Obama: “We Do not Expect” Harmful Radiation in U.S.

President Obama just made his first public remarks since Friday on the unfolding crisis in Japan, and the state of America’s own nuclear industry. Much of his statement amounted to an expression of sympathy and solidarity. “Disasters like this remind us of our common humanity,” Obama said.

But the crux of Obama’s appearance was likely his explicit assurance that Americans needn’t panic over the still-spiraling catastrophe at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. “We do not expect harmful levels of radiation to reach the United States,” Obama said (that includes Hawaii, Alaska and American territories). There’s no reason for Americans to take “precautionary measures beyond staying informed,” he added–presumably including the hoarding of potassium iodide pills. (Too much of the alarming news coverage from Japan has failed, I think, to make this point as clear as it could be, and it appears that the White House agrees: Obama repeated this part of his statement in full for emphasis.)

Obama also assured that U.S. nuclear plants “have undergone exhaustive study and been declared safe for any number of extreme contingencies,” though he is ordering a Nuclear Regulatory Commission review of plant safety. That’s not a prelude to putting the brakes on nuclear power, though, which Obama called “an important part of our own energy future.”

Ultimately, what may have been most interesting is what Obama didn’t say. He did not express any frustration with the Japanese government or the Fukushima plant’s owners, who are not proving to be completely reliable sources of information. Not did he indicate whether he’s aware of any scenario under which the U.S. might, in fact, encounter harmful radiation. (Most experts seem to call it very unlikely. I’m not sure whether they rule it out entirely.)

As Obama walked back into the White House, a reporter shouted a question about Libya. (The U.N. Security Council is scheduled to vote on a no-fly zone resolution at 6pm today.) The president ignored it. It tells you something that, in a certain sense, the crisis in Japan may be the easier subject for him to address.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / White House

    Obama’s Persuasive Powers on Gay Marriage Manifest in Maryland

    When President Obama endorsed gay marriage earlier this month, the media grappled with two basic political questions: Was his personal “evolution” a case of  a politician transparently following a national trend toward accepting same-sex unions (accelerated, perhaps, by his chatty number two), and would it hurt his re-election chances by alienating socially conservative voters like black churchgoers? Sure, there was a recognition that it marked a gratifying moment for gay marriage advocates—as well as some grumbling about the President’s view that it remains a state issue, not a federal one. But by and large, there were few suggestions that one man, even the President, would shift public opinion on the issue or affect public policy. Based on a new Public Policy Polling survey out of Maryland, it seems this possibility was underestimated.

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Cherokee Zero

    Apparently, Massachusetts voters don’t mind that Elizabeth Warren foolishly identified herself as a Native American early in her academic career–it was, apparently, a case of family pride and wishful thinking about a Cherokee ancestor. That’s good. Warren may be the best public figure when it comes to explaining the depredations of the financial industry and [...]

  • afguy

    U.S. nuclear plants “have undergone exhaustive study and been declared safe for any number of extreme contingencies,”
    .
    I would imagine that the SAME could have been said for their reactors too… at least BEFORE this once-”every-1200-years” quake and resulting aftermath occurred.
    .
    Too much “Nah… that could NEVER happen here because we’re US” for my taste.
    .
    And WHY should we trust the word of our nuclear industry lobbyists and financial representatives any more than they have learned to trust theirs?

  • apr2563

    Crowley: Why the quotes around “expect{ed}”? Are you disappointed that Obama didn’t give you and other journalists a chance to pundicize about a subject where your knowledge is limited? The main question on most ot the Villagers minds is how can we make this disaster a political story. Why on earth would Obama ruminate on harmful radiation when there is nothing to indicate the US will encounter a problem? Just to allow the press to gin up hysteria?
    .
    Why would Obama publicly criticize the Japanese government or plant owners when we need their cooperation? Do you have some inside information about what the dialogue is privately?

  • nflfoghorn

    Most presidents ignore shouted-out questions. You make it sound as if his lack of recognition surprised you.

  • http://tisias.wordpress.com tisias

    It could NEVER happen: the quintessential human flaw in not expecting the worst.
    .
    There is a reason that we should all have emergency kits and potassium iodide and backups for our backups for our backups.
    .
    Called preparing for the worst.

  • apr2563

    Remember Reagan’s cupping his ear and smiling beatifically while ignoring the shouted questions?

  • square1

    I don’t think there is a situation in which the U.S. could encounter harmful levels of radiation. Japan is just too far away.

    And everything that I have seen to date strongly suggests that the greatest danger even to the Japanese public is not from the reactors themselves. Even full core meltdowns would largely be contained, as designed.

    By far, the largest danger is from the exposure of the spent-fuel rods in the “pools” (or former “pools” if the water is gone). The #4 reactor core was removed several months ago and has been stored, like other spent fuel, outside of the containment vessel.

    IMO, these spent fuel pools have always been the Achilles heels of nuclear power plant safety. In theory, the fuel rods just sit there, under water and perfectly safe. And yet, in the unlikely event — e.g. tsunami, earthquake, or act of terrorism — that the water level drops and the rods are exposed, there is no containment vessel as a fail-safe.

  • apr2563

    Update: Thanks for altering your headline. You might mention you updated it.

  • therewillbesnark

    Preparing for the worst should be tempered with reason. Those people who believed the Y2K hype also “prepared for the worst.”

  • sacredh

    I’m not buying sheets of plastic, duct tape or potassium iodide pills. F**k it. I don’t want a geiger counter or anything else that will cause me to lose sleep. If I see the neighbors running around and waving their arms (and it’s not just a revival going on again), then I’ll worry.

  • http://erieangel.wordpress.com erieangel

    Does Obama mean to say there are unharmful levels of radiation?

blog comments powered by Disqus