New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

5 Years Later, the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Site Continues to Spill Waste

The cleanup effort could take decades; meanwhile the amount of radioactive material the plant leaks grows

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Five years ago this month a devastating tsunami engulfed Japan's northeastern coast, triggering the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl. Washing over a 10-meter-high seawall, the waves knocked out electricity at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, causing cooling systems to fail and half of the facility's uranium cores to overheat and melt through their steel containers. Hydrogen explosions in the next few days damaged three of the reactor buildings, venting radioactive materials into the air. That plume of airborne contamination forced some 160,000 people to evacuate from their homes.

Today the disaster site remains in crisis mode. Former residents will not likely return anytime soon, because levels of radioactivity near their abodes remain high. Even more troublesome, the plant has yet to stop producing dangerous nuclear waste: its operator, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), currently circulates water through the three melted units to keep them cool—generating a relentless supply of radioactive water. To make matters worse, groundwater flowing from a hill behind the crippled plant now mingles with radioactive materials before heading into the sea.

TEPCO collects the contaminated water and stores it all in massive tanks at the rate of up to 400 metric tons a day. Lately the water has been processed to reduce the concentration of radionuclides, but it still retains high concentrations of tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. Disputes over its final resting place remain unresolved. The same goes for the millions of bags of contaminated topsoil and other solid waste from the disaster, as well as the uranium fuel itself. Health reports, too, are worrisome. Scientists have seen an increase in thyroid cancers among the children who had lived in Fukushima at the time, although it is too early to tell if those cases can be attributed to the accident.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Nevertheless, Japan's government plans to recommit to nuclear power. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe recently emphasized the urgent need to restart the country's nuclear power plants, which all were taken offline following the Fukushima Daiichi disaster. So far two have been brought back to full operation.

SOURCES: “THE WORLD NUCLEAR INDUSTRY STATUS REPORT 2015,” BY MYCLE SCHNEIDER AND ANTONY FROGGATT; JULY 2015 (first four items); “ACCOUNTING FOR LONG-TERM DOSES IN ‘WORLDWIDE HEALTH EFFECTS OF THE FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI NUCLEAR ACCIDENT,’” BY JAN BEYEA ET AL., IN ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, VOL. 6, No. 3; March 1, 2013 (last item)

Madhusree Mukerjee was a senior editor at Scientific American, where she covered psychology, anthropology, and diverse other topics. She has authored two nonfiction books: Churchills Secret War (Basic Books, 2010) and The Land of Naked People (Houghton-Mifflin, 2003). She has a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Chicago and received a Guggenheim fellowship to complete her first book. She has written numerous articles on Indigenous issues, development, and colonialism and is working on a third book.

More by Madhusree Mukerjee
Scientific American Magazine Vol 314 Issue 3This article was published with the title “Fukushima Today” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 314 No. 3 (), p. 18
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0316-18

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe