Why the Japanese Government Should Take Over the Fukushima Nuclear Plant 211
Lasrick writes "The Japan Times has an opinion piece about the seriousness of the situation at Fukushima and the incompetence of Tepco. The article makes the case that it's time for the Japanese government to step in and take control of the plant to facilitate clean-up. Quoting: 'Japan has been very lucky that nothing worse has occurred at the plant. But luck eventually runs out. The longer Tepco stays in charge of the decommissioning process, the worse the odds become. Without downplaying the seriousness of leaks and the other setbacks at the plant, it is important to recognize that things could very quickly get much worse. In November, Tepco plans to begin the delicate operation of removing spent fuel from Reactor No. 4. There are 1,300 used fuel rod assemblies in a pool above the reactor. They weigh a total of 400 tons, and contain radiation equivalent to 14,000 times the amount released by the Hiroshima atomic bomb. The spent-fuel pool, standing 18 meters above ground, was damaged by the earthquake and tsunami and is in a deteriorating condition. It remains vulnerable to any further shocks, and is also at risk from ground liquefaction. Removing its spent fuel, which contains deadly plutonium, is an urgent task.'"
IAEA. Not Japan. (Score:3, Insightful)
The Japanese govt. doesn't feel the necessity to take this on to date, evidenced by their unwillingness to even consider it.
They've already blown oversight, transparency, and emergency response planning. They're not going to suddenly become competent.
Get the IAEA in there, use the UN to pressure them to accept international oversight. There are over 12,000 fuel rods 100 feet in the air.
There's really no more time for trusting the Japanese government.
Waste-Annihilating Molten Salt Reactor (WAMSR) (Score:2, Interesting)
Just build a Waste-Annihilating Molten Salt Reactor (WAMSR) next to the site, problem solved.
http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/MIT-Develops-Meltdown-Proof-Nuclear-Waste-Eating-Reactor.html [oilprice.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Russ Wilcox, Transatomicâ(TM)s new CEO estimates that it will take eight years to build a prototype reactor
Seems like the perfect solution to our current problem! :p
Re: (Score:2)
If the Japanese government had started planning this immediately after the earthquake, by now it would only be 10 years from completion.
Re: (Score:2)
Three things.:
Re: (Score:3)
why don't you learn some nuclear chemistry before spouting nonsense? Bombarding transuranics and actinides in spent nuclear fuel with neutrons will cause fission of heavy long-lived isotopes into shorter lived ones, the end result is a waste that needs storage for about three centuries rather than tens of thousands of years.
Re: (Score:3)
Where do you plan to get those neutrons from? Fissile uranium-233/235 and some plutonium isotopes are about the only good source of energetic neutrons we have and guess what? fissioning them to create the neutron flux needed to destroy the various problematic actinides produces more of those pesky actinides. The high neutron flux needed to burn actinides damages reactor structures, piping, containments etc. and activates them with neutron capture producing isotopes like Co-60 which makes decommissioning at
Hyperbole isn't necessary (Score:3, Insightful)
Really now, any time nuclear anything is mentioned in comparison with Hiroshima, you know that someone is trying to scare you. I believe the SI unit would be Becquerels, not "Hiroshimas".
Re: (Score:3)
With regards to this particular situation, Japan could do with a whole lot more scared, to pressure those in authority to get their arses in gear.
Unlikely (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think the government is very likely to take over from TEPCO. TEPCO itself is already practically nationalized due to the vast amounts of money the government has had to pump into it and pay out to those affected by the disaster. By keeping it independent there is someone external to blame for all the problems, which would otherwise be the direct responsibility of the government.
TFA is full of hype but one interesting point that is often missed is worth noting. The earthquake itself damage the plant, and even without the tsunami there would have been a serious accident.
Re: (Score:3)
The Japanese government has been supervising the work TEPCO have been carrying out since the tsunami. Basically they can't spit without permission and anything and everything about the site is reported to the government on a daily basis via the newly-setup Nuclear Regulatory Authority. Exactly what the government could do that TEPCO isn't doing right now I don't know.
As for the earthquake the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi (and Daini ten km south) survived the ground shocks quite well, going into shutdown an
Re: (Score:3)
For one, they could get rid of the people who keep lying to them about the extent of the problem.
two, They have access to more moeny and can get t solving the actual problem.
This is all about how tepco handle everything post tsunami.
And we are starting to see they weren't as unaffected as we were led to believe.
This is why we should build more new tech reactors and they should be run by the government and the electricity sold at cost.
Re: (Score:2)
If they got rid of the people lying they would have to immediately admit it was far worse than previous government estimates, based on those lies, said. As well as embarrassment that would also mean paying out more compensation.
They don't want to pour more money into that giant sinkhole. It's going to cost in the hundreds of billions of dollars range by conservative estimates, and looks set to rocket as decontamination is failing and needs to be re-done in many areas. People are starting to get sick as well
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The area of Japan that's noticeably contaminated (i.e. significantly above background and maybe dangerous to live in for decades) by the Fukushima radiation releases is maybe a thousand square km in extent, or a quarter the size of Rhode Island to put it in terms of the US. A chunk of that is hills and mountains, quite lightly populated to start with. The larger towns in the area tend to be down near the coast for fishing and agriculture and most of those population centres missed the plumes of radioactive
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is a lot of people are not going back. Their jobs and businesses have gone, their homes are in ruin and have lost most of their value. They have been living somewhere else for over two years and have started a new life, with new friends and neighbours. It isn't clear if those towns will return to being viable communities again.
Decontaminating land is a labour intensive and expensive job. Decontaminating the sea might be impossible, so anyone who used to fish or work in a related industry isn't g
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
TFA is full of hype but one interesting point that is often missed is worth noting. The earthquake itself damage the plant, and even without the tsunami there would have been a serious accident.
Really?
The official line from, well, everyone, is that the reactors would have been fine had the emergency generators been able to operate. They were unable to operate because they were flooded by the tsunami. Also note that the emergency generators did turn on after the earthquake, before they were destroyed by the subsequent tsunami. Even then, secondary backup batteries kept the cores cool for 8 hours until the batteries were depleted.
If the emergency generators were not flooded, they could have been
Re: (Score:2)
The reactors were SCRAMed and would have been kept cool by the (redundant) backup generators for an indefinite length of time.
Ideally, you would safely shut down the reactors when running on generator. Running the plant any longer than absolutely necessary on generator power isn't the safest.
Re:Unlikely (Score:4, Interesting)
The reactors were shut down, that is the fission "chain reaction" had been stopped. The problem is that reactors build up fission products in the fuel pellets, assorted isotopes like I-131 and Cs-137 that are radioactive and as they decay they give off energy = heat. Operating reactors like the ones at Fukushima Daiichi produce about 3000 MW of heat when running at 100% power. A few seconds after they were shut down the residual radioactivity was producing only 50 MW of heat. By the time the cooling systems failed a few hours later that was down to one or two MW of heat as the very short-lived isotopes with half-lifes of seconds or minutes decayed away. That heat energy was still enough to react steam with the fuel rod cladding jackets and evolve hydrogen which caused the explosions.
Reactors five and six at Daiichi, both with full fuel loads in place are being actively cooled to this day; they didn't suffer the hydrogen explosions the other four did but they weren't operating directly before the earthquake hit. There were some problems sustaining their cooling operations after the tsunami but they never failed totally.
Re: (Score:3)
Have a look at some of NHK's documentaries on the subject. I don't know if you can watch them online, the go out in English on NHK World. Anyway, they point out that emergency cooling was in fact available but didn't work.
After the earthquake they lost power to their instrumentation. This prevented them from seeing that a valve that needed to be closed was in fact open. In addition some of the pipes carrying cooling water to the cores were damaged. Even though the backup generators were damaged by the tsuna
Government? (Score:2)
Does anybody think our government could have managed the BP oil blowout?
USA might help (Score:4, Insightful)
Major loss of face? (Score:2)
There is no way they are going to ask for help.
France might help too (Score:2)
France might help also. Areva has a lot of experience with nuclear reactors and wastes. They were willing to help during the meltdown, but at this moment Tepco seemed too proud to accept any help from the foreign countries.
They accepted later, as they bought some water filtering equipment to capture radionucleids.
Next time such a disaster occurs, I hope that the host country will not wait to aks help from the most competent companies in the world.
Re: (Score:3)
How about they ask the Americans for help? We have had a lot of experience with nukes
Yeah, let's send teams from the Hanford site. They've had a quarter century's worth of experience in failing to clean up a nuclear mess.
Re:USA might help (Score:5, Funny)
Re:USA might help (Score:4, Interesting)
If you're making a funny joke (
How about they ask the Americans for help? We have had a lot of experience with nukes, (...)
), then you are a really sick bastard.
Re: (Score:3)
How about they ask the Americans for help? We have had a lot of experience with nukes, and could use a chance to prove that we can still do something in the world besides violate international law. If we fuck it up, then you can blame external powers for it.
I think Russia would be the experts, not the US. It's purely ego-centric to think that any nation would just at the US helping them out. BTW, I'm all in favor of disbanding congress, and bringing in another nation to redesign our government. I wonder how that would go over?
Re: (Score:2)
I think Russia would be the experts, not the US.
Yes, and they'd probably charge less too. The current may not be flowing their way, but their oceans are much closer to the problem as well.
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think the US could help?
Next question (Score:3, Insightful)
Who are they going to have do it? I don't know, let's call in the experts at Tepco.
Re: (Score:2)
The could reach out to the global community, something Tepco doesn't want to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember, after the original disaster, there are several examples of on-site plant managers and workers defying their corporate bosses to do things that weren't necessarily in TEPCO's interest, but were definitely necessary to attempt to stabilize the situation, like injecting seawater into the reactor when the distilled coolant level was falling.
If the workers and engineers know their business and
Re: (Score:2)
The could reach out to the global community, something Tepco doesn't want to do.
Citation needed.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it makes a difference. (Score:2)
Nonsense! (Score:3)
If the government would just stop interfering with the free markets the invisible hand and enlightened self interest would take over and do a much better job! We'd be living in a land of unicorns and rainbows in no time!
Also nuclear power is the only reasonable - and environmentally friendly! - solution to our energy problems. * /sarcasm
* - Excluding all those pesky externalities because we all know in the technologically advanced future we'll magically solve all those problems -- also using the power of the free markets! (some conditions and circular reasoning may apply, offer not valid in all states blah blah blah)
Re: (Score:2)
I fear you are overlooking a very serious problem for the world elite: where are you going to find the nori for your sushi that *doesn't* glow-in-the-dark?
TFA Might be Right, But... (Score:2)
The commentary is written by:
Andrew DeWit is a professor in the School of Policy Studies, Rikkyo University. Dr. Christopher Hobson is a research fellow at the Institute for Sustainability and Peace, United Nations University, Tokyo.
Not exactly credentials for someone who should be making the decision on who should do the clean up. Certainly, the government should be monitoring whatever action is taken, and if Tepco is screwing up give them the boot. But, I wouldn't be doing so on the recommendations of t
Japanese government doesn't look good, either (Score:4, Insightful)
the International Nuclear organization's crisis teams and resources should be brought in, given a drawer full of blank checks, and set after it without any more interference by the hacks that caused this catastrophe in the first place.
The real reason (Score:2)
Privatized profits, socialized losses (Score:2)
Yep, it's about time the Japanese gov't steps in and takes charge of this mess. TEPCO has demonstrated they don't know what they're doing. Matters can and will get much worse. There are experts worldwide who can be brought in to help. The Russians have some experience with a meltdown. There are probably some TMI era consultants still around. It's going to get very expensive.
We might ought to help them. It's not just their problem. If those fuel rods catch fire, that radioactivity will be drifting towards ou
Please sign the petition (Score:2)
Please sign the petition over at Whitehouse.gov to get the US to act in getting the Japanese government to allow US/UN assistance in cleaning up the spent fuel pools. This is an urgent need.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/require-united-states-petition-un-and-japan-seek-assistance-removing-spent-fuel-fukushima/LHSB04r0 [whitehouse.gov]
~ X
Maybe Something More Traditional? (Score:2)
Not the government (Score:2)
And Japan is bankrupt.
So let the world that so far ignores the disaster step in.
Make TEPCO leave.
Make Japan cede control.
Have the rest of the world fix it. It's be quicker and less euphemistic.
They could ... (Score:2)
Assuming any survived, that is.
Oversight (Score:2)
If the company is cleaning it up, you have oversight by the government, the government can force the revelation of inconvenient facts, the government can force them to not take unnecessary risks.
But who oversees the government if they're doing it?
disclosure? unpleasant? Japanese government? (Score:2)
surely you jest. that's three lies in one thought.
What? (Score:4, Funny)
The problem was caused by corrupt lying sacks of shit and now you want to let politicians run the show?
That's like exchanging AIDS for terminal cancer!
Re:More government! (Score:5, Interesting)
It is when a corporate entity want the mess taken over.
Is Japan going to resist the drive to socialize the loss of corporations that can't keep their shit together?
Re:More government! (Score:4, Insightful)
Way too late for that. TEPCO is already virtually state owned. If the government hadn't bailed them out people wouldn't have been able to sue them for compensation. Plus the government has been paying benefits to those who lose their jobs and homes around the plant, and for extra healthcare costs, and a whole long list of other stuff.
Nuclear accident costs are always socialized, just like its development was in the first place. It isn't just Japan, in the US plants have $10bn of insurance by law but if you stuck an extra zero on that it would be a fraction of the cost of Fukushima.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd say that this is more of the privatize - nationalize cycle that is favored by big business.
Specifically, the big businesses -- through media shills and lobbyists they have hired -- request the nationalization of their competitors and regulation of the industry that is designed to prevent competition. In turn, when a government, loaded down with such dross, becomes top-heavy, then the big business requests privatization of the profitable sectors, at rock-bottom prices.
Happens all the time.
The real versi
Re:More government! (Score:5, Insightful)
Contrary to popular psychosis, the solution is not always "less government".
Re:More government! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:More government! (Score:4, Interesting)
And, of a company worried about their own profits and which has been doing a lousy job of the cleanup, or a government which is strongly motivated to get it done -- which would you trust?
Corporations do a lousy job of cleaning up messes like this because they're more worried about spin than actually doing the work.
So the whole time BT was saying "oh, it's only a little oil" they knew it was a load of crap -- but they were more interested in laying blame to contractors and spinning the PR.
Me, I'd put far more faith in the Japanese government than the company who operated the plant and has been doing such a bad job of cleaning it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your choice to compare the Fukushima clean up to the Deepwater Horizon spill is telling. While there was considerable incompetence and criminal actions going into the causes, that oil spill was competently handled after t
Re:More government! (Score:4, Informative)
Oh, you mean like this [socialistworker.org]?? Or this [bbc.co.uk]?
How about this [wikipedia.org]:
Sorry, but if you believe what BP has been telling you, you are gravely mistaken.
If by 'completely handled' you mean done badly, incompletely, and we get lied about it sure .. if you mean actually remediating the damage from it, well, you're either delusional or on the payroll.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. You are right, of course ... apparently my fingers decided to do something else.
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh..the government does VERY little. Corporations do things FOR the government with government oversight often by people who used to work in the same corporations they have oversight for.
Giving it to the "Government" to do is not taking corporations out of the picture.
It's like having the discussion concerning the "private" sector launching manned space vehicles...as if NASA did it without the private sector to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right. Of course, without the government, we wouldn't have roads or the internet but I'm sure those things don't matter to you.
Just as much as the government is dependent on the private sector, the private sector is dependent on the government. It goes both ways, skippy.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, without the government, we wouldn't have roads or the internet
I don't accept that as fact. Linking to new markets and simplifying and lowering cost of supply chains would still be in many peoples interest and with all the tax dollars still in their pocket many might opt to fund the construction. It would be slower and probably more chaotic... organic in nature. There would probably be more toll roads, but that's just paying for it differently and more consciously. I would say we probably wouldn't have as "grand" a road system, but the trade off would be more localized
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty big assumptions there considering history is profoundly against you. Contrary to popular belief, there are somethings that are better when the government does them. I know that's a bitter pill to swallow but it's true.
Re: (Score:2)
They do accomplish some things "better", certainly for a short time. As with most monopolies that efficiency tends to wane, only the government doesn't fail and get out of the way for a newer efficient model. This progress also has costs, as I stated. Using "the government does things better" model the solution to symptoms is more government intervention, such as in my example. We now have an efficient cost to cost system of road that is, according to many, a big factor in destroying our environment. Now th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Commercial business can never be and has never been trustworthy when it comes to public safety. Everything from coal mining, gas/oil drilling, "fracking" all the way to nuclear energy requires safety and EVERY industry, when left to their own, has shown they will favor cost cutting/profit increasing over safety. EVERY time. We've seen coal miners killed. We've seen the "strange earthquakes" around areas where fracking has been going on. We've seen the whole BP oil spill issue. We saw Chernobyl (a name
Re: (Score:2)
dude, did you really give Chernobyl as an example of corporate screwup? I mean really? And do you really think that in state owned coal mines in the Soviet block there were no accidents ever? By that logic deadly accidents in military are unheard of and I am pretty sure that's not the case.
Re: (Score:2)
Commercial business can never be and has never been trustworthy when it comes to public safety.
Compared to who? Government hasn't been trustworthy either. I see you mentioned Chernobyl which was government run.
It's all safety related and it's all because people didn't want to spend enough money on safety.
What makes you think more money would have spent effectively? There's so much misunderstanding about what was going on with Fukushima. The reactors were being decommissioned. Then they weren't because the next generation which was going to replace Fukushima was canceled all at once. This shuffling of future plans probably contributed since why should one build a higher seawall for nuclear react
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I love the idea that "government" can just swoop in and fix things it has no expertise on. Government's channel money. Government's don't even do their own jobs effectively...why in the world would you want the government to "take over" a mess like this.
You want the government to throw more money at the problem...fine. If this reflects the opinions of...anybody I sincerely fear for the future of the US.
Re:More government! (Score:4, Interesting)
Sometimes it is, actually.
Sometimes. But probably not in this case. The government of Japan does not have an elite team of nuclear cleanup ninjas waiting in the wings. In fact, they have no expertise in this area. TEPCO's initial response was incompetent, but the government's response wasn't so good either. And the government was responsible for the regulatory system that allowed the accident to happen. TEPCO's constant underplaying of the severity, and withholding of information, is a Japanese cultural thing, and the government would have done the same if not worse. These statements were misleading to westerners, who are used to officials that normally exaggerate problems, but it was not misleading to the Japanese public, who just assume that whatever officials say, the reality is ten times worse.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but they can hire those folks and have motivation to do so.
At this point the Fukushima site is a total write off. TEPCO has no reason to spend any money on it. What should happen is the government should bring in the right folks to fix it, and TEPCO should be forced to pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but they can hire those folks and have motivation to do so.
There are no "folks" to hire. Government is not magic. They do not have a team of super-smart 007 agents ready to pounce on every problem. If they did, they would have used them fix the Japanese economy, which has been mismanaged so badly that it makes the Italians look competent. The half-life of tritium is not going to change by government decree, and there is no secret government issued super glue that is going to fix the leaking water tanks.
The severity of the problems at Fukushima are being publici
Re: (Score:2)
There are no engineers who would accept a higher salary for this project? What universe do you live in?
Sure you can't change what has happened but you can stop making stupid decisions.
Re: (Score:2)
There are no engineers who would accept a higher salary for this project?
There is no secret team on the bench. The most qualified people are already working on it. All that would change would be the bank account their paychecks are drawn from.
Sure you can't change what has happened but you can stop making stupid decisions.
If history is any guide, the decisions would become even stupider. In the aftermath of the Exxon Valdez accident, government pressure forced Exxon to divert limited personnel from using booms and skimmers on ships at sea (where they were not visible to the TV cameras) to the beaches, where they wasted their time wiping oil from individua
Re: (Score:2)
The most qualified people in the world for this all work for TEPCO? Excuse me if based on current performance I find that hard to believe.
I agree that was a terrible move. What should have happened was both. Then Exxon should have been fined nearly into the ground. Instead they still have not really cleaned up.
Re: (Score:2)
The government also pressured Exxon to use chemical dispersant that likely caused more harm that the oil itself.
Do you have a source for that?
Re: (Score:3)
The government also pressured Exxon to use chemical dispersant that likely caused more harm that the oil itself.
Do you have a source for that?
No, because I chose my words poorly. The dispersants were certainly not (as I stated) worse than the oil spill. What I should have said was that dispersants likely made the situation somewhat worse. They are harsh, environmentally damaging chemicals. They make the problem look better by breaking up the oil slicks, but don't actually remove the oil from the environment. The proper role for government is this case should not have been try micromanage the cleanup by steering it toward publicity stunts. I
Re: (Score:2)
There is no secret team on the bench. The most qualified people are already working on it. All that would change would be the bank account their paychecks are drawn from.
For the sake of the argument, lets assume that this is true. The thing is that right now they are acting in the best interest of the small group of TEPCO investors. If government hires them, they will be acting in the best interest of the government and -- presumably -- public. This is a critical difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Fixed that for you. It's like that everywhere.
The argument in favor of gov. takeover is that a government can spend money in a different way and plan in a different way than a company that has to look for profit. That is especially so in a situation like this that is just a costly mess.
Jimmy Carter: Nuclear Cleanup Ninja (Score:2)
Re:More government! (Score:4, Informative)
Yea, pretty much it is. What do you think is going to happen if the government takes over the plant? Does the government have nuclear workers? Any expertise at all in this area? No? So they are going to hire whomever has the best knowledge of the facility... oh, Tepco. So now, not only is Tepco still in charge of the cleanup, they're now getting paid to do it and the responsibility for the result is now off their shoulders and there's endless layers of red tape they have to get through to actually do anything.
A more appropriate solution would be to send in government inspectors, have them on-site 24/7 and reporting back to government officials. Make Tepco pay their wages as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Or they could hire the best and brightest to oversee the engineers at TEPCO.
Do you think it was the engineers or the bean counters that fucked this up?
Of course TEPCO should pay the full cost of this, in addition to fines and possible criminal penalties.
Re: (Score:2)
In Quebec we get steamed hot dogs but we get a filet mignon bill.
And you still complain? Then what will you do when Quebec runs out of steam?
Re: (Score:2)
Totally irrelevant comment. Regulation in rail transportation is a federal responsability. I hope you aren't Canadian, neither Quebecer, otherwise you are showing how ignorant you are.
Then, to make my comment about more or less government. I believe it is not to Japan's governement to take over TEPCO and clean the place. Japan's governement responsability is to monitor closely the process, make regulations, enforce them and make sure TEPCO is doing ITS job.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
If the engineer is uncompetent, he will cause the train to crash, perhaps killing hundreds of people. Not ot worry though, bcause the free market will kick into action, and the survivors and relatives of the survivors will
Re: (Score:2)
TEPCO were just as responsible, if not more so. So "more corporations" apparently isn't the answer either. What do you propose to do?
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, so "the market" is supposed to fix this? (Score:3)
Yeah, free enterprise can solve any problem. I am sure there are plenty of entities out there that would love to have a bunch of radioactive waste to play with. I bet they would pay top dollar for it. Only....I think we may not want them to have it. But hey! After they spread it all over Tokyo or NYC, maybe thats actually a business opportunity! Think of the manufacturing revenues we could accrue in coffins.
Re: (Score:2)
The solution is more government!
No, the solution is complete deregulation. If achieved, the free market fairy will grant the commercial operators the wish of taking as much profit as efficiently as possible and, if something wrong happens, just do nothing ('cause that would go against their duty to shareholders).
You see, in spite of still existing regulation, Tepco is already heralding the new age.
Re:More government! (Score:5, Interesting)
Having some direct experience with both the culture and government of Japan and of the nuclear industry, I can say [opine] that the Japanese government is completely incapable of handling the task.
If you ask me, I say send the US NRC over to Japan to take the situation over and train Japan's NRC to operate in the same way as the US NRC.
The US NRC is a royal pain in the ass. But they are that for a very good reason. And believe me when I tell you, they aren't just up in the utilities' faces, they are up in EVERYONE connected faces. The Japanese regulatory agency will ONLY communicate with the Japanese utilities and not the manufacturers of equipment, not the people who did construction or planning or any of it. So for the Japanese regulatory agency to ignore those other factors? It convinces me they aren't prepared to see a much larger picture when it comes to nuclear safety.
I am told this aspect of the Japanese nuclear regulatory agency is changing, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Meanwhile, the Japanese habit of never saying more than they should and always holding back information leads me to believe it's actually worse than the mainstream media will say and likely MUCH worse.
Nuclear safety isn't just local. It's not just national. It's a global concern. And if some group of people internationally were to say "hey, this is a global concern. Let's make a global nuclear regulatory agency" I would actually agree to the idea simply because the danger knows no borders. And believe me when I say it's not easy for me to be in favor of -- I am against global government in general. Completely.
Re: (Score:2)
And believe me when I say it's not easy for me to be in favor of -- I am against global government in general. Completely.
So you probably want a global insurance pool, not a regulatory agency. The market forces would actually support this - potential payouts are so large that a global pool may be necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think we need "medical insurance" for general use in the first place.
1. More money should be spent on prevention and better food standards in the US. We have some REALLY crappy standards.
2. Once prevention and standards are better addressed, the need for "constant" medical attention for so many will be gone leaving mostly weird cases, child birth and random emergencies.
3. Once demand for medical care drops the medical insurance industry shrinks to what it once was.
4. On top of that, the pharmaceuti
Re: (Score:2)
Obligatory XKCD: http://xkcd.com/1258/ [xkcd.com]
There, FTFY.
Re: (Score:2)
Hipster libertarians? I get that that both groups are unlikable, but in what way does the "freedom solves everything" crowd reflect the slightest bit of hipster qualities?
Re: (Score:2)
Please, while that may be true on some level, on the level of the positions they directly assert, they clearly believe in universal freedom. Now whether that premise actually leads to the conclusions they claim it does, and whether the actual policy positions they support reinforce that universal freedom are up for debate(and are debated all the time), but you really don't need to resort to "The people I disagree actually believe something less respectable than what they claim to. Look at how easy to dis
Re: (Score:3)
Well, I don't know Mr. Andrew Dewit and Mr. Christopher Hobson, but obviously they don't know technically what they are talking about. They should have restricted themselves to policy or economic matters. In this comment I outlined why these fears are so unlikely to happen: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4141363&cid=44704783 [slashdot.org]
Nonsense, the arrays are already encased in boron cages in the fuel storage racks, they will not go critical even if they are not cooled. Cooling is needed to keep the fuel arrays mechanically sound so they couldn't release the radioactive materials inside them. There is no serious damage in the fuel arrays in the spent fuel pool of unit 4. The damage in each of the 4 units destroyed is very different, so a single event making all of the remaining fuel release their radioactive materials is highly unlikely, and even if it happens, they have in their favor that the fuel in the spent fuel pools have already undergone 2.5 years more of cooling and decay of its radioactive material since the accident, so any new emergency in the pools will be easier to manage than in 2011. The fire in unit 4 was caused by the hydrogen released by the damage in the core of unit 3, not by any release from the fuel in its spent fuel pool. Still, there are a bunch of morons of TEPCO's management that should be behind bars due their criminal incompetence and negligence.
The worst possible things about Fukushima I have already happened. The leaks from the storage thanks, the damage to reactors buildings, the evacuation, the radioactive contamin