Kanagawa Prefecture is just below Tokyo. Perhaps it is a cultural stereotype, but I consider the Japanese to be much more passive about these things than Americans and Americans much more passive than Europeans.
But there is always something salutary about people marching for their beliefs. It’s a democratic thing.
James Pilant
I like this article. It is skeptical but willing to ask a lot of hard questions. I’m willing to give nuclear energy a chance to be part of our nation’s future plans but only if I can trust the industry. So, you can pretty sure I’m opposed to any nuclear plant development since that condition cannot be met. The industry track record is clear. I’ve been pounded with lies, half-truths and assurances that bore no resemblance to reality. Whether or not you believe that the damage caused by the various nuclear incidents justifies abandoning nuclear power, surely you can see that the industry’s credibility is gone?
Not only do we have to contend with industry PR so thin, that the smallest child can see through it, we have the problem of governments being industry captives blurting out even worse nonsense. In the United States, there has been no real changes in planning caused by Fukushima. It’s as if a car of identical make to yours disintegrated on the highway but you just go ahead driving yours.
But there’s more. Disagree with a future of nuclear energy and you get to meet up with the dogs of war, the partisans of a nuclear future. They believe several things – 1) if you are opposed to nuclear energy you are some left leaning tree hugger, 2) you just don’t understand because you’re blinded by anti nuclear propaganda, 3) you don’t grasp the critical need for nuclear power since all the other sources of energy are flawed, and (my very favorite) 4) radiation is all around us, we get it in chest x-rays, scanners in our airports, granite taken from deep in the earth has radiation in it, therefore all of these concerns about radiation are overblown.
This article is intelligent and asks some critical questions, like why is our evacuation zones in case of nuclear accident only ten miles while in Japan a much larger zone was found necessary? That’s a good question.
Let’s hope for more posts from this author.
James Pilant
via boltonnewyork
Accountability, how strange. I have doubts that such a poor performance would always cost the job of an American CEO. We have learned to insulate our governing and corporate classes from the petty pain of suffering for their actions.
Here’s a news story about the resignation.
Here’s another take on the issue, discussing whether or not the company can continue.
I’ve loved maps since I was a little boy. Unfortunately today’s map is something of a downer, a comparison of the Cesium fallout from the two disasters.
I didn’t say it wasn’t depressing.
James Pilant
From Not all alleged is apparent ….
I have written about potassium iodide before (re-blogged a good source on it). But this is very good. It not only discusses potassium iodide but many other health related issues. I find the author to good at the craft of writing and very well-informed in these matters.
I am not medically or scientifically trained. In this case, I am happy to defer to an expert.
James Pilant
My thanks to Rhoda’s Natural Health Blog.
I fully agree with the author. Fairewinds has been the best source of information about the disaster that I have been able to find. I am a subscriber to the site and I recommend you sign up as well. It’s intelligent and full of information usually backed up by photography and films. I visit regularly.
James Pilant
Seldom has a politician been so up front about his contempt for the masses –
From the essay –
On April 26th, the 25th anniversary of the catastrophic Chernobyl accident, Berlusconi held a press conference with French president Nikolay Sarkozy in Rome. At this press conference Berlusconi made his radioactive intentions clear for all. “We are absolutely convinced that nuclear energy is the future for the whole world,” he said. He went on to detail how recent polls showed that the referendum to block nuclear power for decades to come could pass at this time and that by temporarily suspending Italy’s return to nuclear program the issue would be revisited when the Italian voters had been “calmed down” and returned to the realization that Nuclear Energy was the most viable and safe way to produce electricity. He went on to explain how the “leftists and ecologists” had manipulated the emotions of the Italian voters after Chernobyl and penalized the Italian people who have to pay higher electric rates than France that operates 58 nuclear power plants. Berlusconi explained that the “situation in Japan had scared the Italian voters” and that the “inevitable return to nuclear power in Italy” would not be abandoned nor would the collaborations between Enel and Eletricite de France.
You see voters have no wisdom and judgment. When they err by disagreeing with you, for instance, their failure to realize that nuclear power is “viable and safe,” that can be fixed. If you have the media, you just patiently convince them of your point of view. You don’t worry about their judgment because there is nothing that cannot be fixed by good PR.
It would be difficult to find more open contempt for the democratic process or the facts of the situation. If nuclear power is going to be safe, there is some work that is going to have to be done. If that isn’t obvious based on the last twenty years, where have you been hiding?
James Pilant
via Aletho News
Removing top soil from school grounds to reduce radiation is a positive step. It does however provide a small harbinger of the enormous cost this disaster is going to impose in Japan for as much future as humans can reasonably foresee.
Generally nations recover from floods, chemical spills, rock slides, etc. and dare I say it, combinations of tsunami and earthquakes. Japan may recover economically but the damage to the land is permanent unless you look at history in terms of periods like the Jurassic.
It is questionable business ethics to promote PR that claims such disasters unlikely or impossible. It is questionable business ethics to subvert the government into downplaying or covering up incidents at your nuclear plants. It is questionable business ethics to pretend certainty when you don’t have any.
I expect giant corporations to lie, exaggerate and steal if at all possible. (Small corporations are much less likely to have these faults and are in many cases, excellent examples of morality and patriotism.) But permanently destroying the landscape has to considered unethical in an extreme sense.
James Pilant
What are the business ethics problems revealed in this particular news article? First we have a with holding from the residents of critical information about their exposure to radiation. Second, we have worker safety issues on a very large scale. Workers have already died at the site. Third, we have a continuous underestimate of the radiation being released. It seems every time, TEPCO gives the public radiation numbers, it is later discovered to be too low.
It seems that the Japanese government and the utility, TEPCO, are in full damage control mode. They now hold one press conference a week. They invite only establishment press. They limit access to the site, not so much for safety’s sake but to prevent independent coverage.
As a business ethics disaster, these events will be featured in textbooks for generations.
James Pilant
The more kinds of radioactive material can be reasonably assumed to mean more leakage from the plant. Fortunately strontium is bad but not as bad as many other nuclear deposits.
James Pilant
via
Pilant's Business Ethics Blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.