It wasn't just the tsunami that wrecked Fukushima
Over in Japan, somebody's telling the parliament the plain truth about the triple-meltdown nuclear disaster. Even without the tsunami, they say, the plants would likely have blown from the earthquake. And the government, the plant operator, and the Japanese people are to blame:
As well as detailing the specific failings related to the accident, the report describes a Japan in which nuclear power became "an unstoppable force, immune to scrutiny by civil society."Its regulation was entrusted to the same government bureaucracy responsible for its promotion," the commission said.
Contradicting claims by Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), the operator of the plant, the report said that "the direct causes of the accident were all foreseeable prior to March 11, 2011....
"What must be admitted -- very painfully -- is that this was a disaster 'Made in Japan,'" the report said. "Its fundamental causes are to be found in the ingrained conventions of Japanese culture: our reflexive obedience; our reluctance to question authority; our devotion to 'sticking with the program.'"
| Posted at 4:08 AM | Permalink |
|
Comments (9)
"an unstoppable force, immune to scrutiny by civil society.
"Its regulation was entrusted to the same government bureaucracy responsible for its promotion," the commission said."
JK: Kinda like the condo weasels in Portland!
And light rail.
And streetcars.
Thanks
JK
Posted by jim karlock | July 5, 2012 5:08 AM
"Its regulation was entrusted to the same government bureaucracy responsible for its promotion," the commission said.
Gee, just like our NRC. What could possibly go worng?
Posted by Old Zeb | July 5, 2012 6:21 AM
Kinda like the condo weasels in Portland!
And light rail.
And streetcars.
Just the same, really. Except for the deaths, injuries, illnesses (present and future), radioactive contamination of air, land, sea and food supply. Yeah, no difference at all.
Posted by Allan L. | July 5, 2012 7:04 AM
I think there's a little too much "Made in Japan" guilt and not enough, "Oh, by the way, General Electric's design was a big problem, too."
Putting the spent fuel pool above the reactor was arguably the worst design flaw in history - depending on how this plays out. It meant any explosion below threatened the structural integrity of the pool and that's where we're stuck right now.
Oh, and the term "spent fuel pool" is a little misleading. It also contains some unused fuel.
So, if this badly damaged building collapses, and the pool drains, the worst days of this nightmare could still be ahead.
Posted by Bill McDonald | July 5, 2012 7:55 AM
One good thing about plutonium is that it's heavy, so it sinks. Of course, you'll need to forego that romantic, fish dinner unless you're really into that glowing ambiance thing.
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/plutonium-found-fish-deep-water-japan-shore
Posted by Max | July 5, 2012 9:55 AM
Bill, unused fuel is not hot and would constitute very little hazard.
The hot stuff with screaming high activity and Pu would be the "spent" fuel rods (spent in quotes because it's only depleted in U-235 -- it's now enriched in Pu-239, Cs, Sr, etc.)
I'll trust your word on it because you do your homework, but I've never heard of anyone, anywhere, storing fresh fuel assemblies in spent fuel pools. It makes no sense. It would be like trying to store fresh eggs in one of the SamRand's overflowing slop buckets, turning something that would usually be easy and painless to handle into a much bigger problem.
Posted by GA Seldes | July 5, 2012 10:21 PM
Not trying to be to snarky and off topic, but how come Mr. Karlock always thanks us?
At first I thought it was a bit rude, but now I just giggle.
You're Welcome,
JO
Posted by Jo | July 5, 2012 11:55 PM
Just read the links.
When reading about this I constantly think, "Well, I guess our government isn't the only one with it's head on backwards."
Posted by Jo | July 5, 2012 11:56 PM
I've never heard of anyone, anywhere, storing fresh fuel assemblies in spent fuel pools.
I believe unit 4 was undergoing refueling at the time of the earthquake. That may account for both spent and fresh fuel being in the pool.
Posted by Jack Bog | July 7, 2012 3:25 AM