Template:Did you know nominations/Fukushima nuclear accident
DYK toolbox |
---|
Fukushima nuclear accident
- ... that residents evacuated in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear accident were exposed to so little radiation that radiation-induced health effects are likely to be below detectable levels?
- Source: "Outside the geographical areas most affected by radiation, even in locations within Fuku-
shima prefecture, the predicted risks remain low and no observable increases in cancer
above natural variation in baseline rates are anticipated" page 8: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/78218/9789241505130_eng.pdf;jsessionid=5D2A9C6FCDE7BA3C9686CED940B05E3A?sequence=1- ALT1: ... that during the Fukushima nuclear accident officials were told not to use the phrase "core meltdown" in order to conceal the meltdown until they officially recognized it two months after the accident? Source: " Tepco asked a third-party panel to investigate the matter and the panel released a report on 16 June saying the company’s then-president, Masataka Shimizu, had instructed officials not to use the words "core meltdown"." https://www.neimagazine.com/news/tepco-concealed-core-meltdowns-during-fukushima-accident-4931915/
- ALT2: ... that the Fukushima nuclear accident was foreseeable and preventable? Source: "The accident "cannot be regarded as a natural disaster," the panel's chairman, Tokyo University professor emeritus Kiyoshi Kurokawa, wrote in the report. "It was a profoundly manmade disaster -- that could and should have been foreseen and prevented. And its effects could have been mitigated by a more effective human response."" https://www.smh.com.au/world/fukushima-nuclear-accident--manmade-not-natural--disaster-20120705-21jrl.html
- Reviewed:
Improved to Good Article status by Czarking0 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
Czarking0 (talk) 20:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC).