[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FW: BBC apology on Japanese criticality accident - NO EXPLOSION !
Congratulation for your letter, example of lesson to be learned (including
myself) on what one should do (competence, style and language) when
contacting press to be succeeded, as you were.
Regards
Rozental
josrozen@netmedia.net.il
Israel
================================
At 03:44 PM 10/12/99 -0500, you wrote:
>
>FYI,
>
>> ----------
>> From: NewsOnline[SMTP:newsonline@bbc.co.uk]
>> Sent: Friday, October 08, 1999 11:12 AM
>> To: 'Franta, Jaroslav'
>> Subject: RE: Japanese criticality accident - NO EXPLOSION !!
>>
>> Dear Mr Franta
>>
>> Thank you very much for your e-mail.
>>
>> I have investigated the issues you have raised, and discovered that our
>> initial reporting of what happened at the Tokaimura nuclear plant was
>> factually incorrect.
>>
>> Both the television report, which we featured in realvideo, and the text
>> of
>> the early versions of our stories wrongly reported that there had been an
>> explosion at the plant, which punched a hole in the plant's roof.
>>
>> As it turns out, there was a "criticality flash", but neither an explosion
>> nor a hole in the roof.
>>
>> However, this was not a deliberate deception.
>>
>> Our early reports were based on video footage that we received from a
>> reputed news agency. The television feed was flagged as showing pictures
>> taken in the immediate aftermath of last month's nuclear accident at
>> Tokaimura.
>>
>> We used this material in good faith, and we will take up the issue with
>> the
>> agency supplying the pictures.
>>
>> I have now corrected all the relevant stories in our archive, and would
>> like
>> to apologise that we got it wrong.
>>
>> Yours sincerely
>>
>>
>> Tim Weber
>> Acting World Editor
>> BBC News Online - http://news.bbc.co.uk/
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Franta, Jaroslav [SMTP:frantaj@aecl.ca]
>> > Sent: 06 October 1999 16:17
>> > To: 'BBC News On Line'
>> > Subject: FW: Japanese criticality accident - NO EXPLOSION !!
>> > Importance: High
>> >
>> >
>> > > Sir, Madam,
>> > >
>> > > I am absolutely amazed at the brazen deception of television/web
>> viewers
>> > > by the BBC, on the Japanese criticality incident:
>> > >
>> > > On several occasions, the BBC has reported that the criticality
>> accident
>> > > involved an explosion that tore a hole in the roof of the uranium fuel
>> > > processing building in Tokaimura, and showed pictures & video footage
>> of
>> > > what it claimed was the site of the accident, when in fact it was old
>> > file
>> > > footage from a different plant that had nothing to do with last week's
>> > > event.
>> > >
>> > > For instance, the BBC video is accessible at the web site
>> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/460000/video/_461668_ghosh1300_vi.ram
>> > > and it was replayed on television news reports around the world.
>> > > From the BBC pictures and video, it appeared that a corner of a roof
>> of
>> > > one building had been blown open. The BBC commentator called for more
>> > > stringent building standards for other uranium processing plants so
>> that
>> > > they can withstand small "nuclear explosions."
>> > > Further examples of this deception were posted on BBC's web site:
>> > >
>> > > example #1:
>> > >
>> >
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/asia-pacific/newsid_463000/463334.s
>> > > tm
>> > > Saturday, October 2, 1999 Published at 12:32 GMT 13:32 UK
>> > > BBC World: Asia-Pacific
>> > > <<...>> Nuclear accident inquiry begins
>> > > <snip>
>> > > The accident occurred after workers at the plant poured too much
>> uranium
>> > > solution into a tank, setting off an explosion which pushed radiation
>> in
>> > > the area to 15,000 times above normal.
>> > > One of the workers reportedly told an official that he had used about
>> > 16kg
>> > > of uranium - nearly eight times the normal amount - during the process
>> > > just before the accident.
>> > > The resulting explosion pushed radiation in the area to 15,000 times
>> the
>> > > normal level.
>> > > <snip>
>> > > <end quote>
>> > >
>> > > example #2:
>> > >
>> >
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/asia-pacific/newsid_462000/462366.s
>> > > tm
>> > > Thursday, September 30, 1999 Published at 22:25 GMT 23:25 UK
>> > > BBC World: Asia-Pacific
>> > > <<...>> Can the accident happen elsewhere?
>> > > By independent nuclear expert Dr John Large
>> > > Details of the Japanese plant accident are sparse and, at the best,
>> > > sketchy but a few facts have been established.
>> > > <snip>
>> > > Second, the accident resulted in:
>> > > * what witnesses described as a violent blue flash
>> > > * a small explosion sufficient to burst a hole in the building's roof
>> > > * a radioactive release that reportedly resulted in initial radiation
>> > > levels in the local area exceeding 15,000 times background or natural
>> > > radiation levels.
>> > > <snip>
>> > > <end quote>
>> > >
>> > > IN FACT OF COURSE, THERE WAS NO EXPLOSION, as confirmed in subsequent
>> > > reports like this one:
>> > >
>> > > http://www.uic.com.au/wns1001.htm
>> > > Serious criticality accident at Japanese conversion plant. Several
>> > workers
>> > > have been exposed to high radiation levels in an accident at the Japan
>> > > Nuclear Fuel Conversion Co. (JCO) test facility at Tokai-mura
>> > (Tokaimura).
>> > > Two received about 8000 millisieverts, which is probably fatal.
>> Several
>> > > nearby residents appear to have received low radiation doses, and 0.84
>> > > mSv/hr was recorded at a plant boundary soon after the accident,
>> causing
>> > > people within 350 metres to be evacuated. High radiation levels at the
>> > > plant boundary apparently continued for some time, suggesting
>> continuing
>> > > or renewed criticality. An excessive quantity of uranyl nitrate
>> > solution,
>> > > enriched to about 18% U-235, had been poured into a single tank,
>> > > triggering the flash criticality (nuclear chain reaction) and
>> consequent
>> > > neutron radiation.
>> > > There was no explosion, <<<<<<<<<<<
>> > > though a brief but unquantified release of radiation to the atmosphere
>> > > occurred.
>> > > Update (4/10) on Tokai criticality accident. The accident at Tokai
>> fuel
>> > > processing plant has been provisionally rated 4 on the INES scale by
>> the
>> > > Japanese Government. This means that it was more than an "incident",
>> > > causing "acute health effects to workers" as well as some public
>> > radiation
>> > > exposure at about prescribed limits, but "without significant off-site
>> > > risk". This puts it behind Three Mile Island (1979) in severity,
>> though
>> > > that accident was less significant in its actual radiation effects (ie
>> > the
>> > > problem area was shielded from staff and others).
>> > > For reasons not yet clear, the Tokai criticality continued for about
>> 17
>> > > hours, until cooling water surrounding the sedimentation tank was
>> > drained.
>> > >
>> > > The radiation (neutron and gamma) emanated from the tank, not from any
>> > > dispersed materials, <<<<<<<<<<<<<
>> > > and no off-site contamination has been reported. Some 39 workers,
>> three
>> > > fireman and seven members of the public appear to have received
>> elevated
>> > > doses, with three workers hospitalised, two in a critical condition.
>> > Peak
>> > > radiation levels at the nearest site boundary were 0.84 mSv/hr of
>> gamma
>> > > and 4.5 mSv/hr neutron.
>> > > - - - - - - - - - -
>> > >
>> > > Even before the BBC deception became evident from other reports, it
>> was
>> > > possible to surmise the unlikelyhood of an explosion from nuclear
>> > reactor
>> > > physics considerations:
>> > > The excess reactivity of the uranium-containing bucket was estimated
>> to
>> > be
>> > > at most 1.044 - it wouldn't have taken much of an expulsion of
>> material
>> > > from the tank to reduce this to less than one and kill the fission
>> > > process. Nor could the criticality excursion described cause a corner
>> of
>> > > the building roof to blow off and still have enough left in the tank
>> to
>> > go
>> > > critical again, as it in fact did for the subsequent 17 hours.
>> > >
>> > > Finally, the BBC deception was cleared up by a colleague who pointed
>> out
>> > > that there is a separate, nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in
>> Tokaimura.
>> > > It apparently was shutdown after a 1997 fire/explosion accident. That
>> > was
>> > > a chemical or industrial accident but it released some radioactive
>> > > material. The BBC video of a building with a hole in its roof is
>> > actually
>> > > file footage of this other plant, totally unrelated to last week's
>> > > accident, taken during or after that earlier accident.
>> > >
>> > > Whoever at BBC is responsible for initiating this world-wide media
>> > > deception should be fired for gratuitous fear mongering.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > >
>> > > Jaro Franta
>> > >
>> > > Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this communication reflect only
>> > > those of the author and do not represent those of his employer, AECL,
>> or
>> > > anyone else.
>> > >
>> > > Jaro Franta, eng.
>> > > AECL Design & Engineering Services
>> > > Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.
>> > > *(905) 823-9060 x 4585
>> > > Fax: (905) 823-0108
>> > > Sheridan Park - SP2-F4
>> > > 2251 Speakman Drive,
>> > > Mississauga, Ontario,
>> > > Canada L5K 1B2
>> > > * frantaj@aecl.ca
>>
>************************************************************************
>The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
>information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
>
>
jjrozental
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html