Is Japan’s nuclear crisis really as severe as Chernobyl?

Japan's government has assigned the emergency the highest possible severity rating. How bad could it get?

Topics: Nuclear Power, Big Question, Japan, Japan Earthquake,

Is Japan's nuclear crisis really as severe as Chernobyl?

Japanese authorities increased the “severity rating“of the emergency at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant in Japan today, raising it from a level-five to a level-seven accident. Historically, the only other nuclear incident to garner that distinction has been the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. 

This has prompted a barrage of questions about the possible consequences of the continuing crisis. We turned to  Joseph Cirincione, president of the Ploughshares Fund, a nonprofit organization focused on nuclear security issues, to understand the severity of the current situation, and potential end-game scenarios in Japan.

I think it alarmed a lot of people that now suddenly the Japanese government is saying the nuclear crisis is on par with Chernobyl. Is that characterization accurate?

I think the Japanese authorities finally were forced to publicly recognize the severity of this disaster. They were trying to keep the public calm, to preserve some credibility for the nuclear power industry, so they tried to use reassuring language in their statements, and were hesitant to compare what was going on at Fukushima to Chernobyl. And, of course, it’s not Chernobyl. It’s different.

Chernobyl was an explosion that launched about a third of the reactor core thousands of feet into the air, injecting a hot plume of radioactivity into the upper atmosphere and contaminating large parts of Europe. That is not what’s going on at Fukushima. But as an official said at the Tuesday press conference, Fukushima could ultimately release as much or more radiation than Chernobyl. It was that realization, I think, that was behind the re-categorization.

Is the situation deteriorating at the plant?

The situation is deteriorating. I think that’s the only fair way to describe it. You can forget words like “stable,” or “under control.” It’s not. Every day brings a new risk of disaster, whether it’s an aftershock that threatens to open up a crack in the containment vessels; or it’s the water that’s being streamed in, that could distort the fuel rods; or it’s the leakage of this now-radioactive water into the ocean; or the fire that breaks out at the plant. Every day brings a new mini-crisis that could tip one or more of these reactors into meltdown. That’s where we’re at.

You have to understand that these reactors have been subjected to far more stress than they were ever designed to handle. And the stress continues. There have been hundreds of aftershocks. Just this week, there was a 6.6 quake. There are new predictions that the aftershocks could go on for some time, and be as powerful as a major earthquake. And, what [emergency workers] are doing is not in any safety manual. There isn’t any Plan B that says, “Bring fire trucks to the beach and pump salt-water into the reactors,” or “Rent giant concrete pumps and use them to spray water into the reactor.”

Would you say, right now, there’s as big a risk of meltdown as there has been during this entire ordeal?

Yes. They’ve been struggling to keep the fuel rods covered with water. And they partially succeeded. Still, it’s likely that all three reactors have suffered at least partial meltdowns. But we don’t know for sure what’s going on. You can’t open the door and look in. It doesn’t work that way.

At this point, what do you think is the most likely scenario for how this situation will resolve itself?

I believe the most likely scenario is one or more meltdowns. I hope I’m wrong. But I think this is just beyond the capability of anyone to control.

What would the implications be of a major meltdown for Japan?

If one of the fuel rod assemblies melted, it would likely breach the concrete containment vessel and spew radioactivity to the ground, air and water at a much higher level than we’ve seen so far. You would be looking at hundreds or thousands of square kilometers contaminated for decades or centuries. You’d be looking at a dead zone similar to the zone that’s around Chernobyl. It’s hard to predict the radius, but it could be 10 or 20 kilometers. The dead zone around Chernobyl is about 3,000 square kilometers.

What’s the best-case scenario? What will it take to get the plant stable and decommissioned, so it no longer poses a threat?

The best case scenario is you keep the rods covered with water for months, and that, sometime next year, you’re able to do stabilization work. Then you could begin to bury the reactors. One way or the other, this ends with those reactors entombed under tons of sand and concrete, a permanent monument on the shoreline of Japan to this nuclear disaster.

And once it’s buried, the concrete would contain the radiation?

Yeah, for decades. The problem is the concrete would wear out before the radiation stops. You kick the can a century down the road.

Peter Finocchiaro is a senior editor at Salon. Follow him on Twitter @PLFino.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 7
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails
    AP/Jae C. Hong

    Your summer in extreme weather

    California drought

    Since May, California has faced a historic drought, resulting in the loss of 63 trillion gallons of water. 95.4 percent of the state is now experiencing "severe" drought conditions, which is only a marginal improvement from 97.5 percent last week.

    A recent study published in the journal Science found that the Earth has actually risen about 0.16 inches in the past 18 months because of the extreme loss of groundwater. The drought is particularly devastating for California's enormous agriculture industry and will cost the state $2.2 billion this year, cutting over 17,000 jobs in the process.


    Meteorologists blame the drought on a large zone (almost 4 miles high and 2,000 miles long) of high pressure in the atmosphere off the West Coast which blocks Pacific winter storms from reaching land. High pressure zones come and go, but this one has been stationary since December 2012.

    Darin Epperly

    Your summer in extreme weather

    Great Plains tornadoes

    From June 16-18 this year, the Midwest was slammed by a series of four tornadoes, all ranking as category EF4--meaning the winds reached up to 200 miles per hour. An unlucky town called Pilger in Nebraska was hit especially hard, suffering through twin tornadoes, an extreme event that may only occur every few decades. The two that swept through the town killed two people, injured 16 and demolished as many as 50 homes.   

    "It was terribly wide," local resident Marianne Pesotta said to CNN affiliate KETV-TV. "I drove east [to escape]. I could see how bad it was. I had to get out of there."   

    But atmospheric scientist Jeff Weber cautions against connecting these events with climate change. "This is not a climate signal," he said in an interview with NBC News. "This is a meteorological signal."

    AP/Detroit News, David Coates

    Your summer in extreme weather

    Michigan flooding

    On Aug. 11, Detroit's wettest day in 89 years -- with rainfall at 4.57 inches -- resulted in the flooding of at least five major freeways, leading to three deaths, more than 1,000 cars being abandoned on the road and thousands of ruined basements. Gov. Rick Snyder declared it a disaster. It took officials two full days to clear the roads. Weeks later, FEMA is finally set to begin assessing damage.   

    Heavy rainfall events are becoming more and more common, and some scientists have attributed the trend to climate change, since the atmosphere can hold more moisture at higher temperatures. Mashable's Andrew Freedman wrote on the increasing incidence of this type of weather: "This means that storms, from localized thunderstorms to massive hurricanes, have more energy to work with, and are able to wring out greater amounts of rain or snow in heavy bursts. In general, more precipitation is now coming in shorter, heavier bursts compared to a few decades ago, and this is putting strain on urban infrastructure such as sewer systems that are unable to handle such sudden influxes of water."

    AP/The Fresno Bee, Eric Paul Zamora

    Your summer in extreme weather

    Yosemite wildfires

    An extreme wildfire burning near Yosemite National Park forced authorities to evacuate 13,000 nearby residents, while the Madera County sheriff declared a local emergency. The summer has been marked by several wildfires due to California's extreme drought, which causes vegetation to become perfect kindling.   

    Surprisingly, however, firefighters have done an admirable job containing the blazes. According to the L.A. Times, firefighters with the state's Department of Forestry and Fire Protection have fought over 4,000 fires so far in 2014 -- an increase of over 500 fires from the same time in 2013.

    Reuters/Eugene Tanner

    Your summer in extreme weather

    Hawaii hurricanes

    Hurricane Iselle was set to be the first hurricane to make landfall in Hawaii in 22 years. It was downgraded to a tropical storm and didn't end up being nearly as disastrous as it could have been, but it still managed to essentially shut down the entire state for a day, as businesses and residents hunkered down in preparation, with many boarding up their windows to guard against strong gusts. The storm resulted in downed trees, 21,000 people out of power and a number of damaged homes.

    Debbie Arita, a local from the Big Island described her experience: "We could hear the wind howling through the doors. The light poles in the parking lot were bobbing up and down with all the wind and rain."


    Your summer in extreme weather

    Florida red tide

    A major red tide bloom can reach more than 100 miles along the coast and around 30 miles offshore. Although you can't really see it in the above photo, the effects are devastating for wildlife. This summer, Florida was hit by an enormous, lingering red tide, also known as a harmful algae bloom (HAB), which occurs when algae grow out of control. HABs are toxic to fish, crabs, octopuses and other sea creatures, and this one resulted in the death of thousands of fish. When the HAB gets close enough to shore, it can also have an effect on air quality, making it harder for people to breathe.   

    The HAB is currently closest to land near Pinellas County in the Gulf of Mexico, where it is 5-10 miles offshore.

  • Recent Slide Shows



Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>