Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear plant after earthquake and tsunami. (Photo: DigitalGlobe via Getty)

Japan has barely begun responding to Friday’s earthquake and tsunami, and already the government has been forced to focus on a potential new catastrophe at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant (Daiichi can be translated, by the way, as “first” or “number one”). An explosion ripped through a reactor building Monday afternoon (Tuesday morning Japan time)—the third blast since Saturday as workers struggled to deal with pressure buildups in three of the six reactor buildings at the plant. Later, a fire broke out in a fourth reactor building. The new explosion and fire were apparently responsible for a spike in radiation levels around the plant. People living within 20 kilometers (12.5 miles) of the plant complex were ordered to evacuate; those within 30 kilometers (10 miles) were told to stay indoors to avoid radiation exposure. Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan addressed the nation after Tuesday morning’s blast. “Radiation levels around the compound have risen to fairly high levels,” Kan said. “There is a danger of even higher radiation levels.”

So: How bad is the Fukushima situation? And will it affect us in California? To the second question, we’ll just say: We’d like to know, too, and we’re working to find out. (Here’s someone who was working even harder: Paul Rogers of the San Jose Mercury News. See his story: So far, very low risk of West Coast contamination from Japanese nuclear accident, experts say.) To the first question: Judging from the coverage it’s getting from careful, measured sources, we’re led to believe, as most of you are, that it’s pretty bad. Here’s a selection of headlines:

Yes, the headline is in all caps on the Post’s front page. From the story:

The new setbacks came on the heels of a difficult Monday at Fukushima Daiichi unit 2, one of six reactors at the site. Utility officials there reported that four out of five water pumps being used to flood the reactor had failed and that the other pump had briefly stopped working. As a result, the company said, the fuel rods, normally covered by water, were completely exposed for 140 minutes.

That could have grave consequences, worsening the partial meltdown that most experts think is underway. By comparison, in the 1979 Three Mile Island, Pa., nuclear plant accident, it took just two hours for half the plant’s nuclear fuel to melt.

According to a report by the Kyodo news agency, the fifth pump was later restarted, and seawater mixed with boron was again injected in a desperate bid to cool the reactor, but the fuel rods remained partially exposed and ultra-hot. On Tuesday morning, Tokyo Electric said that 2.7 meters, or less than half, of the rods were still exposed.

The New York Times: Japan Faces Potential Nuclear Disaster as Radiation Levels Rise

Japan’s nuclear crisis verged toward catastrophe on Tuesday after an explosion damaged the vessel containing the nuclear core at one reactor and a fire at another spewed large amounts of radioactive material into the air, according to the statements of Japanese government and industry officials.

Los Angeles Times: Reactor breach feared as radiation rises

In the best-case scenario, the situation at the damaged reactors will take weeks, if not months, to stabilize, U.S. nuclear experts said. “They do not have the situation under control,” said Robert Alvarez, a nuclear expert at the Institute for Policy Studies and a former Energy Department deputy.

The Wall Street Journal assesses the dangers posed by the crisis at the power plant: Damaged Nuclear Power Plants Could Spew Range of Emissions

For the latest on the crisis from AP, you can click on this Yahoo! News slug,

Japan’s New Crisis: Fighting to Avert a Nuclear Disaster 14 March,2011Jon Brooks

  • David L

    You are mistaken in your conversion of kilometers to miles. 20 km is equal to 12.4 mi, and 30 km is equivalent to 18.6 mi.

  • Dan Brekke

    Actually, 20 kilometers is 12.4274238 miles. And 30 kilometers is 18.6411358 miles. That’s the Celsius scale, right?

  • bill

    It is sad that the lack of power to the cooling pumps is not restored.
    Why is our aircraft Carrier at sea? Pull it up to the site and get power running. Quicker than running 150 miles of power lines. We have used our nuclear carriers as generators and fresh water makers in the past. Why not now?


    By E. E. Escultura, Research Professor, Mathematician and Physicist, GVP – Prof. V. Lakshmikantham Institute for Advanced Studies, GVP College of Engineering, JNT University, Visakhapatnam, AP, India

    There is an elliptical clockwise Northern Pacific Wind Cycle that includes the Trade Winds starting off the Ecuadoran Coast going westward to the Western Pacific Beyond the Marianas. Then it curves North, Northwest over Japan and joins the jet stream going East south of Siberia, crosses the Bearing Sea and Alaska and veers down through Canada and the Tornado Belt in the US, curves westward across Mexico and off to the Ecuadorean Coast to join the Trade Winds and complete the elliptical cycle. Airborne radioactive materials from Japan ride on this Cycle and hits Alaska and Canada first but by that time most of the radioactive materials would have dissipated, the heavier ones falling to the sea and the light ones dissipating into the upper atmosphere. By the time they reach the Philippines, if any, the amount of radioactive materials and level of radiation would be minimal.

    Design Flaw. Electrical power should not turn off automatically during earthquake for it will shut off the water pump that cools the reactor. Moreover, control of the reactor will be lost. Rather, the tremor should automatically drop the neutron absorbers (e.g., cadmium rods) into the uranium core to slow down or stop nuclear fission and prevent more generation of heat that could lead to meltdown.


Jon Brooks

Jon Brooks is the host and editor of KQED’s health and technology blog, Future of You. He is the former editor of KQED’s daily news blog, News Fix. In 2014, he won a California Journalism Award for his coverage of ride services like Uber and Lyft and the taxi industry. A veteran blogger, he previously worked for Yahoo! in various news writing and editing roles. Jon is also a playwright whose work has been produced in San Francisco, New York, Italy, and around the U.S. He has written about film for his own blog and studied film at Boston University. He has an MFA in Creative Writing from Brooklyn College.

Sponsored by

Become a KQED sponsor