the media control is keeping everybody's head in the sand.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Sending 'confusing messages' will hurt the Japanese mostly.

And hundred of Nuclear plants in Japan are great threats in war, they are just like A-bomb to be lighted.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I recall reading soon after the accident that groundwater was contaminated. I recall thinking "Hmm! that was awfully quick." seeing as groundwater contamination should take some time to show up. So, it wouldn't surprise me if the plant had been hiding all of it's little mistakes over the years.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Still a coverup. This plant has been leaking since day 1.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Serrano, he is correct.

Coal is way kore polluting than nuclear.

I should stop sending 'confusing messages' to Japan Today readers.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

GobshiteAug. 29, 2013 - 09:34AM JST

Roughly translated as "Japan should tell the truth"

Well, if you have read the body of the article, you would have realized what IAEA meant was contrary to your translation and was "Japan should NOT tell the truth." Wanderlust is right.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

I just read an article in today's Japan News written by Yomiuri Shimbun staff writers titled "N-power is here to stay, and here's why." It starts out with this gem:

"The Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry believes nuclear energy has advantages over other energy sources, such as the relatively low cost of exploiting uranium and being friendly to the environment"


5 ( +5 / -0 )

Japan should stop sending 'confusing messages'

Roughly translated as "Japan should tell the truth"

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The IAEA cautioned against the frequent use of INES evaluations in the future, saying this risked clouding the issue in the public mind.

They really mean that Japan should stop scaring the rest of the world with announcing problems in the safe use of nuclear power, which the IAEA are there to promote...

The rest of the world fully understand the INES scale, it is Japan who is not adhering to it.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Yea, because am confused.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

the rest of the world uses Magnitude to measure earthquake, Japan uses "shindo". Confusing as hell if you ask me!

Japan also uses magnitude to indicate the size of an earthquake. Shindo indicates the effect of the earthquake at any particular spot. Makes things a whole lot clearer, if you ask me.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

@ Tessa - I agree. Japan is causing the confusion to disguise the real issue with their own set of rules. Just like the rest of the world uses Magnitude to measure earthquake, Japan uses "shindo". Confusing as hell if you ask me!

3 ( +6 / -3 )

However, he also accused the international press of not fully grasping the INES designations.

This makes me mad. Why should there be one set of rules for Japan, and another for the rest of the world? Typical.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

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