Fukushima residents call for criminal charges against nuclear officials
19 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Tokyo (CNN) -- The executives of the Japanese utility that owns the stricken Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant and a number of the country's government officials should go to jail, according to a complaint filed by more than 1,000 local residents on Monday.
A total of 1,324 people lodged the unusual criminal complaint with the Fukushima prosecutor's office, naming Tsunehisa Katsumata, the chairman of Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) and 32 others.
The complaint argues that the 33 TEPCO executives and government officials are responsible for causing the nuclear disaster that followed the March 11 earthquake and tsunami and exposing the people of Fukushima to radiation.
A spokesman for TEPCO said the company had not received the complaint yet and therefore couldn't immediately comment on the matter.
The Fukushima prosecutor's office will assess the complaint and decide whether it will bring criminal charges against the 33 people it names.
"The Fukushima nuclear accident is the worst corporate crime in Japan's history and caused significant damage to the life, health and assets of the people of Fukushima and the rest of Japan," the group said on its website, dubbed the Plaintiffs Against the Fukushima Nuclear Plant.
The written complaint, filed with the Fukushima District Public Prosecutors Office, also named former TEPCO president Masataka Shimizu
The written complaint says the officials failed to prepare for the disaster, despite the number of earthquakes in Japan and the threat of a tsunami to Fukushima.
They also say the delay of data on the spread of radiation from the System for Prediction of Environmental Emergency Dose Information, or SPEEDI, caused further exposure of the community to radiation. The complaint accuses the executives and government officials of professional negligence resulting in death and injury.
"We lost our homeland, filled with beautiful nature, and our irreplaceable community. We shoulder the heavy burden of a divided local community and we are sitting in the midst of a suffering which shall never end," said the group.[/QUOTE]
Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/11/world/asia/japan-nuclear-complaint/index.html?hpt=wo_bn4[/url]
Useless cries.Wasn't their fault a huge earthquake caused a tsunami that hit the reactor.
As terrible as the accident was, I doubt anyone expected the events which happened in Fukushima to ever happen.
[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;36329824]Useless cries.Wasn't their fault a huge earthquake caused a tsunami that hit the reactor.[/QUOTE]
Ban earthquakes.
Because, you know, nuclear reactors are built to take an earthquake and a tsunami :downs:
[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;36329824]Useless cries.Wasn't their fault a huge earthquake caused a tsunami that hit the reactor.[/QUOTE]
It's even funnier because it wasn't the reactor that was the problem at all. The whole plant survived the earthquake, and the tsunami wasn't even a problem for the reactor. What broke on the power plant was the generators. What really killed the Fukushima plant was the lack of electricity. The power plant needs electricity to power the systems that cool the reactor. When the earthquake hit, the power plant went off the grid, which is fine because they can just make their own electricity with the generators on site. The problem was that the generators were on the first floor of a building right next to the concrete wave barrier. The waves only went over the wall by 2 or 3 meters, but the generators flooded. This left the power plant completely without power and cooling; that's when shit hit the fan.
Funny how the disaster has nothing to do with the safety of the reactor but just poor planning.
[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;36329824]Useless cries.Wasn't their fault a huge earthquake caused a tsunami that hit the reactor.[/QUOTE]
They should be held liable for the fact that their reactor didn't have the appropriate safeguards to international standard levels, as a fully protected modern reactor is a behemoth that would laugh away the earthquake and tsunami, along with the cries of "green" activists.
Fukushima was old and should have been decomissioned / updated ages ago, nuclear power is clean and pretty safe, but only as long as you follow proper security measures, such as the 4 backup generators and the like. (fukushima didn't have them)
[QUOTE=Irespawnoften;36330109]Because, you know, nuclear reactors are built to take an earthquake and a tsunami :downs:[/QUOTE]
Amazingly, a modern reactor actually can when kept to proper security levels. It might have to deactivate itself for a while, but it would withstand it without leakage.
I forget but I think it was stable and there wasn't any danger until an aftershock hit..
[QUOTE=Itsjustguy;36329824]Useless cries.Wasn't their fault a huge earthquake caused a tsunami that hit the reactor.[/QUOTE]
You make money with a businessmodel that puts other people's health in danger - you pay if it does.
Why shouldnt you? You made enough profit, if it goes bad you are responsible.
[QUOTE=BloodYScar;36330398]You make money with a businessmodel that puts other people's health in danger - you pay if it does.
Why shouldnt you? You made enough profit, if it goes bad you are responsible.[/QUOTE]
If if the "goes bad" part is due mostly to an act of god?
Calculate that part and see if its worth the risk? You guys are seriously defending the typical
"Oh shit i couldnt see that it could go wrong, im not responsible" excuse?
If you build a nuclear plant on earthquake territory you gotta bargain for a disaster.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36330416]If if the "goes bad" part is due mostly to an act of god?[/QUOTE]
I think that it's mostly due to the fact that the plant desperately needed updating due to extreme age (plans were drawn up pre Chernobyl and it didn't meet modern standards) and that they are responsible as they likely could have prevented it through proper maintenance.
It wouldn't be so bad if the plant was fucked either way, but the plant would have likely stayed fine if it had been modernised.
Here, there was a 1990 report on how it was insufficiently equipped, and apparently they hadn't done nothing by 2004, so it's likely that this trend kept up.
[url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-16/japan-s-reactor-risk-foretold-20-years-ago-in-u-s-nuclear-agency-s-report.html[/url]
It was negligence on the part of the managers imo.
[QUOTE=Irespawnoften;36330109]Because, you know, nuclear reactors are built to take an earthquake and a tsunami :downs:[/QUOTE]
Well I suppose in a region like the one it was in, it's not asking too much for them to take Earthquakes/Tsunamis into account when they build them so things like the Fukushima disaster wouldn't happen. Can't really blame them for skipping out on it, but it does seem like a senseless thing to forget about in Japan.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;36330416]If if the "goes bad" part is due mostly to an act of god?[/QUOTE]
Then you sue the shit out of god.
sure, lets just sue anyone who owns property that gets fucked by natural disasters that in effect harm us too
That reactor hadn't had a security/safety checkup in years, because it wasn't being maintained very well. If it had been, neither of these would have been an issue.
unless there's significant proof that the government officials had a part to play in this, i doubt this will be taken seriously.
If you build a nuclear reactor in a earthquake hotspot like Japan, it should be able to take a lot of shit without falling apart and irradiating a large area of land.
[QUOTE=squids_eye;36333324]If you build a nuclear reactor in a earthquake hotspot like Japan, it should be able to take a lot of shit without falling apart and irradiating a large area of land.[/QUOTE]
That's exactly what it did. As EdTheFirst said above, the plant completely withstood both the earthquake and the tsunami; the only reason something went wrong was because the tsunami (which, I remind you, was an unprecedented 27 feet high) flooded the generators and disabled power to the cooling systems. The Fukushima plant going critical is almost the definition of a "freak accident."
[QUOTE=Terminutter;36330500]I think that it's mostly due to the fact that the plant desperately needed updating due to extreme age (plans were drawn up pre Chernobyl and it didn't meet modern standards) and that they are responsible as they likely could have prevented it through proper maintenance.
It wouldn't be so bad if the plant was fucked either way, but the plant would have likely stayed fine if it had been modernised.
Here, there was a 1990 report on how it was insufficiently equipped, and apparently they hadn't done nothing by 2004, so it's likely that this trend kept up.
[url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-16/japan-s-reactor-risk-foretold-20-years-ago-in-u-s-nuclear-agency-s-report.html[/url]
It was negligence on the part of the managers imo.[/QUOTE]
I'm requoting this because people are missing the point. I'm seeing posts in this thread pointing out the obvious about the power being cut and an "act of god" and all that jazz, but not trying to think beyond that. The problem with this particular plant is that they could have taken more precautions to prevent this from occurring in the first place. Nuclear plants are supposed to have back up methods in the event of catastrophic failure, for what ever reason. The article quoted here points out that the Japanese body responsible for checking up on these plants stated back in 2004 that the Tokyo Electric Power Company, the people running the Fukishima plant, were not taking adequate precautions. As far as those interpreting the actions of the company could tell, they figured that it wasn't worth sinking money to update the plant and get more effective safeguards against a natural disaster they thought wouldn't happen in the way it did.
Alot of people's livelihoods got wrecked by this, and I don't blame them for taking action if it appears the company didn't take adequate precautions. The company ain't going to have an issue with the earthquake- they'll recover in time. I can't say the same about those who had to leave their homes and start over again- they aren't going to have it easy like the company.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.