Home Environment Fukushima Radiation No Health Hazard - Bananas!

Fukushima Radiation No Health Hazard – Bananas!



No, not that the claim that the Fukushima radiation leak harmed no one is bananas, but it is to bananas that we must look to work out why:

Radiation caused by the nuclear meltdown in Fukushima a decade ago has not damaged the health of local people, according to a UN report.

Gillian Hirth, chairwoman of the UN’s scientific committee on the effects of atomic radiation (Unscear), said that “no adverse health effects among Fukushima residents have been documented that could be directly attributed to radiation exposure from the accident” in March 2011.

Unscear said the latest findings supported a 2013 report on the health impact of radiation released after three reactors suffered meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

As to why, here’s one I prepared earlier:

The Fukushima Radiation Leak Is Equal To 76 Million Bananas

There’s much screaming and shouting from the usual suspects about the new radiation leak discovered at Fukushima, the stricken nuclear power plants in Japan. What they’re not telling you is that the radiation leakage is around the same as 76 million bananas. A fact which should help to put it all into some perspective. Here’s Greenpeace:

Environmental group Greenpeace said Tepco had “anxiously hid the leaks” and urged Japan to seek international expertise.

“Greenpeace calls for the Japanese authorities to do all in their power to solve this situation, and that includes increased transparancy…and getting international expertise in to help find solutions,” Dr Rianne Teule of Greenpeace International said in an e-mailed statement.

Not that Greenpeace is ever going to say anything other than that nuclear power is the work of the very devil of course. And the headlines do indeed seem alarming:

Radioactive Fukushima groundwater rises above barrier – Up to 40 trillion becquerels released into Pacific ocean so far – Storage for radioactive water running out.


Tepco admitted on Friday that a cumulative 20 trillion to 40 trillion becquerels of radioactive tritium may have leaked into the sea since the disaster.

Most of us haven’t a clue what that means of course. We don’t instinctively understand what a becquerel is in the same way that we do pound, pint or gallons, and certainly trillions of anything sounds hideous. But don’t forget that trillions of picogrammes of dihydrogen monoxide is also the major ingredient in a glass of beer. So what we really want to know is whether 20 trillion becquerels of radiation is actually an important number. To which the answer is no, it isn’t. This is actually around and about (perhaps a little over) the amount of radiation the plant was allowed to dump into the environment before the disaster. Now there are indeed those who insist that any amount of radiation kills us all stone dead while we sleep in our beds but I’m afraid that this is incorrect. We’re all exposed to radiation all the time and we all seem to survive long enough to be killed by something else so radiation isn’t as dangerous as all that.

At which point we can offer a comparison. Something to try and give us a sense of perspective about whether 20 trillion nasties of radiation is something to get all concerned about or not. That comparison being that the radiation leakage from Fukushima appears to be about the same as that from 76 million bananas. Which is a lot of bananas I agree, but again we can put that into some sort of perspective.

Let’s start from the beginning with the banana equivalent dose, the BED. Bananas contain potassium, some portion of potassium is always radioactive, thus bananas contain some radioactivity. This gets into the human body as we digest the lovely fruit (OK, bananas are an herb but still…):

Since a typical banana contains about half a gram of potassium, it will have an activity of roughly 15 Bq.

Excellent, we now have a unit that we can grasp, one that the human mind can use to give a sense of proportion to these claims about radioactivity. We know that bananas are good for us on balance, thus this amount of radioactivity isn’t all that much of a burden on us.

We also have that claim of 20 trillion becquerels of radiation having been dumped into the Pacific Ocean in the past couple of years. 20 trillion divided by two years by 365 days by 24 hours gives us an hourly rate of 1,141,552,511 becquerels per hour. Divide that by our 15 Bq per banana and we can see that the radiation spillage from Fukushima is running at 76 million bananas per hour.

Which is, as I say above, a lot of bananas. But it’s not actually that many bananas. World production of them is some 145 million tonnes a year. There’s a thousand kilos in a tonne, say a banana is 100 grammes (sounds about right, four bananas to the pound, ten to the kilo) or 1.45 trillion bananas a year eaten around the world. Divide again by 365 and 24 to get the hourly consumption rate and we get 165 million bananas consumed per hour.

We can do this slightly differently and say that the 1.45 trillion bananas consumed each year have those 15 Bq giving us around 22 trillion Bq each year. The Fukushima leak is 20 trillion Bq over two years: thus our two calculations agree. The current leak is just under half that exposure that we all get from the global consumption of bananas.

Except even that’s overstating it. For the banana consumption does indeed get into our bodies: the Fukushima leak is getting into the Pacific Ocean where it’s obviously far less dangerous. And don’t forget that all that radiation in the bananas ends up in the oceans as well, given that we do in fact urinate it out and no, it’s not something that the sewage treatment plants particularly keep out of the rivers.

There are some who are viewing this radiation leak very differently:

Arnold Gundersen, Fairewinds Associates: […] we are contaminating the Pacific Ocean which is extraordinarily serious.

Evgeny Sukhoi: Is there anything that can be done with that, I mean with the ocean?

Gundersen: Frankly, I don’t believe so. I think we will continue to release radioactive material into the ocean for 20 or 30 years at least. They have to pump the water out of the areas surrounding the nuclear reactor. But frankly, this water is the most radioactive water I’ve ever experienced.

I have to admit that I simply don’t agree. I’m not actually arguing that radiation is good for us but I really don’t think that half the radiation of the world’s banana crop being diluted into the Pacific Ocean is all that much to worry about.

And why we really shouldn’t worry about it all that much. The radiation that fossil fuel plants spew into the environment each year is around 0.1 EBq. That’s ExaBecquerel, or 10 to the power of 18. Fukushima is pumping out 10 trillion becquerels a year at present. Or 10 TBq, or 10 of 10 to the power of 12. Or, if you prefer, one ten thousandth of the amount that the world’s coal plants are doing. Or even, given that there are only about 2,500 coal plants in the world, Fukushima is, in this disaster, pumping out around one quarter of the radiation that a coal plant does in normal operation.

You can worry about it if you want but it’s not something that’s likely to have any real measurable effect on anyone or anything.



  1. It’s worth remembering that among people who work with radioactives as part of their job “becquerel” is jokingly pronounced “bugger all”.

    The best informed comment I’ve seen about the water coming out of the Fukushima reactors is that it’s about as dangerous as household bleach – you wouldn’t want to drink it or paddle in it with bare feet but dilution (as in the entire Pacific) would make it harmless.

  2. If Greenpeace admitted that there’s no reason to worry about low level radiation, they’d have to admit that their climate change panic could be solved by French style nuke building programs.

    This would prove that their windmill and solar panel program, that long antedates the climate fuss, is a senseless waste of money. Thus the chance that they’ll stop their jihad against nukes and radiation is zero.

  3. Nagasaki and Hiroshima are still inhabited cities.
    If the radiation leakage is so serious, you’d think they would have abandoned them decades ago.

  4. Just like a Farad is way too big to be a useful unit, and everything is quoted in nuffs of puffs, radiation should be TBq. 20 TBq – now, doesn’t that sound nice and calm. Twenty terror Becquerels. Argh! Scream! No! Ok, 0.2 PBq. point two petta Becquerels. Even betterer. Petterer even!

  5. “… I’m not actually arguing that radiation is good for us ….”

    Why not? Experiments seem to show that a small amount is essential for healthy life. Google ‘radiation hormesis’.

    If you think that Greenpeace is unhappy about the low levels of leakage from Fukushima, then they are MAD about the concept of radiation hormesis. It is now a well-proven fact, but you wouldn’t think so to read the Wiki, which insists on calling it a hypothesis despite many experiments showing the effect unequivocally.

    • Given that the world was much more radioactive when life evolved, the existence of radiation hormesis is certainly logical.
      And I’ll agree that the evidence certainly seems to support it.

      The argument I find most entertaining is that bathing in hot springs is good for you, as the water is naturally a bit more radioactive. But of course this was more popular in the good old days, when as a health treatment it provided people with the excuse for a nice hot bath.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here


in British English
expunct (ɪkˈspʌŋkt)
VERB (transitive)
1. to delete or erase; blot out; obliterate
2. to wipe out or destroy

Support Us

Recent posts

In Praise Of Benign, Even Helpful, Beneficial, Tax Competition

Richard Murphy tells us that it is not possible for there to be anything other than harmful tax competition. All such competition must, by...

If Women Working Causes Inflation Then Women Must Be Less Productive Workers Than Men

Over at Politico there is the assertion that one reason for past inflation was that women joined the workforce. If there are more people...

The Point Of Inventions Is To Be Able To Use Them, Not Sell Them

This is a common complaint about the British economy, that we can invent things but don;t then go on to make fortunes out of...

An Interesting Method Of Avoiding Tax Rises – Just Borrow

Those progressives over at American Prospect, it is possible to wonder whether they've quite got the basics of how the economy works at times. So,...

The Truth About Biden’s Tax Plan – It’s Based Upon Lies

So Richard Murphy told us how lovely the Biden corporate tax plan is over at FT Alphaville. I pointed out in the comments that...

Recent comments