[Column] Will Tepco admit their mistake in radiation analysis ?

Note : If you are from the international mass media, Don’t read this site before taking a contact with me.

 

 

Most of the plant data that Fukushima Diary reports are based on Tepco and Japanese government.

Some of the readers may want to ask, how can we trust them ?

 

I know that.

Though the trend and sampling locations are likely to be true, I don’t trust the readings etc..

 

So why do I report it ?

 

That’s because it’s the “bottom line”.

Tepco and the government of Japan have the strong incentive to make it look much less serious than actual.

So what I report (= what they report) is the best scenario.

I’m writing each article hoping the readers to think “The reality (readings etc) must be way worse than this.”.

 

Some people “report”, this is from the secret source, this is the secret leak from a secret person. IAEA knows everything, Tepco knows everything.

 

I agree to the idea that they are concealing something, but I think they are as ignorant as us, and there is no such a secret source.

I have seen those “information from the secret source”, but they did never match the past trend or entire situation and were forgotten in a few months.

 

Anyway, apparently it’s getting time to update the “bottom line”.

 

In the press conference of 1/8/2014, Tepco confessed that they are confused by their own past analysis data.

 

The thing is this. Numerous analysis results of Strontium-90 have not been announced for longer than 6 months.

Usually Strontium-90 analysis doesn’t take longer than 1 month. However, Tepco has never been publishing the data of leaked contaminated water and seawater.

 

In the end of last year, a Japanese journalist made a sharp attack about this issue in Tepco’s press conference.

 

That was their answer.

 

The reason why Tepco is confused by themselves is because the density of Strontium-90 is higher than All β nuclide density in some of the analysis results.

(*1)

 

What is all β nuclide ? It’s the collective of multiple β nuclides including Strontium-90.

Therefore Strontium-90 density cannot be higher than this all β nuclide density.

 

If this explanation of Tepco was another lie, significant level of Strontium-90 has already leaked to the sea and Tepco is trying to delay the data release.

If it’s true, the situation is more complicated and could be worse. It means the past analysis of Tepco might be wrong.

 

Tepco stated Fukushima plant is very occupied with samples and data that they cannot deal with enough.

 

In June of 2013, Tepco admitted they made a mistake to analyze some of the samples because the back ground radiation level is too high in Fukushima plant. (*2)

Also in August of 2013, NRA (Nuclear Regulation Authority) stated Tepco’s radiation measurement might have the significant error because the trend shown is overly random. (*3)

NRA inspected the actual analyzing site and concluded Tepco didn’t make an error. However Tepco’s Strontium-90 analysis was wrong and NRA couldn’t find that.

 

If their past measurements were entirely / partially wrong, we would have to reconsider the reality. The actual contamination situation may be worse than ever reported.

 

At this moment, most of Tepco’s measurements are not checked by the third party.

Also, it is not known how many samples they took behind one measurement, and if the announced reading is the maximum, minimum, or the average. The standard deviation is not announced either.

 

*1 Question about Tepco’s radiation measurement credibility / Sr-90 density was higher than all β density [URL]

*2 Tepco mis-measured radiation, 610 Bq/m3 of Cs-134/137 detected from bypass well water in the second test [URL 2]

*3 NRA “Tepco’s nuclide analysis may have a significant error” [URL 3]

 

 

Thank you for reading Fukushima Diary. Your support is the energy of my restless work.

_____

Français :

[Édito] Est-ce que Tepco va reconnaître s’être trompé dans ses analyses de la radioactivité ?
Note : Si vous êtes de la grande presse internationale, ne lisez pas ce site sans avoir préalablement pris contact avec moi.

 

La plupart des données sur la centrale publiées par le Fukushima Diary sont basées sur celles de Tepco et du gouvernement japonais.
Certains lecteurs peuvent se demander dans quelle mesure on peut leur faire confiance ?

Je le sais.
Bien que les tendances et les lieux d’échantillonnage soient probablement vrais, je n’ai aucune confiance dans leurs relevés, etc.

Alors, pourquoi je les rapporte ?

Parce que c’est “l’essentiel”.
Tepco et le gouvernement du Japon ont une très forte motivation à le faire croire moins grave que ce qu’il en est en réalité.
Donc, ce que je rapporte (= ce qu’ils rapportent) est le scénario au meilleur des cas.
J’écris chaque article en espérant que les lecteurs pensent “La réalité (relevés, etc.) est forcément bien pire que ça”.

Certains “rapportent” que c’est de source secrète, que c’est une fuite secrète issue d’une personne secrète. L’AIEA sait tout, Tepco sait tout.

Je partage l’idée qu’ils cachent des choses mais je pense qu’ils sont aussi ignorants que nous et que de telles sources secrètes n’existent pas.
J’ai vu ces “informations de source secrète” mais ça ne correspond jamais au sens de l’histoire ou à la situation globale, oubliée de quelques mois.

De toute façon, apparemment il faut du temps pour mettre à jour “l’essentiel”.

Au cours de la conférence de presse du 8 janvier 2014, Tepco a avoué qu’ils sont embarrassés par leurs propres  résultats des analyses passées.

Le truc, c’est ça :  Beaucoup de résultats d’analyse du strontium 90 n’ont pas été publiés pendant plus de 6 mois.
Habituellement, les analyses du strontium 90 ne demandent pas plus d’un mois. Néanmoins, Tepco n’a jamais publié de résultats sur les eaux des fuites et sur les eaux de mer.

Un journaliste japonais a mené une attaque frontale violente à ce sujet au cours d’une conférence de presse de Tepco à la fin de l’an dernier.

Leur réponse a été la suivante :

La raison de l’embarras de Tepco sur ses propres résultats est que la concentration en strontium 90 est supérieure à celle de la radioactivité β totale dans certains de leurs résultats d’analyse. (*1)

Qu’est-ce que la radioactivité β ? C’est la totalité des nucléides émetteurs β, dont le strontium 90 fait partie.
Donc, la radioactivité du strontium 90 ne saurait être supérieure à celle du total des nucléides émetteurs β.

Si cette explication de Tepco est un autre mensonge, alors de graves quantités de strontium 90 ont déjà fuit dans l’océan et Tepco essaye de retarder le moment de la publication des résultats.
Si elle est vraie, la situation est plus compliquée et pourrait empirer. Ça signifie que les anciennes analyses de Tepco peuvent être fausses.

Tepco a affirmé que la centrale de Fukushima est débordée d’échantillons et de données qu’ils n’arrivent pas à traiter.

En juin 2013, Tepco a reconnu qu’ils avaient fait une erreur dans l’analyse de certains échantillons parce que, dans la centrale de Fukushima, le niveau de la radioactivité ambiante était trop élevé. (*2)
En août 2013 également, la NRA (=Nuclear Regulation Authority =  l’autorité de règlementation nucléaire) a affirmé que les relevés de radioactivité de Tepco ont pu comporter de sérieuses erreurs parce que la tendance qui en sort est exagérément aléatoire. (*3)
La NRA a examiné le lieu de leurs analyses et en a conclut que Tepco n’avait pas fait d’erreur. Or, les analyses du strontium de Tepco étaient fausses et la NRA n’a pas réussi à le voir.

Si leurs anciens relevés sont entièrement / partiellement faux, on devrait réexaminer la réalité. La situation réelle de la contamination est sans doute bien pire que tout ce qui en a jamais été rapporté.

En ce moment, la majorité des résultats de Tepco  sont en cours de vérification par un prestataire extérieur.
De plus, on ne sait pas combien d’échantillons ils prenaient à chaque mesure et si les résultats donnés correspondent au maximum, au minimum, ou à leur moyenne. La déviation standard n’est pas indiquée non plus.

*1 Doutes sur la fiabilité des mesures de Tepco : Plus de strontium 90 seul que de radioactivité β globale
*2 Tepco a mal relevé la radioactivité : Les deuxièmes tests révèlent qu’il y a 610 Bq/m³ de césium 134/137 dans les puits de dérivation
*3  NRA : “Les analyses de radioactivité de Tepco peuvent comporter de graves erreurs”

 

Merci de lire le Fukushima Diary. Votre soutien est l’énergie de mon travail acharné.

    1. Unused MOX is Uranium and Plutonium

      http www wise-uranium org/ (rup) html
      is a decay series for Uranium look up the corresponding series for plutonium

      RadioStrontium (SR-90), RadioIodine (I-131), and RadioCesium (Cs-134, Cs-137) are FISSION PRODUCTS, which are primarily of concern in SPENT FUEL and in various releases into the environment from bombs and reactor accidents.

      All the civilian reactors routinely produce plutonium from uranium and they ALL produce the fission products.

      Plutonium is more active, toxic and carcinogenic than uranium. Some of the isotopes are more active and dangerous to your health than others.

      MOX fuel (pound for pound) is hotter, more active and harder to control, than UOX fuel.

      Sincerely,

      Bill Duff

  1. I think the corium has melted thru the bed rock and is in the underground aquifer that empties into the sea, and that is what they are really trying to hide from everyone.

  2. Mochizuki San,

    This is one of your most useful postings. I hope you will continue to focus your attention on details of this kind. It’s helpful to a global audience.

    The news reports from TEPCO and NHK in the months following the disaster were a strange mix of truth and disinformation, but clearly were designed to produce the illusion that the Daiichi NPPs could be kept under control, that meltdown could be prevented, and that cold shutdown was possible. Subsequently TEPCO announced “cold shutdown” — nine months later — in a clearly Orwellian misuse of the term. On that basis alone, it’s very clear that we cannot trust TEPCO and official pronouncements.

    As you say, we must consider TEPCO reports the best case scenario, aimed at maintaining dominance in the information battle.

  3. The global concerns over Fukushima seem to have basis in fact although one would be hard-pressed to recognize that through media coverage!

    This article poses the potential problems in a different way.

    Politically incorrect and in bad taste: Was this baby in this article at The Political Commentator born in Fukushima? (Video)

    Has anyone ever wondered how the baby in this commercial grew so big? It may be politically incorrect and in bad taste to ask but could he have been born in Fukushima as a result of the massive amounts of radiation being released there?

    http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com/2014/01/politically-incorrect-and-in-bad-taste.html

Comments are closed.

About this site

This website updates the latest news about the Fukushima nuclear plant and also archives the past news from 2011. Because it's always updated and added live, articles, categories and the tags are not necessarily fitted in the latest format.
I am the writer of this website. About page remains in 2014. This is because my memory about 311 was clearer than now, 2023, and I think it can have a historical value. Now I'm living in Romania with 3 cats as an independent data scientist.
Actually, nothing has progressed in the plant since 2011. We still don't even know what is going on inside. They must keep cooling the crippled reactors by water, but additionally groundwater keeps flowing into the reactor buildings from the broken parts. This is why highly contaminated water is always produced more than it can circulate. Tepco is planning to officially discharge this water to the Pacific but Tritium is still remaining in it. They dilute this with seawater so that it is legally safe, but scientifically the same amount of radioactive tritium is contained. They say it is safe to discharge, but none of them have drunk it.

Categories

January 2014
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031