There is some dispute about the recent high level of radiation measured inside the Fukushima Daiichi reactor 2, thanks to the Japan Times unprecise english translation of the Kyodo News Japanese language article.
They have been able to measure these highest radiation levels only now because they couldn’t get as close to where they think the melted fuel may be with monitors before. Not the highest levels ever present at the site. That would have been around the time of the accident, or soon after. The radiation levels at the site do not appear to be rising, they are just now able to get deeper inside the reactor containment before the monitors fail, and so they get better readings.
The unprecise english translation of the Kyodo News Japanese language article published by the Japan Times opened the door to possible misconstruction of the real facts by other media, western media and websites relying on that Japan Times article. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/02/03/national/fukushima-radiation-level-highest-since-march-11/#.WJY4ffLraM_
The Japan Times article’s title is ok: “Highest radiation reading since 3/11 detected at Fukushima No. 1 reactor”. Yes, it is the highest radiation reading found since 3/11 because since 3/11 Tepco had not been able to reach such deep place to measure the radiation there. So this recent reading is the highest found since 3/11.
The Japan Times article in itself does not mention directly any radiation increase or “spike. But their wording “has reached” in “The radiation level in the containment vessel of reactor 2 at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 power plant has reached a maximum of 530 sieverts per hour, the highest since the triple core meltdown in March 2011, Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc. said” could be misconstrued as meaning that the high level recently found is resulting from an increase of radiation, when compared to the lower level previously found . Which is not the case. Their previous reading was lower because they had not been able to go that deep before to monitor radiation there.
The Japan Times article then misled some western media, such as the Guardian, Popular Mechanic and others to themselves publish misconstrued articles based on the Japan Times article as their source.
The Popular Mechanics article’s title was ok: “Highest Radiation Levels Since Meltdown Recorded at Fukushima” but their subtitle is entirely wrong and misleading: “Levels haven’t been this high since the actual meltdown in 2011.” That subtitle is wrong, the levels were maybe that high or even higher, but Tepco had not been able to reach there before to find out, to take such measure in that place, at that deep level. That subtitle is wrong, suggesting that there is an increase. Popular Mechanics misconstrued the article of Japan Times and drawed the wrong conclusion. http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a25034/radiation-spikes-fukushima-possible-breach/
The Guardian ‘s article title is in itself misleading: ” Fukushima nuclear reactor radiation at highest level since 2011 meltdown”. A title such as “Fukushima nuclear reactor radiation highest level to date found since 2011 meltdown” would have been better and more accurate. The added words “to date found” would clarify that it was maybe already there before but that it had not been found yet, because they had not been able to reach that place and that deep before to take such measure. In its text it fails to mention the real reason why the measure recently found is higher than the previous measure. This all results in the Guardian article saying that this highest recent measure compared to the lower previous one is due to an increase of radiation. This is absolutely wrong, a complete misconstruction of the real facts. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/03/fukushima-daiichi-radiation-levels-highest-since-2011-meltdown?CMP=share_btn_fb
And many other western media and websites went along and repeated the same blind misconstruction.
Thanks heavens there were two websites who noticed the error made by those mainstream media and many other websites. They stepped in trying to correct that misconstruction and to re-establish the true facts. The Simply Info Fukuleaks website and the Safecast website, thanks to both websites’ bloggers team for their vigilance and their efforts in keeping the facts straight.
No, Fukushima Daiichi Did Not See A Radiation Spike http://www.fukuleaks.org/web/?p=16094
No, radiation levels at Fukushima Daiichi are not rising http://blog.safecast.org/2017/02/no-radiation-levels-at-fukushima-daiichi-are-not-rising/
We can’t say that there has been an increase in radiation because we do not know that. To know that we would need to have a previous measure at the same deep at the same place to compare both measures. But such previous measure that deep at that place we do not have, so it is impossible to draw any conclusion at this stage, only that it is very high.
Now what we really need is a second probe at the same deep at the same place, to confirm the first probe readings, but also to compare the recent readings and the next readings so as to assess if the radiation levels there are stable or not, if there will be an increase of radiation between the two probes or not…Until such second probing takes place, at this stage no one can say anything about any occuring increase…
For more information: TEPCO Reports:
Video here: NHK Video (in Japanese)