Greenpeace: IAEA Fukushima Report ignores science and downplays disaster impacts

Greenpeace International has released the following press release, reprinted with permission:

IAEA Fukushima Report ignores science and downplays disaster impacts 

Greenpeace and citizens’ groups challenge agency’s report

Vienna, 14 September 2015 - Greenpeace, together with Japanese civil society organisations, has sent a letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano, challenging the conclusions of the IAEA’s Fukushima report as inadequate and flawed.

The report will be presented at the annual IAEA General Conference of Member States on Tuesday.

It draws conclusions where there are major uncertainties and lacking data, unjustifiably downplays the ongoing environmental and health effects, and misrepresents the current radiological crisis in the region, according to Greenpeace. The report also does not accurately reflect the utter failure of the nuclear industry, and most nuclear regulators globally, to learn and implement the lessons of the Fukushima disaster. In addition, it actively glosses over the seriously flawed nature of current nuclear regulation in Japan.

“The IAEA’s Fukushima report is more a lengthy propaganda tool for the nuclear industry than an authoritative and balanced scientific assessment of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. The IAEA concludes that no discernible health consequences are expected as a result of the Fukushima disaster, while it admits important uncertainties in both radiation dose and long-term effects. The truth is that nobody knows how much radiation citizens were exposed to in the immediate days following the disaster. If you don’t know the dose, then you can’t conclude there won’t be any consequences. To say otherwise is political rhetoric, not science,” said Greenpeace CEE Nuclear Energy Expert Jan Haverkamp.

The IAEA report also attempts to justify Japanese government policy of systematically lifting evacuation orders in increasingly contaminated areas in Fukushima. This then strips evacuees of compensation and may force many to return to areas where radiation levels remain dangerously high. (see Greenpeace investigation from July this year)

“The IAEA report actively supports the Abe government’s agenda to make it appear that things can return to normal after a nuclear disaster. The clear objective is to attempt to overcome public opposition in Japan to nuclear reactor restarts, which remains high. There is nothing normal about the exposure rates that former Fukushima citizens are being asked to return to. Only through the establishment of a truly independent international commission that can investigate the causes, consequences, and implications of the accident without prejudice, will the people of Japan be provided with a factual and balanced assessment,” said Shaun Burnie, senior nuclear specialist at Greenpeace Germany.

Only one nuclear reactor is currently operating in Japan, with 42 shut down. The Japanese government is seeking to operate at least 35 reactors over the coming years.

Letter to the IAEA Director General: http://bit.ly/1Oa2SFc

The IAEA Fukushima Daiichi Accident - Summary Report: A preliminary analysis: http://bit.ly/1L4ngpt

For further information:

Jan Haverkamp, Expert for Nuclear Energy, Greenpeace Central and Eastern Europe, Tel.: +48 534 236 502, E-Mail: jan.haverkamp@greenpeace.org

Shaun Burnie, Senior Nuclear Specialist, Greenpeace Germany, Tel: +49 151 64320548

Réka Tercza, Press Officer, Greenpeace CEE in Österreich, Tel.: + 43 (0)664 85 74 59 8, E-Mail: reka.tercza@greenpeace.org 

  

Notes to the editor: 

(1) See “Low-dose Extrapolation of Radiation-related Cancer Risk.” ICRP Publication 99. Ann. ICRP 35 4, 2005. Publication 99.  http://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%2099

(2) The internationally accepted model for calculating the risks of radiation exposure, the Non-Linear Threshold (LNT) model, stipulates that there is no safe level of radiation exposure. In addition, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in its 2005 report stated, “. . . that while existence of a low-dose threshold does not seem to be unlikely for radiation-related cancers of certain tissues, the evidence does not favour the existence of a universal threshold. The LNT hypothesis, combined with an uncertain DDREF (dose rate effectiveness factor) for extrapolation from high doses, remains a prudent basis for radiation protection at low doses and low dose rates.”

(3) A Greenpeace investigation in July this year revealed radioactive contamination in the forests and land of Iitate district in Fukushima prefecture so widespread and at such a high level that it will be impossible for people to safely return to their homes. Decontamination efforts conducted by thousands of workers are both limited in scope and are failing to significantly reduce radiation levels, while at the same time the vast expanses of highly contaminated forests and waterways remain impossible to decontaminate.

(4) In May, Greenpeace Japan released a preliminary analysis of the IAEA summary report and is currently reviewing the entire Fukushima report for an overall analysis.

[Kendra Ulrich, a Beyond Nuclear Board of Directors Member, serves as Senior Global Energy Campaigner for Greenpeace Japan.]