Oops...Wade Did It Again!

That would be Wade Allison.  I've written many posts criticizing his technical mistakes in the past, just search his name.

Looks like he'll be continuing his international book tour:

Allison, arguably, misses the broader point about the Fukushima evacuation, fear, and lives lost.

He seems to think that it was fear behind the evacuation which resulted in loss of some lives and that only one person will die in the next 50 years (obviously he means one excess death from the Fukushima contamination, not one death in 50 years) from the Fukushima radioactivity.

Japan is a democracy and they are free to choose whatever evacuation criteria they want.  They didn't choose the criteria on the date of the accident, they chose the criteria long ago, in the absence of fear.

Once they choose that criteria, it's the government's responsibility to ensure that the loss of life from the evacuation is minimized.  It's up to the government to have a plan in place in which an informed, non-fearful populace can evacuate in an orderly manner.  It's education, communication, transportation, monitoring, etc.  It's called Emergency Preparedness and Response (EPR).

If one doesn't exercise EPR, how can one hope for a successful evacuation?  Sports teams don't just tell themselves they'll be victorious, they form strategies and practice.  I haven't read any evidence that any evacuation strategies were formulated and exercised.   And if so, why did they apparently fail?  The earthquake and tsunami damage may have knocked out certain transportation routes or means of communication, but it wouldn't have affected the education of the people.

Allison wants more nuclear power, but he doesn't mention EPR at all.  He's only promoting increasing the risk of another mishap, since the risk goes up with each plant brought into operation.  At least the IAEA is taking a more reasonable approach (EPR is #3).

And where did the one excess death come from?  He offers no evidence to support his claim.  One study has much higher estimates (www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/TenHoeveEES12.pdf), and they provide their methodology and weaknesses.  The WHO should be releasing their estimates before year's end.

He thinks the radiation safety regulations are based in the Cold War.  Why would he say that?  The basis for the regulations are reviewed frequently, here's one example.

Music, please Maestro: