ネットの力はすごい。作られた世論や工作員に負けず、全国の市民で
協力しましょう。

もちろん自分もすぐに拡散。
いろいろな人がいろいろなとことに一斉に拡散し、このような結果に
なったと思われます。

ネットの力はすごい。
作られた世論や工作員に負けず、全国の市民で協力しましょう。

日本の産廃マフィアと、そのマフィア勢力に利権を与えて手なずけようと必死な
民主党や自民党などのマフィア勢力は、どう反応するのでしょうか？

------------------------------------------------------------
http://enformable.com/2012/03/former-australian-government-minister-says-australia-should-accept-fukushima-debris-japan-just-too-crowded/

Former Australian government minister says Australia should accept Fukushima debris – Japan “just too crowded”

Posted by Lucas W Hixson on March 18, 2012
in Editorials, Featured, Lucas Whitefield Hixson

Although the Fukushima disaster has likely ended the risk of Australia going down the uranium-brick road called Nuclear Energy for a while longer, former government minister Andrew Thomson has started a new nuclear-waste debate by arguing that Australia should accept radioactive debris from the Fukushima nuclear disaster, stating that the move would help break a deadlock in Japan that is jeopardizing recovery efforts from last year’s March 11 tsunami and nuclear meltdown.

Mr Thomson, who now works for law firm Minter Ellison in Tokyo, said Australia could offer “ideal places to dispose of this debris and store it safely”. ”This stuff is only mildly radioactive, it’s not going to harm anyone, but the last place you want to store it is Japan ― it’s just too crowded,” he said. Andrew Thomson is a former Howard government minister, and has worked through Asia and the Middle East consulting on mergers and acquisitions, and government relations.

“Western Australia has benefited greatly from Japanese demand for iron ore and base metals and South Australia is launching a major uranium export industry. It’s only fair and reasonable if we propose to sell more uranium to Japan in future that we should offer such help now when Japan really needs it.”

Although some criticize that international transport would only increase the potential displacement of radioactive materials into the environment, many feel that Japan is overwhelmed in its response to the Fukushima crisis. It is a reminder that we should have a serious public debate about all parts of the nuclear industry from cradle to grave, including the mining and export of uranium. Yuki Tanaka from the Hiroshima Peace Institute noted: “Japan is not the sole nation responsible for the current nuclear disaster. From the manufacture of the reactors by GE to provision of uranium by Canada, Australia and others, many nations are implicated.” No one has demonstrated safe permanent storage of radioactive waste, despite over 50 years of production.

Australia is not immune to the risk or tragedies of nuclear power, Australia is the beginning of the nuclear fuel chain cycle. Australia has proposals to send uranium to India, Russia and China, where the technical capabilities are not as high as they were in Japan. In October 2011, the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office acknowledged that: “We can confirm that Australian obligated nuclear material was at the Fukushima Daiichi site and in each of the reactors ― maybe five out of six, or it could have been all of them.”

Former Australian ambassador to Japan Murray Mclean, commented on the Fukushima disaster in an interview with The Australian. ”It was very difficult indeed to know there had been obvious damage to the Fukushima nuclear plant and not be told very much about it,” he said. ”We were not being told significantly more at all than what was being told to the public. We were not getting much from the Japanese government.”

The former ambassador confirmed Australia had evacuation plans in place but voiced the uncomfortable truth that, in reality, greater Tokyo (population 35 million) would have been almost impossible to evacuate.

“To be frank, I don’t know how it actually would have taken place without complete chaos,” he said.

“You can’t get everybody on the Shinkansen (bullet train), no matter how many there are; you can’t get them on the roads, because they would have been clogged. How do you get people out to Narita or Haneda or the US airbases to evacuate people?”

Australia wants Japan to cease its controversial killing of whales in Antarctic waters, and has even commenced legal action against Japan, but has remained hush about the nuclear safety issues in the island nation. Australia’s uranium industry did nothing in response to hundreds of findings of safety violations, including the systematic and routine falisification of safety data and breached safety regulations perpetrated by TEPCO in the last 40 years of operation. The industry did nothing in 2007 when more than 300 incidents of “malpractice” at Japan’s nuclear plants were revealed (104 of them at nuclear power plants).

When the plant began to overheat and spew radiation into the atmosphere, foreign countries including Australia set an 80km exclusion zone around the plant, while the Japanese government’s initial reaction was to set up a 10km evacuation zone. Australia could have played a role in breaking the vicious cycle of information mismanagement in the wake of the March 11th disaster, by making uranium exports conditional on improved management of nuclear plants and tighter regulations. Even a strong public statement of concern would have been heard by the Japanese, and it would have shown support for Japanese citizens.

However, the uranium industry has done nothing to date, therefore leading many to feel that the industry as a whole is in denial about its role in fuelling the Fukushima disaster, there is no reason to believe that it will behave more responsibly in the future. Despite some claims, there hasn’t been a renaissance of nuclear energy, only a resurgence of pro-nuclear talk. Nuclear power has remained expensive, requiring substantial public subsidies wherever it operates. Most insurance companies are unwilling to back nuclear energy, often the taxpayers are forced pay the bill when things go wrong.

------------------------------------------------------------

ちなみに、こちらは産廃マフィアの頭目のご発言（笑）
　　↓
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━●
　　　　 　　「官邸かわら版」のお知らせ（2012/03/21)
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━●
○「官邸かわら版」
http://kawaraban.kantei.go.jp/

====================================================================
　　　　　　　　　　　　　 今回の更新情報 　　　　　　　　　　　　　
====================================================================
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
●総理の語録：一歩も二歩も前に(03/21掲載）
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−
　がれき広域処理は、国は一歩も二歩も前に出ていかなければなりません。

※　記事全文はこちらから
http://kawaraban.kantei.go.jp/2012/03/21goroku.html
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

トンあたり、どこまで上がるか見物だぜ

瓦礫の焼却を行うとその放射能濃度は約１０倍になります。

瓦礫を１００トン焼却すると焼却灰が約10トン出ます。（この焼却灰10トンのうち3トンが飛灰で残りの7トンが主灰です。この値はほぼ間違いのないところで、一般ゴミ建設時に作られる計画書に記載されています）

10,000Bq/Kgの瓦礫100(ton)の放射能濃度は1,000,000,000Bq(=100*1,000*10,000)
燃やすと、焼却灰は10(ton)できます。放射能濃度は変わらず、1,000,000,000Bq
ですからその 放射能濃度は10倍の 100,000(Bq/Kg)

つまり、10,000Bq/kgから100,000Bq/Kgと１０倍の濃度になったのです。

さて、焼却灰のうち飛灰の99.9%が補足され、0.1%が空気中に拡散されるとすると、
300,000Bq（3t*1000Kg/t*0.001*100,000Bq/Kg)の放射能で瓦礫を引き受けた都市の住民が被爆することになります。

つまり、10トンの埋め立て灰（放射能強度100,000Bq/Kg)で土壌汚染の可能性増大、万一漏れでもしたら農業は立ち行かなくなり、住民は住めなくなる等の被害も視野に入れておかなければならない。
3Kgの飛灰が空中に舞い内部被爆の危険性。幼児、子供に対する被害甚大です。

岩手、宮城の瓦礫には放射能がないのではなくて、福島に比べれば低いのですが、あります。焼却すれば10倍の放射能濃度に凝縮します。低いものは高く、高いものは更に高くなるのです。

どうか、細野（環境省）のウソに騙されないで下さい。

　投票総数　　　　１９６００
　
　拡散賛成　　　　　２１００（　７％）

　拡散反対　　　　１７５００（９３％）

　　どんどん投票しましょう！

日本では、日本映画専門チャンネルというペイテレビが、
１〜２月に、原発関係の黙示録的な映画ばかりを特集していました。
この特集の監修は、岩井俊二監督がおこない、彼が震災後に
制作したインタビュー記録映画「岩井俊二friends after 3.11 」も
大晦日に同チャンネルで放映されました。（動画投稿サイトで
その断片を見ることが出来ます）

この特集では、田原総一朗監督の「原子力戦争」や、
80年代イギリスアニメの名作「風が吹くとき」や
権力に飼われたマスコミが大衆洗脳を行なっている状況を
子供にもわかるかたちでハッキリと描き出した1969年のアニメ
「空飛ぶゆうれい船」なども放映されましたが
なんといっても目玉作品は、「日本沈没」でした。
http://www.nihon-eiga.com/program/detail/nh10001000_0001.html

「日本沈没」は、地震発生の目に見える危険性を警告している学者が、
気休めの戯れ言をいってごまかす御用学者を、「ふざけるな！」と
テレビ放映中になぐりつける場面などもあって、じつに見応えが
ありますが、日本列島消滅の危機に直面しながら総理大臣の決断で
日本国民をオーストラリアなどの他国に移民させる交渉を行なう場面
なども出てきます。　……じつに黙示録的な映画でした。　まさか
この映画が作られて数十年後に、同じような状況が現実に訪れる
なんて、真剣に考えていた人は（反原発を訴えてきた一握りの
科学者や反原発運動の活動家以外には）皆無だったのではないか？

過去の人類史をみても、国家は簡単なことで滅びたり消滅することが
わかります。　瓦礫受け入れ（＝　進め一億　被曝者だ！）のような
大政翼賛的なレミング自殺行動は、この国の滅亡を助長しているの
でしょう。　じつにくやしいです。

……まあ、しかし、第二次世界大戦当時に疎開した都民などが
そうであったように、危機に対して賢明な対応行動ができた人たちは
生きのこっていくでしょう。　そしていずれの時期にか、過去(＝今現在)
の危機に対して、嘘やゴマカシを言ったり、大本営発表を信じて
非業の死を遂げた愚かな人たちのことを、歴史的反省の材料に
するのでしょう。　……生きのこりたいものですね。