Take our user survey and make your voice heard.

Official defends secrecy over worst-case nuclear disaster scenario

By Yuri Kageyama

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

© Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Governments need to keep secrets from the people to avoid panic yes. BUT when the government itself doesn't know what one hand from the other is doing they cause more problems and anxiety than necessary.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

What's 'massive radiation'?

Is this a commonly used phrase?

5 ( +6 / -2 )

@Kondo Shunsuke: WHo are you to determine for us what is safe, prudent and suitable? Who are YOU to decide when we are given essential information that affects us, outr children, loved ones and friends? Although you'll never read this the answer is absolutely NO ONE. That's who you are. That is why many of us left, knowing the possibilities were VERY real. You have and had NO right to keep those millions who waited on word in the dark. Shame on you.

2 ( +11 / -7 )

YongYang, did you read the article?

4 ( +6 / -4 )

“That was our biggest mistake,” he said. This is the most honest sentence I've heard over this disaster.A man who says how it was.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

In other words, this evil bast@rd thought that the potential loss of millions of lives was acceptable, as long as they didn't have to spend anything to improve preventative safety measures. He still has sleepless nights? And so he should! I hope they all suffer chronic insomnia for the rest of their lives.

1 ( +6 / -3 )

The bottom line here is the worry about cost for these guys. "Cost Effective" is what matters.

I am with YongYang. These people should give information to allow people to make decisions. If they release rational, trustworthy information then people can decide what is right for their families. It is a far better scenario than waiting to the last moment and having a flood of people trying to escape. But I guess they don't consider tha

2 ( +4 / -2 )

"But he also acknowledged Tuesday that the design for the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant had been faulty and he had not expected the “Chernobyl-style disaster” that occurred."

And yet you gave the go-ahead for building. Whose fault is that?

9 ( +9 / -0 )

This man doesn't have sleepless nights. I bet he sleeps on a Simmons mattress. They gambled with people's lives, plain and simple. An evacuation costs millions / billions of dollars. Our lives simply aren't worth it. It played out just like an insurance would when considering a recall on vehicles. Which number is greater / lower?

If the costs of evacuating millions is more than the possible lawsuits, *that they do have control over, then we don't do the evacuation and never tell the people. It's all long division that would give most people headaches.

It's definitely one for the history books. You have to make sure you tell your children these stories. School textbooks will erase this day and the details.

0 ( +6 / -4 )

But he also acknowledged Tuesday that the design for the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant had been faulty and the above sentence should have been followed with

“That was our biggest mistake,”

“Implementing cost-effective measures was the proper response,”

Yeah could have cost millions their lives.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The government claim they wanted to prevent panic, but really they don't care about the common people, they only care about themselves. It's interesting that minister Edano sent his family to Singapore shortly after the nuclear disaster. He must have seen this document and acted on it, yet he decided to keep the information secret. One rule for them, another rule for us.

1 ( +7 / -5 )

Readers, the story about Edano sending his family abroad is a myth. It has no foundation. Please do not post such misinformation here.

The worse case did indeed happen and more people needed to be evacuated far enough away from Daiichi. Like a 350km No Go Zone and Assistance from Allied countries to bring evacuees to places like Hawaii and such until safety measures could be put in place wherein they could return. But this is Not cost effective and more importantly to J Govt, it would hurt the Economy in Japan. As Mr. Kondo says “Implementing cost-effective measures was the proper response,” But not for the Health and welfare of the People affected by the crisis.

-1 ( +3 / -3 )

Scrote: "It's interesting that minister Edano sent his family to Singapore shortly after the nuclear disaster."

That IS interesting, and something I did not know. I would like someone to ask why, after literally DOZENS of "it's not harmful to human health" and "there's no danger" proclamations by this man, he sent his family away.

3 ( +6 / -2 )

Scrote~ Really?!! If that is true, I wonder how many other 'government officials' moved their families 'out of the way' while the masses were left in the dark as it was 'cost effective' ?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Edano never sent his family to Singapore or anywhere overseas after the 311 quake. Here's the proof:


1 ( +2 / -2 )

@CrazyJoe~ Thank you for clarifying that.

0 ( +1 / -2 )

I am always shocked to see how these officials commonly use conditional sentences as if things were over and people are now safe. It is so misleading. But no mistake, they will not be the only one to respond to that. Blame shall be on the entire International Community for its silent crime.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

...were able to bring the reactors under control.

So nice that this gets repeated as often as possible and often several times per article.


1 ( +2 / -1 )

I just hope the people who become ill is at a minimum. remember the article on JT. Fukushima cesium leaks 'equal 168 Hiroshima bombs. People got sick, So everybody PLEASE please stay as healthy as possible Please. I'm sorry I can't finsh this.. I'm crying... just be safe.

0 ( +5 / -3 )

Massive overreaction by Yong Yang above in my humble opinion. This was a contingency plan. It was sensible to do this and I don't see why they should have to tell the public every "what if" scenario. If the radiation had spread to levels such as those around the plant then we would have known soon enough what the plan was. Now if they had not drawn up a plan at all, that would have been worse, and if they had needed to evacuate Tokyo but hadn't, then that would have been worse still.

2 ( +4 / -2 )


Last year it was stated that growing sunflowers could help tp reduce the soil contamination

and smoking cannabis can reduce the side effects of the chemo therapy.

And all this has been known for decades. Yet no one plants sun flowers and no one is allowed to use cannabis.

BUT atleast the govt had a PLAN. albeit not a good one.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Zichi I agree

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@hatsoff, Rumors were flying and the lack of any info was the worst. Contingency plans are what each person had to come up with on their own, with little help from "knowledgable sources"!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

With emissions of radiation ongoing there is still a culture denial over the effects of the destruction at Fukushima. Victims of the disaster are banned giving testimony at the Diet,government ministers sneer at residents'' concerns , food is dispersed from the north-east all over Japan-radioactive noodles are found in Okinawa!!!!!

Unlike Kondo my nightmares are about those living with the legacy of contamination which TPTB deny...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I've got mixed feelings about this report.

First - it's just a report of an estimation of what could happen. Not was actually happening. At that time, my mind was also conjuring up all kinds of similar scenarios, and another estimation would not have changed reality.

Second - This has nothing to do with the secrecy of events that actually WERE taking place at the time. Events such as evidence of meltdown/melt-through, radiation air-dispersal towards Itatemura, Speedi data, etc. These are actual events that should have been brought to the public's attention.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

It's over

-2 ( +0 / -2 )


This was a "what if" scenario. The witholding of the SPEEDI data, however, was a "what IS" scenario - real figures happening in the real world - and for this I DO think it is disgraceful that the data was witheld, and even from prefectural governors. People could have made more informed decisions if they had had access to SPEEDI data.

0 ( +0 / -0 )


1 ( +1 / -0 )

Brilliant idea making contingency plans AFTER the you know what hits the fan!

Perhaps it wud be prudent know for the twits in Nagatacho to do this NOW for all nuke plants in the country, just an idea.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

And what they are not saying is that illnesses that have been recorded and associated with the A-bombs high level radiation in Japan which had taken 6 to 8 years to appear at the time are now appearing in less than 1 year after the Daiichi incident in Japan. I believe the reason for this is Fukushima cesium leaks 'equal 168 Hiroshima bombs. I will respect the privacy of the person who had me looking for the whys and wherefores. I'd just start crying again anyway.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

With you there, hatsoff.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kondo had erroneously expected problems at a Japan plant to be like the Three Mile Island accident, where radiation leakage was limited.

So, in other words, an out-spoken proponent of nuclear power, charged with developing worst-case scenarios, instead decided that Fukushima would be no worse than Three Mile Island. What a surprise. And this is acceptable? Wrong. Its that kind of thinking that made me leave Japan despite considerable professional and personal cost. Japan Inc. is the only core "value" of Japan, and, unfortunately every key decison that gets made there is based on what is best for it, and not the actual well-being of the citizens. And that will not change for decades.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yeah, yeah, as if governments in any other countries would have acted much differently. Dream on. These guys have to make decisions based on the info they have. I think they made the right decision. If you really disagree, then what the hell are you still doing in Tokyo? Or Kanto? I'm still here and am glad I decided to stay. To all those who left, good for you. You made a decision based on what you knew (or didn't know) and that is fine. In hindsight everything is 20/20 of course, but it is totally understandable that recommending or ordering 35 million people to leave the Kanto area would have been an absolute last resort and we clearly weren't (and hopefully aren't) at that stage. If anyone can convince me that we should still evacuate ten months after the disaster, go for it. I'm all ears.

2 ( +2 / -0 )


Sorry, but crying twice won't help much.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

serendipitious, I am only human and civilized enough to have compassion and smart enough to have learned to set my retirement sights on a country like Brazil. They have only 2 nuclear power plants and to reside well away from those.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan was one of the countries I was researching before the Daiichi nuclear accident along with Singapore, Chile, Brazil and Virgin Islands in the US. Daiichi is something I will NEVER take my eyes off of no matter where I am on this earth. But thank you for your recommendation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't vote anyone who supported these people. The truth hurts! The only way to have change is to vote for new leaders.

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