Skip to Navigation
Skip to Content
Share this page


Welcome to PSR's Environmental Health Policy Institute, where we ask questions -- then we ask the experts to answer them. Join us as physicians, health professionals, and environmental health experts share their ideas, inspiration, and analysis about toxic chemicals and environmental health policy.


More Topics »

Costs and Consequences of the Fukushima Daiichi Disaster

Posted on October 31, 2012

By Steven Starr

The destruction of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in March 2011, caused by an earthquake and subsequent tsunami, resulted in massive radioactive contamination of the Japanese mainland. In November 2011, the Japanese Science Ministry reported that long-lived radioactive cesium had contaminated 11,580 square miles (30,000 sq km) of the land surface of Japan.[i]  Some 4,500 square miles – an area almost the size of Connecticut – was found to have radiation levels that exceeded Japan’s allowable exposure rate of 1 mSV (millisievert) per year.

About a month after the disaster, on April 19, 2011, Japan chose to drastically increase its official “safe” radiation exposure levels[ii] from 1 mSv to 20 mSv per year – 20 times higher than the US exposure limit.  This allowed the Japanese government to downplay the dangers of the fallout and avoid evacuation of many badly contaminated areas.

However, all of the land within 12 miles (20 km) of the destroyed nuclear power plant, encompassing an area of about 230 square miles (600 sq km), and an additional 80 square miles (200 sq km) located northwest of the plant, were declared too radioactive for human habitation.[iii] All persons living in these areas were evacuated and the regions were declared to be permanent “exclusion” zones. 

The precise value of the abandoned cities, towns, agricultural lands, businesses, homes and property located within the roughly 310 sq miles (800 sq km) of the exclusion zones has not been established.  Estimates of the total economic loss range from $250[iv]-$500[v] billion US.  As for the human costs, in September 2012, Fukushima officials stated that 159,128 people had been evicted from the exclusion zones, losing their homes and virtually all their possessions. Most have received only a small compensation to cover their costs of living as evacuees.  Many are forced to make mortgage payments on the homes they left inside the exclusion zones. They have not been told that their homes will never again be habitable. 

Radioactive cesium has taken up residence in the exclusion zone, replacing the human inhabitants.  Cesium-137 has a half-life of 30 years, and since it takes about 10 half-lives for any radionuclide to disappear, it will maintain ownership of the exclusion zone for centuries.

Once a large amount of radioactive cesium enters an ecosystem, it quickly becomes ubiquitous, contaminating water, soil, plants and animals. It has been detected in a large range of Japanese foodstuffs, including spinach, tea leaves, milk, beef, and freshwater fish up to 200 miles from Fukushima.  Radioactive cesium bioaccumulates, bioconcentrates, and biomagnifies as it moves up the food chain. Routine ingestion of foods contaminated with so-called “low levels” of radioactive cesium has been shown to lead to its bioaccumulation in the heart and endocrine tissues, as well as in the kidneys, small intestines, pancreas, spleen and liver.  This process occurs much faster in children than in adults, and children are many times more susceptible than adults to the effects of the ionizing radiation their internal organs are then exposed to.

Decontamination in the exclusion zones is proving futile.  Efforts to clean up highly contaminated areas are generally failing because melting snow and rainwater run off the contaminated hills and return to recontaminate homes and land.  Diversion ditches have failed to stop the process.  Areas significantly contaminated with radioactive cesium and other long-lived radionuclides can no longer sell and export agricultural crops. 

In addition to its effects on land, the Fukushima disaster produced the largest discharge of radioactive material into the ocean in history.[vi] Fifteen months after 733,000 curies of radioactive cesium were pumped into the Pacific, 56 percent of all fish catches off Japan were found to be contaminated with it.[vii]  Fishing continues to be banned off the coast of Fukushima, where 40 percent of bottom dwelling fish (sole, halibut, cod) were recently found to have radioactive cesium levels higher than current Japanese regulatory limits. 

Meanwhile, the destroyed Fukushima reactors and spent fuel ponds, which hold huge quantities of radioactive waste, are far from being stabilized.  Reactors #1, #2 and #3 every day discharge radioactive gases that emit a billion becquerels of radiation.  The uranium cores of reactors 1, 2 and 3, which completely melted down and then melted through the bottom of the steel reactor vessel,[viii] will continue to produce enormous amounts of radiation and heat for many years.  Every day, ten tons of seawater is poured upon each of the melted cores; the water becomes intensely radioactive and then rapidly leaks out of the containment4 into the adjacent turbine building.  It is then pumped through an expensive cooling system that traps the radioactivity in filters the size of small cars, which become highly radioactive and are being placed in a nearby field.  Fifty million gallons of intensely radioactive water have already been collected and stored on site.[ix]  Thousands of additional radioactive gallons continue to accumulate daily, and the jury-rigged pipe system connecting the storage tanks remains at risk, should another large quake strike the area.

Other forms of maintenance are also required to avoid potentially catastrophic radiation-releasing events.  The intense gamma radiation from the melted fuel causes the seawater to disassociate into hydrogen and oxygen gas. In order to prevent further hydrogen explosions, which have already destroyed the buildings housing reactors 1, 3 and 4, nitrogen gas must be continually pumped into the leaking containment vessel. This process must continue for another six or seven years.  Reactor building #4 was severely damaged by the earthquake and a massive hydrogen explosion. It holds a spent fuel pool with 1,532 nuclear fuel assemblies, which contain about 10 times more radioactive cesium than was released by the Chernobyl disaster.[x]  Should building 4 collapse, its fuel pool would lose its cooling water, and the gamma radiation from the exposed fuel assemblies would then be immediately lethal to anyone within 300 feet.  It would be impossible to access the site, including the common pool that contains 6,000 fuel assemblies, which is located 50 feet from building 4. 

The Fourth Reactor at Fukushima on February 20, 2012. The yellow area is the containment vessel. --The Asahi Shimbum Digital

Thus the collapse of building 4 could lead to the release of many times more radiation than has already escaped from Fukushima.  This would leave much of Japan uninhabitable and would constitute a global disaster.

Tokyo Power and Electric Company (TEPCO, the owner of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant) is pursuing a timetable that will require about two and a half years to safely removed the spent fuel assemblies from building 4.  In August, TEPCO stated that reactor 4 building can withstand a quake in the upper 6 magnitude.[xi]  Let’s hope so, because experts forecast that there is a high probability of an earthquake of this magnitude or greater occurring at Fukushima.[xii] It is an open question as to whether or not building 4 could withstand such an event.

There are 23 nuclear reactors of the same design as those at Fukushima now operating in the US.  US spent fuel pools contain many times more spent fuel than the spent fuel pool at reactor building 4 in Fukushima Daiichi.[xiii]  It is past time to shut these reactors down and place their spent fuel rods in dry-cask storage, which is not vulnerable to a loss-of-coolant disaster.[xiv] 

[i] The Asahi Shimbun. “Radioactive Cesium Spread as far as Gunma-Nagano Border.” The Asahi Shimbun.12 Nov. 2011. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <>

[ii] Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, National Research Council. Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2006. Web. <>

[iii] World Nuclear News. “Another evacuation order lifted.” World Nuclear News . 15 Aug. 2012. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <>

[iv], “Fukushima Cleanup Could Cost up to $250 Billion” 6 Nov. 2012 <>

[v] Gundersen, Arnie & Caldicott, Helen. “The Ongoing Damage and Danger at Fukushima.” Fairewinds Energy Education. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <>

[vi] Institut de Radioprotection y de Sureté Nucléaire.  Web.  26 Oct. 2012.  <>

[vii] Roslin, Alex. “Post-Fukushima, Japan’s Irradiated Fish Worry B.C. Experts.” 19 Jul. 2012. Web. 6 Nov. 2012 <>

[viii] Nuclear Information & Resource Service. “Nuclear Crisis in Japan.” Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <>

[ix] Yamaguchi, Mari. “Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: Plant’s Contaminated Water Storage Running Out Of Space.” The Huffington Post. 25 Oct. 2012. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <>

[x] Akio Matsumura. “Correspondence on the New Photo of Reactor Unit No. 4 at Fukushima.” Akio Matsumura. 21 Feb. 2012. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <>

[xi] The Asahi Shimbun. “TEPCO: No. 4 Reactor Building Can Withstand 6-Plus Intensity Quake.” The Asahi Shimbun. 31 Aug. 2012. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <>

[xii] ScienceDaily. “Fukushima at Increased Earthquake Risk, Scientists Report.” ScienceDaily. 13 Feb. 2012. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <>

[xiii] Alvarez, Robert. “Spent Nuclear Fuel Pools in the U.S.: Reducing the Deadly Risks of Storage.” Institute for Policy Studies. May 2011. <>

[xiv] Alvarez, Robert et al. “Reducing the Hazards from Stored Spent Power-Reactor Fuel in the United States.” Science and Global Security. 11 (2003): 1-51.


cole williamson said ..

this was so lit

March 20, 2017
mo mo said ..

thank you for the info, really helped me out.

December 14, 2016
John Lock,PhD,MD,EU,BBQ,LOL,TTYL said ..

I can't fathom the bravery of the people who shut down the reactors

December 9, 2016
Frederick Bangle, PhD said ..

I do declare, nuclear energy is a blessing and a curse

December 8, 2016
KitemanSA said ..

The primary cost of the accident is that the fearmonger Kan was PM and he panicked and evacuated ~16 times as much area as he should have. Had they implemented the IAEA guidelines rather than his panic, Most folks would have stayed safely in their homes rather than facing the stresses of needless evacuation. Put bluntly, Kan killed something like 1000 people by his panic.

November 27, 2016
Mark.W said ..

Hey all, would anyone happen to know the deatils of this publication, hoping to refernce it in an assessment, any feedback would be great, thanks!

November 24, 2016
DR Johnson said ..

It is too bad that Japan didn't implement the international guidelines for emergency response to nuclear accidents. If they had, the number of people and the area of land that was evacuated would have been much, much lower. By PM Kan panicked and made some really silly decisions.

November 22, 2016
todell said ..

What happened to those brave souls thar went into the reactor to shut it down? the fukushima 50 I believe they were called. I hope they are well.

November 15, 2016
Dr Tim Norris said ..

Nuclear fission power is an unfortunate combination of two characteristics. The first characteristic is that a nuclear fission reaction generates some of the most toxic and dangerous waste products on Earth, in particular actinides. The second characteristic is that nuclear fissionr eactors have to be run at criticality, namely at the threshold of becoming a bomb. If hypothetically nuclear reactions could be run well away from criticality or the fission reaction byproducts were not highly toxic, it might not be such a controversial form of power. However, the combination of explosion risk and high toxic reaction products fundamentally make fission nuclear power a thoroughly bad idea. It is not good engineering. There are nuch better energy sources on the way, including LENR (that does indeed work as demonstrated by numerous laboratories), that do not result in dangerous byproducts being generated. By comparison, in the past huge mercury arc reactifiers were used to generate d.c. for telephone systems, whereas these days we wold simply use some silicon rectifiers. Similar considerations pertain to nuclear fission - it is dirty polluting technology, and there are far better solutions in the future coming soon, especially LENR.

August 16, 2016
Sam said ..

Sure would like to read some non-bias material on Fukushima from a credible source. It sure is annoying to read articles full of "may", "could", "might", "possible", "likely"...etc. The absence of facts and figures that say an event or outcome will occur is so distracting and annoying. Nuclear "has" and "does" provide 17% of the worlds base load with less than 2 reactor issues that resulted in the "may", "could", "likely"...etc's we read regularly from bias sources that say things they have no scientific evidence or proof even occurs. This results in bad short turn decisions and reactive behaviour that "has" more negative consequences than a total meltdown of a the shift from nuclear back to coal which we "KNOW" kills people and we cannot contain the waste from these energy sources (burning of fossil fuels). Enough of this bias "may", "could", "might", etc...bias writing and take accountability for what you're saying rather than scare people into formulating an opinion based on un substantiated and or conspiracy theory blogs/articles.

July 4, 2016
Donna Gilmore said ..

Steven, this document needs to be updated to reflect current information that the U.S. thin-walled (mostly 1/2" thick)stainless steel spent nuclear fuel canisters are subject to cracking, cannot be inspected (even on the outside), cannot be maintained or repaired and the nuclear industry has no plan in place to deal with leaking canisters that can potentially explode due to hydrides in the canisters. There is no early warning system prior to a radiation release. Even a microscopic through-wall crack will releases millions of curies of radiation into the environment. Each canister contains more Cesium-137 than was released from Chernobyl. There are over 2000 of these "Chernobyl cans" loaded in the U.S. and more being added. The rest of the world uses thick metal casks (10" to almost 20" thick) that do not have the above issues. The 2003 document you reference does not address these issues. The NRC, utilities and canister vendors are aware of these issues, but continue to use these thin canisters rather than require thick casks that can be inspected, repaired, maintained, have multiple redundancies(rather than none), and have continuous early-warning monitoring systems prior to a radiation release. Once a crack starts in a thin walled canister, it can grow through the wall of the canister in 16 years, possibly less. The Koeberg nuclear plant had a similar component leak in 17 years from cracks up to 0.61" thick. Most U.S. canisters are only 0.50" thick. See NRC and other government and technical resources at

June 20, 2016
Fukushi said ..

Would you mind a free ride there to study at radiation hotspot?? No need for binoculars, think again!

June 5, 2016
Ho said ..

Hope so. It was secretly U-235 The radioisotope U-235 has had many important impacts on society and has a high level of social significance both in the past and the present. U-235 has had many positive benefits through the use of nuclear power. Since the first commercial nuclear reactor in 1951, these power plants have grown to produce 11% of the world’s total energy production. In many cases, such as in Lithuania and France, the country is dependent on nuclear power by having up to 77% and 78% of the energy produced in nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plants have no carbon emissions making them extremely good for the environment. As of 2016, a single nuclear power plant can generate $470 in economic output per year, majorly boosting the economy. Another positive social impact is that during the life of a nuclear power plant up to 700 new jobs can be emplaced, causing another economic boost. These jobs pay 36% more than the average salary in the local area, making nuclear power plants a positive impact of society. Through the process of nuclear induce fission, a single U-235 atom will produce 10000000 times more power than a single coal atom. This fission also forms a chain reaction (induced fission) which will result in society being positively affected by the impact of U-235. The last positive impact of U-235 on society is that nuclear power plants have lower operating costs then coal powered stations. This makes nuclear power a more affordable resource then coal. This is once again a positive impact of U-235 on society. Therefore the radioisotope U-235 has had multiple positive impacts on society, making it significant in the modern world. U-235 has had many negative impacts on society through the use of nuclear power that have made it significant in society. Firstly, the nuclear power plants themselves have high construction costs. This is because of the numerous safety restrictions and laws that are necessary to have this power safe to produce. This means that the power plants that have nuclear power are not economically positive for the society. The U-235 liquid waste generated by nuclear power plants is 695 m^3 of radioactive waste per year. This waste won’t break down for many years as the main by products off U-235 after fission are, Tc-99 and I-129, which have half-lives of 220000 and 15700000 years (respectively). U-235, through the use of nuclear power, also can be made into destructive atomic bombs. Two of these bombs were used in japan to end WWII. These were in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The explosion at Hiroshima resulted in the deaths of 130000 people. The explosion at Nagasaki resulted in 166000 deaths. In both cases the explosion resulted in severe flash burns that killed 90% of the casualties within 3 weeks of the explosion. Therefore U-235 has had a large negative impact on society. Through the use of induced fission (U-235), nuclear power plants also have a high risk of possible melt-down. This can result in major negative impacts on society. The melt down puts emergency personal and civilians the immediate vicinity in danger of thyroid cancer and acute radiation sickness. This has already happened three times in 50 years in the Chernobyl, Fukushima Daiichi and Three Mile Island disasters. In these events thousands of people have been killed and damaged for life because of the disastrous effects of nuclear radiation. The Chernobyl disaster, caused by U-235, resulted in the evacuation of 336000 people from the immediate area, unable to return to their homes. This incident also resulted in 136 cases fatal acute radiation sickness; an effect of exposure to concentrated U-235. The reactor core melt down caused 5 million people to be effect with readings of 100 mSv of radioactive materials, five times higher than the ‘safe’ amount. This further more effected the land around to people unable to safely support crops until 60 years later. This therefore results in a significant decline in the local economy as a result of this accident. Reactor four in Chernobyl contained 190 metric tonnes of U-235 dioxide fluid. Approximately 30% of this fluid escaped into the atmosphere allowing 57 tons of radioactive matter to pollute areas up to 2123.3 km’s away. The Fukushima disaster also had major negative impacts on society. This disaster occurred when a 15 metre tsunami collided with and destroyed the main cooling supplies to the three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. This resulted in the three cores being completely melted down over a three day period. The after affects had enormous negative impacts on the surrounding society. As a result of the U-235 levels in the area, 56920 people have fled their homes in the Fukushima region and are now living in temporary sites, spread all across Japan. The incident caused 733000 curies of radioactive material to be expelled into the ocean. This further more impacted on Japans fishing industry, with approximately 56% of all caught fish being radioactive and unsafe to consume. Also there was an extremely high release of radioactive nuclides that caused illness to be evident in the area. The nuclides caused 370 cases of severe thyroid cancer in children alone and twice that among the adults. Therefore U-235, through the Fukushima nuclear disaster, caused a major negative impact on society.

May 9, 2016
Steve said ..

Would it be safe to say if we avoid bottom feeding fish, avoid Japan, avoid Japanese products all for 300 years we will be Ok?

May 4, 2016
seanne said ..

Chernobyl is soooo bad smh :(

April 21, 2016
Bozidar Kornic said ..

Nuclear energy is akin riding on a wild, blood thirsty tiger.

April 12, 2016
Dr Tim Norris said ..

Fukushima Dai'ichi is not the whole story. There are 145000 tonnes of high level nuclear waste at various locations around the World requiring safe storage for circa 100000 years. There are several sunken Russian nuclear submarines just off the coast of Norway, some with their reactor cores with rod assemblies included therein, just next to Norwegian salmon aquaculture facilities; when these reactors corrode and contaminate, Norwegian salmon will not be safe to eat. The UK Government is to make a decision this coming week on Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C reactors; these reactors will nearly double the UK inventory of high level nuclear waste when the reactors (that EDF cannot yet make their design function properly)are eventually decomissioned at the end of their service life. The UK nuclear safety record is poor, with many leaks of radiation from Sellafield (as identified and recorded by Greenpeace), with Windscale nuclear reactor fire still causing local contamination (UK solved the problem by renaming "Windscale" to "Sellafield"). I expect the Japanese Government will solve the Fukushima Dai'ichi problem by renaming Fukushima Dai'ichi to something else, so that Internet search engines will not be able to find emerging details. That way, "Fukushima Dai'ichi" will "disappear" at minimal cost, exactly what the Japanese Government and its associated mafia (who are handling the "cleanup" at Fukushima Dai'ichi (or whatever new name the Japanese Government gives the site)) want to happen. Problem is: has the human race gone insane or something?

March 19, 2016
A Common Man said ..

I read many things to be alarming... But there is no clear govt supported evidence about the abonded area and how much the government spent to control the complete disaster.... any ballpark infomation from govt sources would be more helpful.

March 9, 2016
A Person said ..

History always repeats itself without intervention... guess what the U.S. will become if we don't do something? This is what we've made this planet. Thank GOD we can't traverse to other potential hospitable planet candidates, or this would start all over again.

March 4, 2016
Lulu Xavier said ..

Really helped with my essay, thanks. :)

March 2, 2016
Canuck said ..

The article contains many accurate and useful points, but also reinforces ideas that are questionable, and if anything, understates the harmful implications. An example of a questionable thesis: the idea that hydrogen explosions were responsible for the massive destruction of reactors 3 and 4. This is not a fact, but a thoroughly questionable part of the official narrative. And the implications for people and the global environment are catastrophic. The monumental study of the Chernobyl disaster, "Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment", which was based on thousands of studies, found that every life form, exposed to areas of heavy contamination, suffered harm. There are entire areas of Byelorussia and Ukraine where it is hard to find a healthy child now, 30 years later. Genetic deformities as a result of Chernobyl will continue for many generations. Coincident with the five years of the Fukushima disaster, with massive contamination of the Pacific Ocean, there has been unprecedented mass mortality of a very large number of species of plants and animals in the North Pacific.

February 27, 2016
pizzo said ..

what we have here is a slow acting doomsday machine, & there is nothing anyone can do about it . we are gonna be like frogs in cold water bought to the boil slowly . just that we wont boil you will start seeing everyone around you develop cancer . god bless

January 26, 2016
Dr. Mick said ..

Dr. Tim gives a good overall assessment; Fukushima is an unprecedented global disaster; three meltdowns continues to spew unknown amounts of hot radiological into the oceans, water tables & the atmosphere - all trending in increasing concentrations. The potential for additional explosions is real. Expert Projections are based on multiple & subjective assumptions. The one thing we know us - we don't know. Central Cause: Human greed. For the sake of money - we have put all life on earth at enormous risk. Do your own research. This is a catastrophe beyond comprehension, caused by epic human greed.

December 27, 2015
Eclipse said ..

"Some 4,500 square miles – an area almost the size of Connecticut – was found to have radiation levels that exceeded Japan’s allowable exposure rate of 1 mSV (millisievert) per year." Steven, do some research! Charles Sturt University shows people that live in naturally radioactive places that are higher than 50 microSieverts a year with no discernible impact on health!

December 18, 2015
Bish said ..

i liked this site....

October 20, 2015
Someone >.> said ..

Why did they have to use nuclear power plant? >.> When you are doing something risky or something, think, "what could go wrong if I did this?"

September 17, 2015
abcdefg said ..

thx this helped

September 7, 2015
Bob said ..

how did this effect the cyrosphere

September 1, 2015
Jackson said said ..

Really helped with my essay :)

August 16, 2015
Jordan C said ..

Thank you very much! helped with my assignment a lot. 10/10

August 3, 2015
Eclipse said ..

This article starts of with a few paragraphs on mS/y, but does not seem to realise that workers in the US are allowed 50mS/y, and many populations receive around or even above this level of exposure *naturally* because their nations are higher than others (and receive less atmospheric protection from the sun and cosmic rays) or they have more thorium than normal in their soils, like Kerala, India. So what does the science say? "Above about 100 mSv, the probability of cancer (rather than the severity of illness) increases with dose. The estimated risk of fatal cancer is 5 of every 100 persons exposed to a dose of 1000 mSv (ie. if the normal incidence of fatal cancer were 25%, this dose would increase it to 30%). 50 mSv is, conservatively, the lowest dose at which there is any evidence of cancer being caused in adults. It is also the highest dose which is allowed by regulation in any one year of occupational exposure. Dose rates greater than 50 mSv/yr arise from natural background levels in several parts of the world but do not cause any discernible harm to local populations."

August 2, 2015
Eclipse said ..

WHAT IS THE ACTUAL RISK? Authorities have found that the Soviet evacuation of the Chernobyl region caused depression and mental illness which has probably killed more people than Chernobyl’s radiation would have. Mark Lynas then goes on to say: “So the scientific consensus currently is that the radioactivity released by the accident at Fukushima will very likely present a small additional lifetime risk of cancer for people whose homes are in the relatively high 10-100 mSv contamination range. Given that the contamination comes largely from caesium-137 (which has a half-life of about 30 years) this will persist for long enough to make permanent evacuation a worrying prospect. Think about it seriously: would you return to your home if doing so presented you with a one-in-a-thousand to one-in-a-hundred additional risk of cancer? This is the choice faced by the Japanese population and authorities.” Given that the choice between a certainty of far higher rates of suicide from evacuation OR the *possibility* of slightly higher rates of cancer, when modern medicine could have a *cure* for cancer in the next few decades, I would say go back and live in the Fukushima zone! By living there, and rebuilding and mowing and gardening, the radioactivity will gradually be dispersed and moved and possibly erode into waterways and the ocean where it will be much, much safer. WATER STOPS RADIATION Do you know that water stops radiation? Every 7 cm's of water stops about half the radiation getting through. Again, if the stuff has washed down to the bottom of the oceans, halve the radiation for every 7 cm. Soon none gets through, even for some of the most deadly stuff. In fact, water is so good at stopping radiation you would swim through a reactor pond! As long as you stayed away from the *deadly* nuclear waste at the bottom of a storage pond, and swam through the middle, you would experience *less* radioactivity than here on the radioactive surface of the earth because the water *above* you would shield you from cosmic rays and this radioactive old planet we live on!

August 2, 2015
Eclipse said ..

Honestly! More scaremongering, but little science, and anyone who references the self-referencing, anti-peer-review, conspiracy theorist 'Dr' Helen Caldicott needs their head read! George Monbiot revealed what a total charlatan that woman is! Now, for some real science read the following article: here are the headings! 5 Findings about Fukushima from the environmentalists at *The Breakthrough Institute*: 1. Thyroid Cancer Rates Lower in Fukushima Children Than Other Regions 2. Fukushima Seafood Safe to Eat 3. Fukushima Evacuation Zone Is Mostly Habitable 4. Cancer Rates in USS Reagan Crewmembers Lower Than Control Group 5. Fukushima Death Toll Is Too Small to Measure

August 2, 2015
Boidar Kornic said ..

There is no 100% safe any nuclear plant, regardless of what any engineer says.

July 30, 2015
Bozidar said ..

I would require the CEO and the management of the Power company to live near the nuclear reactor plant, as a proof that it id safe.

July 30, 2015
Bryan Stephenson said ..

I was born and raised on the central coast of California. There is an active power plant owned by PG&E (Pacific Gas & Electric (Diablo Canyon). It was built in the mid to late 1960's, but it is placed near various earth quake fault lines and by rock slides. I am having a hard time trying to get my friends and family aware of the potential risks of "contamination." My home town is Santa Barbara. Diablo Canyon is near Lompoc, California and is near the west coast. After, researching and viewing three disasters three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima. It is time now for Diablo Canyon to go offline and be decommissioned, before an earthquake or tidal waves and rock slides knock it off its foundation.

July 2, 2015
Kate Park said ..

Oh, the endless horror...

June 2, 2015
megha joseph said ..


May 13, 2015
Dr Tim said ..

Yet there are conferences and meetings internationally whereat "experts" proclaim nuclear power to be the solution for anthropogenically-forced climate change. At such meetings, unless Fukushima is only mentioned briefly in passing, one is shown the exit door and it made clear that one is unwelcome. Such is the level of delusion that presently pertains in the nuclear industry. Insanity rules the present situation.

May 6, 2015
sai praneeth said ..

Many people do not realize that seawater has a natural concentration of uranium. the entire sea water/ocean has 4.5 billion tons of uranium. so how can we say that a small amount of nuclear material into ocean, will affect the entire human evolution.and due to oceanic currents this leakage will be carried to the entire ocean and thus becomes less / negligible comparitively.

May 3, 2015
Dr Tim said ..

Now we find that Japan is restarting at least one of its nuclear reactors, having learnt nothing from Fukushima. Problem is that the world has become subservient to an economic discipline dictated by Wall Street and the City of London that dictates profits for shareholders, perpetual economic growth and so forth, without any consideration for environment and resource limitations. The Nobel Committee give Nobel Prizes in Economics for the economists who pedal this perpetual growth rubbish (note: Nobel Prize has been generally discredited as merely a politically correct organisation, subservient to the present economic order). The Japanese government, likewise IAEA and WHO, are largely ignoring the situation in Japan, hoping the general public will forget about Fukushima, and that the problem of Fukushima will simply "waft" itself away without any monetary cost. Fact is that, at Fukushima, we have three China Syndromes (yes, the coriums have penetrated into the ground beneath at least one of the reactors, and there is nothing that can be done to try to ameliorate the situation - maybe that is why GE, Tepco, the Japanese Government, IAEA, WHO are not doing anything about the situation - they are powerless and clueless, and have no real solutions).

April 26, 2015
monkey said ..

helps a lot!

April 23, 2015
Matt said ..

Fantastic article. It is very well written and incredibly informative with the statistics and figures provided. Thank you for publishing this.

April 20, 2015
chinwe said ..

Useful and educating. Thanks a lot.

April 15, 2015
rick dickinson said ..


March 31, 2015
Greg said ..

Man's continued inhumanity to men women and children. Mankind with its incessant Desire to one up God the creator of the heavens and the earth, has opened up the perverbial PANDORAS

March 23, 2015
tabz vivitah said ..

this really helps alot in my assignment

March 22, 2015
Percy said ..

This is disheartening

February 16, 2015
Cara said ..

Thanks this really helped!

February 9, 2015
John P said ..

Thanks, helped me on my humanities assignment.

October 29, 2014
Linda said ..

this was good thank u!!!!!

October 8, 2014
Billy Bob said ..

This is some quality shit. Good job, Legends!

August 27, 2014
John Smith said ..

High end/top notch stuff

August 27, 2014
D L Smith said ..

I have never heard of using sulfated interventions, and not being a scientist myself, wonder at the possibility. it seems too easy and too cut and dried. Cesium does not break down into harmless elements, not for 300 years.

February 5, 2014
Eva v said ..

Prepare for a world with far fewer humans but an even greater need for enough humans to survive several hundred thousand years to deal responsibly and skilfully with the horrific waste we have allowed to accumulate. Sadly for all other species, we have made ourselves indispensable, stupid, greedy, oversexed, proud and shortsighted as we have been.

January 17, 2014
Nicole Scott said ..

All the scientific literature published regarding the releases from Fukushima Dai'ichi were calculated based on faulty information, namely the explosions alone. Given that new news has come to light regarding over 300 tons of radionuclide contaminated water flooding into the ocean every day ever since the accident, combined with the additional releases (level 3 leakage of storage containers), additional leakages in unit 1, as well as their other additional dumps in tons above and beyond the daily leakage, what new scientific figures might their be with regard to the plume running along the Kuroshio ocean current? Also, given the fact that the corium are still in fission (evidenced by the tests of seaweed by Greenpeace - 127,000 Becquerels per kilogram in the seaweed species Sargassum Horneri to be exact, which show continued elevated levels of iodine 131 which has a half life of 8 days), what other isotopes are in the water aside from cesium and in what concentrations?What are the bi products of the corium specifically while they are in fission? What is the difference between the radioactive waste coming from the MOX corium compared to the other two corium? How much tritium, strontium 90, uranium, and plutonium loads are flooding into the sea in what concentrations? In light of this new truth with regard to the un-contained corium and ongoing leakage in tons everyday, what can we expect by way of the dispersion in the water cycle, ie: what concentrations might we expect of these radiological isotopes in the coming rains, and advection fog along the pacific coastal regions? Will an independent consortium of scientists test and monitor bio accumulations in California produce to ensure children are not fed certain foods to mitigate harm, since specific radiological isotopes target specific organs and bones? Is there, or will there be full disclosure as to the concentrations of each respective radionuclide in foods grown along the western seaboard, now that we are aware of the level of contamination ongoing in the Pacific Ocean?

November 23, 2013
misca said ..

RIP for those who died.

November 21, 2013
ishika patel said ..

it is so sad...

November 21, 2013
Peter Russell said ..

I fear that the nuclear industry with half a century of lies and cover ups has already committed mankind to its eventual extinction. Having cut the rope holding this sword of Damacles, there is no way of returning to sanity.

November 8, 2013
Tim said ..

Unless something is done very soon, the Pacific Ocean will be permanently poisoned with dangerous radioactive isotopes and its fish unsuitable for human consumption. The truth is too dramatic for any politician to admit. Tokyo's population is slowly being poisoned and really ought to be evacuated to safer regions. The true costs are much much higher than 1 Trillion USD. However, there seems to be total denial of reality. Fukushima requires a World wide coordinated effort, and resources should be diverted away from the unnecessary wars presently being orchestrated by the military-industrial complex (as warned by President Eisenhower). We have the worst industrial accident in human history to address, so all these unnecessary wars around the Wold are diverting effort and resources away from the urgent existial task that Fukushima now represents. There is a desperate need for sanity in the situation.

October 27, 2013
Patrick McGean said ..

With all of this radiation why is the information from Pub Meds and cons of nuclear energy? Sulfur can protect and repair the damage of radiation exposure. Pub med seven times since 1957, and not published by pHarma, who publishes peer review literature. Cesium 137 sulfates into a harmless element. Not an opinion. Plutonium far deadlier than Cesium sulfates, harmlessly. Our study members who have undergone radiation therapy protected their healthy cells with organic sulfur a crystal food. Why is it that nuclear experts don't shit know about biology, and the period table? Mineral sulfur dumped onto the failed GE reactors, the land and into the sea and the sulfated radiation won't harm the fish, nor any more dead infants on the West Coast of the US. Mr. Starr we know how bad it is but we know how to negate the stupidity of man. Organic sulfur in the people of Chernobyl and Fukushima and the sulfated radiation leaves harmlessly and the damage done is repaired. That should be your message, Sir. The sulfur in on the ground in Hawaii, and GE can afford the planes. The Spin stops now, the Nukes shut down, individual solar will end our need for nukes, and scientists who know nothing about biology. Got Sulfur?

October 26, 2013
Boggy said ..

I think its bad that this happend, great webbside

October 13, 2013
Bill Gates said ..

To many dyslexic scientists, the full extent of the costs and consequences of the Fukushima Dachii disaster are still nuclear...

June 19, 2013
Veronica said ..

i am very greatful for the information on this site thankyou ;P

June 2, 2013
Rodger said ..

very accurate information thankyou ;P

June 2, 2013
Velda Smith said ..

Not surprising at all. Working in the medical profession for over 38 years I am seeing too many coworkers being diagnosed with breast or thyroid cancers past 5 years.

December 2, 2012
troy livingston said ..

a must watch video i have been collecting information on fukushima since day one please feel free to copy or share, over 7000 photos.

November 22, 2012
LR Weinmann said ..

Thank you for this factual, sober assessment of the Japanese reality. US Senator Ron Wyden has taken a great interest in the matter as the situation has grave consequences for the US west coast in particular, but he is a voice in the wilderness. There is no Congressional caucus on nuclear safety and there should be. And GE, the designer of the Mark 1s, should be held liable since design flaws which aided and abetted the disaster have been long known. Finally, a recent Japanese parliament report found that although the disaster was precipitated by a natural event, it was a lax safety regime due to collusion between nuclear regulators and the nuclear industry to blame for the current state of affairs -- a cautionary tale for those of us all too familiar with the troubling state of US nuclear energy production.

November 20, 2012
CaptD said ..

Much more about San Onofre, the worst US reactor by far and what the DAB Safety Team has written about it!

November 18, 2012
Brett Stokes, Adelaide said ..

For me, the judgement is already very clear, with plenty of evidence that we are dealing with organised liars, with their peer-reviewed propaganda and their culture of contempt and corruption. So I see the need to change the agenda, I see the need to start setting the agenda for dismantling the uranium mining and nuclear cartels. This PSR article is a step forward. The real dollar costs of the ongoing TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi atrocity are starting to be counted. There is clear risk of further tragic massive illegal emissions of radioactive poisons, as well a guarantee of ongoing high levels of emissions. The risks of nuclear catastrophe are global, with dozens more unsafe GE Mark1 reactors with their (known since 1967) ECCS design faults that guarantee meltdowns if power is cut off for a few hours.

November 17, 2012

Comments closed.