“Fukushima – Untold stories” by Toru Bové a world famous ex Greenpeace activist and superbiker – A presentation



NewsVoice is proud to present Toru Bové a world known now ex Greenpeace activist and also famous superbiker formerly known as Toru Suzuki. Toru will write exclusively for NewsVoice about the Fukushima tragedy. He will report on what really happened in Fukushima and describe what the real consequences were and still are due to the radioactive fallout in and around Japan, stories not told in the controlled mainstream media. Toru Bové hereby present himself in his own words.

By Toru Bové (all articles) | Toru’s Facebook profile | Photo collage contains photos by Andrew Taylor (Greenpeace) and Annika Östman (Vetenskapsradion, SR)

My name is Toru Bové, a Japanese Superbike racer, entrepreneur and former Greenpeace activist. My family and I fled from Japan after we faced Fukushima, the worst nuclear accident in human history.

Before going into Fukushima in details, I would like to introduce myself a little more. Because a set of unique experiences I had prior to Fukushima made me see through things most people miss. In all, I’m not a typical Japanese man as you would expect.

I’ve been racing Superbikes, the motorcycle version of a touring car for decades so I had some mechanical background to understand how earthquakes and tsunamis can destroy nuclear plants.

And after 10 years as a nutrition product sales person, I also had basic knowledge to understand health risk caused by radioactive particles released by the nuclear accident. One of the dangers with radioactive particles is that they are absorbed inside the body like nutrients.

On top of that, I had this unique experience of encountering a national security police operation. In fact, my colleague and I, as Greenpeace activists, were arrested by 75 police officers accused of being a “national threat”. One month before the event, we had exposed the worst scandal of Japan’s infamous whale-hunting program and we happened to push the “right button”. Then things went really big, and bad, then some people call me one of “Tokyo Two” and even so until today.

I had a chance, in a hard way, to learn how the Japanese authorities work in a case against an alleged “national threat” or “public’s enemy”, plus how mainstream media works closely with the government. I have to admit that I was very naive before these events unfolded.

When Fukushima happened, I had a good sense to read what was going on under the surface. I knew how the government would downplay damages and hide the truth from the public eye. I knew how the public would be fooled by them. I knew it would get really bad if we didn’t leave the country. First three weeks, I had a mix of special experience I will never forget. Some of them would be very difficult to publish. But those made me to decide leaving my very own country for good.

Today, full four years from the accident, all three of my children are growing up as Swedish kids, and my Danish-Japanese wife Maiko and I now call Sweden our new home.

Though we don’t have many things to yell or complain about here, we are so disappointed to find so very little coverage of the Fukushima incident in Scandinavia. If you compare to Germany, for one good example, it’s almost NO meaningful coverage here in Sweden. Nothing. And this small beautiful nation has 10 nuclear reactors, all very very old. We can’t be so naive about this issue anymore. It’s your big problem but also mine now.

As relatively new immigrant to Sweden, I would like to tell you about the true face of Fukushima. I believe many people would see the thing differently if they knew what I know. In the end, we have to face a tough reality in Sweden as well. If we don’t wake up by completely understanding Fukushima, we never will…

By Toru Bové

Toru will soon return to NewsVoice with articles about Fukushima and the risks with nuclear power.



Toru Bové in the media

The Japan Times: ‘Tokyo Two’ fight to clear names

Green Lifestyle Magazine: Ecowarrior: Toru Suzuki Interview by Emma Bowen

Treehugger: Greenpeace’s Tokyo Two Convicted of Whale Meat Theft by Japanese Court

Demotix: Greenpeace Activists Demand Justice for Tokyo Two

SR: Vetenskaplig valjakt ifrågasätts av aktivister och forskare

Greenpeace: Unjust sentence for Japanese anti-whaling activists

Greenpeace: Justice for the Tokyo Two – justice for whales, coming our way?

Greenpeace: The Tokyo Two: Whaling, Activism, and Human Rights

Greenpeace: Tokyo Two Appeal rejected by Japanese High Court

Lämna Twitter - Byt till Twitter och friheten
  • I kommentarsfältet har varje person ansvar för sin egen kommentar. Se reglerna.
  • Donera gärna till NewsVoice, en gratistidning som är beroende av läsarnas stöd.
Notify of
22 Kommentarer
Nyast Mest röstad
Inline Feedbacks
Se alla kommentarer
30 mars 2015 kl 07:31

Welcome to Sweden and Newsvoice! Sweden, not any better than any other country, concerning the government and the ties to the media, I’m afraid, probably worse, but, welcome in any case! Your experiences would be good to hear about.

Pål BergströmD
30 mars 2015 kl 14:28

Thank you. Your view is needed. Things are getting very bad. I know how bad the situation are in Fukushima and the Pacific, from other sources. Looking forward to read more from you.

30 mars 2015 kl 23:00

Completely unneccessary to leave Japan because of Fukushima. All experts agree that it won’t be possible to discern any health consequences because the increase in background radiation is fairly minor even in small evacuated areas of the fallout plume.

Kalle 01
Kalle 01(@kalleh)
Reply to  jeppen
31 mars 2015 kl 08:20

Somehow, I suspect that the “experts” that you are reffering to are all persons who would lose their income and/or their position in society if they didn’t have that view.

Reply to  Kalle 01
31 mars 2015 kl 09:24

I would hope so. Fear mongering and lying should not be tolerated.

[Warning – this comment could be regarded as breaking the rules of commenting / moderator]

30 mars 2015 kl 23:43

Toru, I produce a weekly program on nuclear issues, Nuclear Hotseat. From this article, I believe that your English is excellent. If that is indeed the case, I would like to interview you for my show. Email me at: , and check out the show (196 episodes archived, in production since three months after Fukushima began) at: http://www.NuclearHotseat.com. Thank you!

Toru Bové
Toru Bové
31 mars 2015 kl 00:38

Jeppen, I’m not sure who you call as “all experts”. It’s totally different from what I hear from “all experts” I refer. What I know is: All experts funded by nuclear industry and/or Japan government have single voice. “Fukushima radiation is small and there is no health risk”. That’s a crap.
My side of experts keep warning us about “internal exposure” which “pro-nuke experts” purposely ignore. I hope people like you would change perception after reading my postings for few months.
So take your time…
FYI, my family and I are happy by leaving Japan and we already made tough decision to not going back because of radioactive contamination and some other issues. I left the area, 250km from Fukushima plant, where countless hot-spots are in neighborhood, for good. There are enough reasons to do that.

Reply to  Toru Bové
31 mars 2015 kl 09:29

With “all experts” I mean people such as the UN panels and academics of which most have tenure and can speak their mind freely, radiation experts and so on. They all include “internal exposure” to the degree it deserves, which is not much.

I guess your “all experts” include Busby, Gundersen, Caldicott, Mangano and other like them?

No, sorry, there are no real reasons related to nuclear power for you to leave Japan, other than to make a name for yourself in the anti-nuclear circles, of course.

[Warning – this comment could be regarded as breaking the rules of commenting / moderator]

Toru Bové
Toru Bové
Reply to  jeppen
31 mars 2015 kl 17:17


I often tell people that if they smoke and drink regularly, no kids and don’t care much about future of own and people’s, I have no reason to stop them going to Japan today. They can enjoy life as others do in Tokyo. It’s a free world and it’s their own risk.

But if they have small child or have a chance to have one in future, I would try to convince them to not go. And I’ve got a lot of stories to tell. Then, it’s up to them to decide.

I know my own story, evacuation from 260km zone, would create new debates here and there. You are not first one to tell me I had no such a risk. And I can understand why people say that.

Those people belong to end of “food chain” of information where I was bit more close to top of it. To be honest, I don’t care those people really. I hate wasting my time to convince those people. I do care who care our children and their future. Since 311, I have been spending my time to help and save them when and where possible.

My message is clear.

Is Fukushima’s radiation danger to people ? Of course.

Are people in Tokyo facing risk ? Yes, in some degree. And it’s too much for me to leave.

Are Japan government, TEPCO and global nuclear industry covering up Fukushima ?
Yes. Everyday bases.

Reply to  Toru Bové
31 mars 2015 kl 18:36

Tokyo has negigible radiation levels from Fukushima. It would be impossible to cover up those radiation levels, since they are easily measured by readily available and cheap geiger counters. I have to ask – since you’re shunning Tokyo, how come you moved to Sweden, which is one of the countries hardest hit by Chernobyl? It doesn’t make sense.

Toru Bové
Toru Bové
Reply to  jeppen
31 mars 2015 kl 19:45

Do you mean “negligible”. If so, that’s totally wrong.

Again, I have no clue where you rely information from. Don’t ever read anything from IAEA and those craps. I read those sometime to read where they want to drive public. I don’t trust them at all.

Without going to details now, I see people who say ” Tokyo is safe” are not worth listening.
They are uninformed or biased, or being part of nuclear industry.
I hope you are just one of many who are uninformed.

We have many hot spots around Tokyo city. Some of them are extremely high. But government ignores those measurements by citizens and uses “own” data.
Meaning, those information by private person/organization would not come up on sanitized mainstream media often.

In my personal opinion, I think no one shouldn’t say ” Tokyo is safe ” unless they have very strong evidence to prove. Radioactive plumes have hit Tokyo number of times. There are massive amount of radio active particles fell over 38 million people in Tokyo area.

But it’s all up to each individual to judge “how much risk” for him/herself.
It’s actually very difficult for them as they only can measure air dose with cheap geiger counter. In best cases, measuring soil and food.

I have judged the place was too danger for me and my family so we left.
And I still remain to same judgement today with more data and information to back up. Number of my friends are suffering after staying too long.

Tokyo has negligible radiation ? Kidding.

BTW, The reason I ended up in Sweden is my wife is Scandinavian. And I’m aware of Chernobyl contamination here of course.

Reply to  Toru Bové
31 mars 2015 kl 20:42

You repeat that I’m not worth listening to, and that I’m biased, uninformed or part of the industry. Yet you keep responding to me with conspiracy theories that would have me believe that UN agencies, national and foreign government officials, journalists and academics all collude in an enormous cover-up to put people in harms way.

In my personal opinion, Toru, no one should say “Tokyo is unsafe” unless they have very strong evidence to back it up. Extraordinary claims needs extraordinary evidence. What you are telling me is not such evidence. I find it far more plausible, to put it mildly, that a few anti-nuclear activists misreport geiger readings.

So, you are aware of Chernobyl contamination? So why then do you run from a small nuclear disaster to a big one? It makes even less sense if you are aware of it. And hey, if Japanese residents are suffering now (how, pray tell?), what can we expect in they way of long-term health evidence? When can we start seeing epidemiological data concerning differences between areas with differing contamination levels? Or will that data be covered up as well?

Peter Grafström
Peter Grafström
Reply to  Toru Bové
1 april 2015 kl 00:07

Without citing quantitative measurements and their geographical distribution it is of little value for decision-making. It would be valuable if those critical against the officially published data, pick a suitable offical source and point out which of their data isnt correct and what you suggest are the correct values. That would be more enlightening.

The following doc http://www.jnto.go.jp/eq/eng/04_recovery.htm cites dose rates from 2015 Fukushima 0,22uSv/h
New York 0,094uSv/h
Tokyo 0,033uSv/h.
Average appears to be 0,083uSv/h among ten different large cities.
Normal global average background is cited as 0,27uSv/h
including effects from ingestion space earth and radon.
Judging from the heightened value for Fukushima of 0,22 compared with the average 0,082, I estimate that Fukushima ought to have an increase of 0,22-0,082=0,14
So compared with an average normal background of 0,27 we would expect an increase to 0,41uSv/h ~50% increase. (I was arbitrarily assuming that Fukushima before 2011 had the global average level)
In other cities the data shown are down to normal as far as I had the ambition to sample the data.
I was just citing from this arbitrary document to get a rough idea of what we’re talking about.
I dont beg anyone to trust Japans official data which I believe I now cited but please tell us what’s wrong in quantitative measure.

Reply to  Peter Grafström
1 april 2015 kl 06:59

Where I live in Sweden I will have on average 0,24 to 0,11 on my geiger counter. Once even 0.5, but it quickly sank to around 2.0. (I live in the middle of Sweden.)
I check pretty often.

Toru Bové
Toru Bové
Reply to  Linda
1 april 2015 kl 15:33


Though it’s, sadly, only one broad system available for public, government’s monitoring system remains controversy for many since 311.

Now, they claims all posts are in 1m level from ground. But certain period of time after 311, those were installed at very high point. As one example, Yokohama, the city I’m from, placed monitoring post at 23m point from ground…

They are also number of questions raised such as;

Measurements conducted by citizens, including Greenpeace, have shown that many monitoring post have lower numbers than their own measurement. Some gaps were too great to ignore.

There are some reports about witnessing decontamination work done around monitoring posts.

There was time some monitoring posts had two system beside. Government has fired first contractor, and installed other system next.

Though I’m very skeptical with government’s data, there are many personals and organization who keep citing the data including a food delivery service company, White Food.

White Food uses this data as reference. They send automatic warning email to members, most are concerning mothers, when some posts show increase. On their site, there are colored dots on Japan map. Red is 2 times of last 30 days average, yellow is 1.5-2 times, orange is 1.25-1.5 times, blue is less than 1.5 times.

Anyway, to me, air dose measurement doesn’t mean much. At least, I can not depend on it as it’s not reliable method to judge wide area.

In my case, primary reason to decide leaving is food safety.
I will write about it in my article. I hope you sense something from reading it.


I don’t know where you live and I don’t know what kind of geiger counter you use,
but it sounds very high to me.

I have this “Pocket Geiger” made by Japanese NPO group which you can connect to iPhone. It only cost 700kr including posting to Sweden, but it’s good enough to use.

I lived in south of Skåne and now live in north of Skåne.
In both locations, it shows 0.05-0.07. Very few time, 0.08-0.09. I never had higher than 0.07 if I do two or three measurements in same spot.

More important thing is that how much radioactive particles you have in air, water and food. And it’s not easy to do those measurement in daily basis for ordinary people.

Reply to  Toru Bové
1 april 2015 kl 21:13

At home now it’s between 0.16 and 0.2. Today I was in a town near by and it showed 0.4 for a brief time, and then it went down to arounf 0.24. My counter is called “RADEX”. I wonder if it’s something wrong with it…

Toru Bové
Toru Bové
Reply to  Toru Bové
2 april 2015 kl 15:08

Linda, I’m not sure if you really have high radiation or your device has a problem.

Best simple way is using another device and doing measurement with two in side by side.

There are people in Japan using number of devices in same location as theirs are “cheap” and don’t have calibration way. We have hundreds of youtube clips showing Japanese citizen’s own measurements. But with this reliability and accuracy problem, we can not take the numbers as we see.

Even though RADEX is popular in Japan, they sometime see varied results. Some people use new plastic bag every time they use it, because they want to avoid contaminated dust from the device. If you used your device naked, meaning no cover, at some hot spots or over high radioactive dust in past, you may have your device “contaminated” and it shows higher number every time.

Some people use some radioactive test sample to check if their device are reliable. But it’s not recommended for all people. Comparing with other devises is much easier though it is not best accurate ways.

If you have a friend or two who has geiger, that’s good. If not, try to convince a friend who has iPhone or Android phone to buy “Pocket Geiger”. It’s only less than 700kr and arriving in a week. Then do some measurement with your device at number of locations. Hope it works.

31 mars 2015 kl 23:57

“Jeppen” you are accusing Toru Bové of being a conspiracy theorist and I had to erase a couple of ad hominem comments from you. From now on you need to comment on the same terms as Toru Bové, that means with full name and traceable background.

I suspect you can’t or will not do that because that may reveal you are a lobbyist or PR-man working for or with the nuclear industry. I hope I am wrong.

If you mention the word conspiracy I will block you out of this discussion since that word is ONLY used in order to discredit your opponent and creating a bad reputation.

Torbjörn Sassersson, Editor

Reply to  Red
1 april 2015 kl 00:13

Torbjörn, you apply double standards. I’m as polite as (or more than) my opposition. Also, it’s a bit ironic when you (just as Toru) do an ad hominem by accusing me of being part of the conspiracy. I will absolutely not comment with my full name, but as for traceable background, do read my blog over at nejdetkanviinte.se. I never expect to be long lived in alarmist and anti-nuclear environs such as yours anyway; you people are always quick to block voices of reason. Bye, bye!

Reply to  jeppen
1 april 2015 kl 06:53

I expected exactly this would be your response. I have been moderating forums and article comments sections for 13 years and this IS the common pattern of a “debunker” on tour or typical internet shill. The content of your blog and the total black out of your identity confirms even more.

So who will be the next incoming debunker taking over your seat? Mr M.K.?


Peter Grafström
Peter Grafström
Reply to  jeppen
1 april 2015 kl 13:45

I checked your blog and it was worth it. But you are wrong about cancer risks. There is no low level cutoff like you seem to imply when you speak of the lowest level tied to cancer.
There has been speculations about activation of the immune system by small amounts of radiation but there is nothing scientific about it. The mechanism of radiation is believed to be that fast secondary electrons in sufficient numbers manage to simultaneously destroy both halfs of the DNA so intrinsic repair is knocked out. The immune system doesnt have any remedy for that.

Reply to  Peter Grafström
1 april 2015 kl 14:01

Peter, thanks for your reply. I’m not welcome here, so please find me in some other forum for a reply.