Jiji Tsushin (3/13/2013) headline reporting on the survey was even more dire: ３６％が「米国に重大な被害」 - 36% think "grave damage in the US".
36%? Grave damage?
Here's Rasmussen page on the survey on the 2nd anniversary of the nuclear accident in Japan (3/11/2013):
36% Think Radiation From Japanese Nuclear Disaster Hurt the U.S.
Monday, March 11, 2013
It’s been two years since an earthquake and tsunami triggered an explosion at Japan’s Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, and more than a third of Americans think radiation from that accident is likely to have done significant harm to the United States. Still, most Americans believe nuclear power plants at home are safe.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 36% of American Adults believe it is at least somewhat likely that radiation from the Fukushima nuclear power plant did significant harm to the United States. However, that includes just nine percent (9%) who think that scenario is Very Likely. Fifty percent (50%) of adults say it’s not likely the radiation did any harm, including 17% who say it’s Not At All Likely. Sixteen percent (16%) are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The survey of 1,000 Adults nationwide was conducted on March 9-10, 2013 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
The wording of the survey question:
1* It’s been two years since the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan. How likely is it that radiation from that plant did significant harm in the United States?
2* How safe are nuclear power plants in the United States – very safe, somewhat safe, not very safe, not at all safe?
3* Should more nuclear power plants be built in the United States?
Coverage of the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident by the major media outside Japan, including the US, pretty much ended by the end of March 2011. I was writing many posts each day starting March 11, 2011, and distinctly remember the foreign coverage dropped off significantly around March 23, 2011. There was nothing more to explode, nothing exciting to see or hear. By the time April rolled around, there was hardly any coverage. That was my unscientific impression, anyway.
If I were to answer the first question, I would answer "not sure". NOA did publish the data on contamination from the rain after the Fukushima I Nuke Plant accident, but the EPA in California didn't bother even measuring radioactive particles in the atmosphere. EPA in northern California relied on "volunteers" to collect air filters at the measuring stations, as it fit their "lifestyle", and the air filters were sent by mail to a laboratory in Alabama. I haven't seen any systematic, official measurement of agricultural produce except in the very early days (EPA stopped emergency monitoring on May 2011).