*Japanese credibility called into question on nuclear accident

Perhaps it's not surprising to see confusing and often contradictory comments by Japanese officials - both from the utility and the government - about the status of the crippled nuclear plant. It seems as if there's a history of secrecy and obfuscation. From the Guardian:

In a newly released diplomatic cable obtained by WikiLeaks, politician Taro Kono, a high-profile member of Japan's lower house, tells US diplomats that the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry - the Japanese government department responsible for nuclear energy - has been "covering up nuclear accidents and obscuring the true costs and problems associated with the nuclear industry". In 2008, Kono told them: "The ministries were trapped in their policies, as officials inherited policies from people more senior to them, which they could then not challenge." He mentioned the dangers of natural disasters in the context of nuclear waste disposal, citing Japan's "extensive seismic activity, and abundant groundwater, and [he] questioned if there really was a safe place to store nuclear waste in the 'land of volcanoes'."

[CUT]

"What we are seeing follows a clear pattern of secrecy and denial," said Paul Dorfman, co-secretary to the Committee Examining Radiation Risks from Internal Emitters, a UK government advisory committee disbanded in 2004. "The Japanese government has always tended to underplay accidents. At the moment the Japanese claims of safety are not to be believed by anyone. The health effects of what has happened so far are imponderable. The reality is we just do not know. There is profound uncertainty about the impact of the accident."

In fairness, the current disaster is moving so quickly and in so many directions that any government would have a hard time keeping up. Given the potential dangers, what would you tell your people - and would you run the risk of inciting panic? That said, the cover-up allegations are certainly not reassuring.

*From the NYT:

The warnings were stark and issued repeatedly as far back as 1972: If the cooling systems ever failed at a Mark 1 nuclear reactor, the primary containment vessel surrounding the reactor would probably burst as the fuel rods inside overheated. Dangerous radiation would spew into the environment. Now, with one Mark 1 containment vessel damaged at the embattled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant and other vessels there under severe strain, the weaknesses of the design -- developed in the 1960s by General Electric -- could be contributing to the unfolding catastrophe.