national

Japan's radiation monitoring unreliable: Greenpeace

43 Comments

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

© 2012 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

43 Comments
Login to comment

This comes from the same idiots that spill tons of oil into the ocean in the name of protecting ocean life. Any garbage that comes from these guys needs to be taken with a mountain of salt.

Without explaining WHY they get different readings I'll stick to safecast's data, which shows that the government readings aren't too off despite "buildings". Thanks to the inverse square law, anything more than a few meters away from a major hotspot is entirely safe, and not all hotspots are caused by Fukushima.

-24 ( +4 / -25 )

Disturbing that none of this is being reported by the local media. Trustable or not, it at least needs to be covered by the media and some level of response from the accused authorities should be in order to avoid any cause for distrust or panic.

9 ( +9 / -1 )

Greenpeace found that in some parks and school facilities in Fukushima city, home to 285,000 people, radiation levels were above three microsieverts per hour. Japan’s recommended radiation limit is 0.23 microsieverts per hour.

The Fukushima gov't needs to investigate the report and take readings to compare those claimed by Greenpeace. I have also read reports from other individuals showing radiation readings of 9 microsieverts per hour, near rivers.

17 ( +17 / -2 )

Basrlol What are the other causes of hotspots in and around Fukushima ????

13 ( +13 / -1 )

Yes, basroil - as if the the BS that came out of the government sources and Tepco ( going by their record ) doesn't,t " need to be taken with a grain of salt "? Wonder which side has more to gain by twisting the truth here.

13 ( +13 / -1 )

Greenpeace needs to get this out to more international media in order to finally put the needed pressure on the Japanese government to actually do something instead of try to look good. The best way to get the government here to act is to embarrass them on the public stage and have them thinking that they look bad in the world's eyes.

10 ( +10 / -1 )

I lived in Fukushima and did some measuring in various areas and know about ten other people who have done the same. There are hot spots with tremendous amounts of radiation. The flower bed in front of my house measured around 3 microseiverts/hour in August of last year. An area next to my inlaws house measured around 2 microseiverts/hour as of this March. Some parks and gutters have scary amounts of radiation in some cases. A friend found 20-30 micro/hour around his company warehouse. There are thousands of hotspots. Somehow some people still believe this is safe?

13 ( +12 / -1 )

politically tainted radiation readings

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@Onniyama.... what are you still doing there?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

alliswellinJapan, I'm sorry to say this, but you're wrong. I read some reports by the local media yesterday.

I'm not defending the gov reports or anything, but I just think that many people like to read or always wait for worse news: the worse it reads, the more reliable it seems to get. You'd believe it if you read the news that reports far worse "reality", would you? Yes, this all boils down to the gov's unreliability, but aren't you also waiting for some worse news???

I would wait to read more articles and reports, optimistic or otherwise, by many other different researchers and institutes and compare them each other.

How about YOU, guys? The worse, the better?

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Neo_Rio. Thanks for your concern. We live in Kansai now.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

People also tend to forget that many people are using a Geiger Counter to check the radiation level day to day. Have they reported any large deviations from the gov reports? Are they fools, too, believing what the Counter gives them??? Or is the Counter faulty?

What about the independent (=non-government) research reports by think tanks or unis??? Do you actually read them or just wait for bad news by influential bodies???

Come on, guys, we'd better read a lot more and think.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

A friend of mine just put his Geiger Counter up for sale on Craig's list. Maybe I should ask him for it and send it up to Fukushima where some of my pottery friends live and work. There are hot spots down here in Tokyo and Yokohama also. We went out checking several times. If you see someone sweeping the street, move away from that dust and stay upwind.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nothing suprising there.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Hiroicci:

alliswellinJapan, I'm sorry to say this, but you're wrong. I read some reports by the local media yesterday.

Not so sure about this. As far as I've regoogled just now the only reportings in the Japanese language are coming from Chugoku shimbun and AFPBB news and none from Yomiuri, Asahi, Nikkei et al, not even from yahoo news with the tendency to instantly list up any sort of headline. May possibly be a question of time for it to spread soon, but the media as we all know is usually not so slow on these things and would naturally assume this to be intentional by-pass for whatever reason there may be.

5 ( +5 / -1 )

It is reported by some of the Japanese media but it ends up on TV at 2 am at night when everyone's asleep.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The good thing for tepco,and the corrupted government. Is that with radiation. You can't smell it. Or feel it,and it's long term...

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The government maybe just wants to keep everything looking normal so they can turn on the rest of the nuclear reactors. Greenpeace would not make a mistake on these readings which are simple for even an idiot to conduct. It is obvious that there would be high readings in areas in and around Fukushima and for a very long time. Look at Chernobyl --it is still a radioactive waste land.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Professor Hayakawa has also reported that the radiation measurement done at the monitoring posts in Fukushima differs, sometimes significantly, from the measurement done nearby.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

It's just like Joseph Garrett Baxter said, measuring radiation is simple. The quality of the machine determines the results, tho in actuality now it's not so hard to get a machine that produces excellent results.

The thing that scares me most, tho, is not the hot spots we focus on so much. Yes, they are dangerous but not many people will be sleeping in a gutter in Fukushima City.

What is really scary is that right around Fukushima Station and the eastern part of Date City I got measurements over 1 microsievert/hour just walking around town, at waist level. And many other people and organizations have got the same readings. These are the levels of radiation people living in Fukushima are being constantly exposed to, and are more of a concern IMO. These are the levels that will contribute to people getting vastly higher doses than they should be exposed to.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

I'm sorry to say this, but you're wrong. I read some reports by the local media yesterday.

Isn't the Fukushima disaster supposed to be classified as a National disaster? These hotspots would not only affect the locality, but even produce which are distributed to other parts of the country as well.

Several months ago, I remember seeing pictures of the so-called "radiation clean-up" ... which included scrubbing doors and windows.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I hate to imagine how much Fukushima produce has been consumed since the accident. I still can't believe the government didn't put a blanket ban on all food from the area. This should have been a case of guilty until proven innocent.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Oh, common Greenpeace! The Japanese radiation reports are extremely reliable. You can rely on them to be falsified and misleading snow-jobs, as it has been since match 11 last year. Haven't you been paying attention?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

basroil: "This comes from the same idiots that spill tons of oil into the ocean..."

As opposed to TEPCO, right? I mean, they do nothing but HELP the environment! :)

7 ( +7 / -0 )

moomoochoo: "I hate to imagine how much Fukushima produce has been consumed since the accident."

Oh, come now, Moomoochoo! The government very strictly allows the farmers of Fukushima to 'monitor' and 'inspect' their own products to determine if they are safe for shi-pping (under other labels)! How can you possibly doubt that they would have anything but the consumers, and not their own income, at heart?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/hl?a=20121023-00000025-jij_afp-int

alliswellinjapan, here you go. Source is the same, but that's yahoo. This news came out 8 o'clock yesterday evening, so I am guessing all the major newspapers missed the timing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Profit over people, the end game... Denial will be the human race' ultimate down fall, as big corporations were allowed to dis respect atomic energy without regard for any consequences resulting in the slow destruction of life on earth at a genetic level...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

TSRnow: Thanks for the info. Missed the yahoo article, but still doesn't change the limited local coverage here. Regoogled just now and the situation remains the same. News coming out at 8pm should not be a problem for any of the major media and the reason is clearly elsewhere.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What is the solution, and how do these hotspots get cleaned up?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

bluesea67Oct. 24, 2012 - 07:50AM JST

What are the other causes of hotspots in and around Fukushima ????

Manufacturing, hospitals, hell, even snow. http://blog.safecast.org/2012/02/measuring-radiation-in-snow/ yes, snow can be radioactive naturally, as well as rain. As for manufacturing, funny thing is that in Iitate they measured mostly factories and workshops!

Even higher radiation hot-spots of 13 uSv/h were recorded at a factory that was allowed to resume operations in September 2012. (http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335386#ixzz2ABvEEej4)

Greenpeace never released what type of radiation their doses were based on, and while the detector they claimed to use is a scintillator capable of just Cs137 as well as overall dose, they ever released ANY of the raw data or settings used. Until then, only trust safecast, as you can verify the data yourself (if you know how to).

http://map.safecast.org/#map/140.47472820000442,37.76083369999986,12

As you can see, their map has more than a few dozen hand picked locations, and the data does not collaborate anything greenpeace stated (in fact, this article is wrong about greenpeace stating 3microSv/h+, their data only shows 2.4microSv/h in Fukushima City)

marcelitoOct. 24, 2012 - 08:17AM JST

Wonder which side has more to gain by twisting the truth here.

Greenpeace actually. They got a pretty bad reputation here in recent years, and they are seeking to improve it for political gain. Just check at their attire change over the last decade. Certainly the Japanese government can't gain much when everyone distrusts them anyway.

Again, people, listen to safecast instead of greenpeace, they have less political involvement and don't write threatening letters to governments (with elementary school level writing style).

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

@JapanGal Hope your potter friends in Fukushima are testing the clay etc. they use. I don't think I would be happy to buy their merchandise.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I just took the Hayate Tohoku Shinkansen to Shin Aomori and back to Ueno on 12 and 18 Oct. without stopping at Fukushima and had eki-ben during the 3.3hrs journey. Was it safe?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

m6bobOct. 24, 2012 - 03:54PM JST

I just took the Hayate Tohoku Shinkansen to Shin Aomori and back to Ueno on 12 and 18 Oct. without stopping at Fukushima and had eki-ben during the 3.3hrs journey. Was it safe?

If you were in the smoking car, probably not. Otherwise, you got more radiation walking through the station, especially if you took the underground paths.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Tokyo fallout!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9pk42kdL4k&feature=related

1 ( +1 / -0 )

basroil: "They got a pretty bad reputation here in recent years,"

As opposed to TEPCO, who's reputation is outstanding? I mean, heck, the cover-ups at Niigata, the lying about knowing about major faults before plants were built above them, Fukushima... yeah, stellar reputation.

It seems you want to blame anything BUT Fukushima for any and all radiation that exists in the area. Next you'll be deflecting with statistics on tobacco.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Instead of blaming Greenpeace for its findings on higher levels of radiation around Fukushima area,why not Japanese Anti-nuclear activists force the japanese universities to take up this monitoring work as a third party and furnish correct information on Radiation exposures around Fukushima plant as the academicians are paid from public taxes for their salaries and they have a duty to do this work as a matter of gratitude for their pay-masters.Let N.G.O's demonstrate against the heads of the Educational institutions who have the expertise to help serve the interests of Japanes people by telling them the truth so that they make their own decisions whether to return to their native places or stay back in safer places far away for some more time instead of blindly believing in the words of Government experts.Ren Dubos,an American Encvironmentalist said long ago that 'A Nation which blindly believes in its experts is a nation on its way to death"Let not Japan make this mistake

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Greenpeace are just regurgitating things poster on this forum should know: radioactive particles collect in areas that channel water from the environment: drains, trees and plants.

Unless you are going to live in a drain or under the foliage there is minimal exposure, and in fact these constant readings seem to show one reassuring thing: The radiation is not being moved about.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

smithinjapanOct. 24, 2012 - 06:31PM JST

basroil: "They got a pretty bad reputation here in recent years,"

As opposed to TEPCO, who's reputation is outstanding? I mean, heck, the cover-ups at Niigata, the lying about knowing about major faults before plants were built above them, Fukushima... yeah, stellar reputation

Who the hell said anything about TEPCO? I was talking about GREENPEACE (which that statement referred to) and the GOVERNMENT, which actually pertains to this discussion. In fact, my entire point is to not jump to conclusions IN EITHER CASE, and to use data from all sources to figure out issues, in this case the Safecast network data and others which have little political motivation (unlike the government and greenpeas)

Star-vikingOct. 24, 2012 - 11:28PM JST

Unless you are going to live in a drain or under the foliage there is minimal exposure, and in fact these constant readings seem to show one reassuring thing: The radiation is not being moved about.

Given safecast readings and this together (assuming the numbers are somehow correct), there may be some concentration going on, though the overall levels haven't changed. That's actually good for cleanup, as it will make cleanup more effective and cheaper and faster. Three problems solved in one stroke would be a good thing for the folks working to clean up everything and the people who live there or are displaced waiting to return.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Shivajirao TipirneniOct. 24, 2012 - 11:04PM JST

the japanese universities to take up this monitoring work as a third party and furnish correct information on Radiation exposures

Safecast works with several Japanese institutions for their data. I've been saying that you and others should check that data, but of course nobody listens to rational arguments and then ends up asking questions that were already answered.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Does this mean bottle water from mountain springs around Japan isn't safe to drink?! Shit everyone drinks out of bottle waters these days

1 ( +1 / -0 )

crouching$amuraiHiddenNinjaOct. 25, 2012 - 05:19AM JST

Does this mean bottle water from mountain springs around Japan isn't safe to drink?! Shit everyone drinks out of bottle waters these days

Depends on the source. If you are downstream of an onsen there's a good chance that sulfur and heavy metal levels are way above the safe level. You shouldn't drink that water, but luckily the Fukushima area isn't known for that many onsen locations.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

In addition to Prof. Hayakawa, Fuji TV's morning show found the same phenomenon.

http://enenews.com/japan-tv-monitoring-posts-show-far-lower-radioactivity-levels-shoot-up-just-steps-away-tokyo-professor

It's obvious that the areas immediately around some of the monitoring posts have been sanitised to present a better situation than what actually exists. The question is why that would be done. If the higher actual readings are really safe, there would be no reason to hide them. I don't know who is providing safecast readings, so I cannot comment on the potential for their accuracy. Are these taken indoors or out? On the first floor or tenth? By average citizens or bureaucrats, electrical company employees, government-supported academic scientists tasked to do so at their homes? It is true that radioactive naturally occurs but what is falling with precipitation is manmade radioactive substances. Like the "natural" radiation said to occur in bananas, it comes from radioactive substances that human activity such as nuclear power generation releases into the air.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If I may, more evidence of unreliable ambient radiation monitoring: http://kingo999.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-748.html with a brief summary available in English here http://enenews.com/tokyo-paper-thick-iron-shielding-below-radiation-monitoring-post-journalist-dose-doubled-5-meters-away

0 ( +0 / -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