The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists posted its Fukushima issue today, which I think has a lot of interesting/deep/new pieces written by leading experts about the nuclear disaster in Japan. (Such as “Fukushima: The myth of safety, the reality of geoscience,” which shows that in the decades after the nuclear plant was built, the authorities discovered historical records and other science that showed Fukushima was vulnerable to a giant tsunami, but they did nothing to protect the plant.)
And the Bulletin did something even cooler than good in-depth journalism: It translated these expert analyses of the Fukushima catastrophe into Japanese. This is how Bulletin editor Mindy Kay Bricker explains the reasoning behind translation project: “Those in genuine need of erudite analysis are, of course, those directly affected by the Fukushima disaster, the Japanese population. Stellar coverage by Western news outlets might win awards, but what is the point if those who most deserve the information never benefit from reading it?”
Bricker’s piece announcing the Fukushima issue is here. The Japanese translation of the Fukushima issue is here. The table of contents for the Fukushima issue is here.
In the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, one can hear the cable chatterers and other newspeople talking about radiation and its connection to cancer is a dizzying number of ways, many and perhaps most of them extremely ill-informed. Particularly, the notion of a “safe” dose of radiation is bandied about, usually in reference to what the government says a “safe” dose is. A lot of research has been done into the health affects of radiation since atomic bombs ended World War II, but actually, the harm done — or not done — by small doses of radiation remains a question unanswered. But don’t take my word for it; here’s a brilliant explanation of this mystery by the director of the Center for Radiological Research, at Columbia University Medical Center. Read it, and you will know more than you did before — even if you thought you knew what you thought in regard to nuclear energy and radiation, post-Fukushima. Very small doses of radiation may be dangerous if distributed over large populations. Or they may not. It’d be nice if, amid its current budgetary insanity, the Congress were smart enough to fund the research that will tell us what we have to fear, or not fear, from future Fukushimas and the all but inevitable event of radiation-related terrorism.