Japan Nuclear Disaster Was Preventable, Panel Says - Polidicks

[QUOTE] TOKYO, July 5 (Reuters) - Japan's Fukushima nuclear crisis was a preventable disaster resulting from "collusion" among the government, regulators and the plant operator, an expert panel said on Thursday, wrapping up an inquiry into the worst nuclear accident in 25 years. Damage from the huge March 11, 2011, earthquake, and not just the ensuing tsunami, could not be ruled out as a cause of the accident, the panel added, a finding with serious potential implications as Japan seeks to bring idled reactors on line. The panel criticised the response of Fukushima Daiichi plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co, regulators and then Prime Minister Naoto Kan, who quit last year after criticism of his handling of a natural disaster that became a man-made crisis. "The ... Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant accident was the result of collusion between the government, the regulators and Tepco, and the lack of governance by said parties," the panel said in an English summary of a 641-page Japanese document. The report - issued hours after a reactor began supplying electricity to the grid for the first time in two months - put an official imprimatur on criticism of the cosy ties that have bound a powerful nexus of interests known as the "nuclear village". Regulators, it said, had been reluctant to adopt global safety standards that could have helped prevent the disaster in which reactors melted down, spewing radiation and forcing about 150,000 people from their homes, many of whom will never return. "Across the board, the Commission found ignorance and arrogance unforgivable for anyone or any organisation that deals with nuclear power. We found a disregard for global trends and a disregard for public safety," the panel said. The panel's finding that seismic damage may well have played a role could affect the restart of reactors that were taken offline, mostly for maintenance and safety checks, in the months since Fukushima. Japan is one of the world's most quake-prone country's. "We have proved that it cannot be said that there would have been no crisis without the tsunami," Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismologist and panel member, said in the report. The panel urged strict checks on all reactors against guidelines set in 2006, and said Japan's 21 oldest reactors, whose construction was approved before guidelines were set in 1981, may be at similar risk from a big quake as Fukushima Daiichi. Experts have said that an active fault may lie under Kansai Electric Power Co's Ohi plant in western Japan, whose No. 3 unit began supplying electricity to the grid early on Thursday. Ohi's No. 4 unit will come on line later this month after the government approved the restarts to avoid a power shortage. "This means that all of Japan's reactors are vulnerable and require retro-fitting, calling into question the hasty decision of the (Prime Minister Yoshihiko) Noda cabinet to restart reactors before getting the lessons of Fukushima," said Jeffrey Kingston, Asia studies director at Temple University in Tokyo. The report by the experts - one of three panels looking into the Fukushima disaster - follows a six-month investigation involving more than 900 hours of hearings and interviews with more than 1,100 people, the first such inquiry of its kind. [B] MISSED OPPORTUNITIES[/B] Many of the shocking details of the disaster, including operator Tokyo Electric Power Co's (Tepco) failure to prepare for a big tsunami and the chaotic response by the utility and government, have already been made public. In an effort to repair tattered public trust in the regulatory regime, the government will in a few months set up a more independent nuclear watchdog that will then draft new safety rules. The report pointed to numerous missed opportunities to take steps to prevent the disaster, citing lobbying by the nuclear power companies as well as a "safety myth" mindset that permeated the industry and the regulatory regime as among the reasons for the failure to be prepared. Resource-poor Japan has for decades promoted nuclear power as safe, cheap and clean. Atomic energy supplied nearly 30 percent of electricity needs before the disaster. "As a result of inadequate oversight, the SA (Severe Accident) countermeasures implemented in Japan were practically ineffective compared to the countermeasures in place abroad, and actions were significantly delayed as a result," it said. Tepco came under heavy criticism in the report, partly for putting cost-cutting steps ahead of safety as nuclear power became less profitable over the years. "While giving lip service to a policy of 'safety first', in actuality, safety suffered at the expense of other management priorities," the team said. In a report on its internal investigation issued last month, Tepco denied responsibility, saying the big "unforeseen" tsunami was to blame - though it admitted that in hindsight it was insufficiently prepared. Tepco, struggling under huge costs for compensation, cleanup and decommissioning, was effectively nationalised last month with a 1 trillion yen ($12.53 billion) injection of public funds. The panel also said it had found no evidence to back up Kan's allegation that Tepco had planned to abandon the tsunami-ravaged plant as the crisis risked spinning out of control. But fans of Kan, a former civic activist who angered the powerful nuclear industry when he became a harsh critic of atomic power after the disaster, questioned that finding. "I think the crisis would have been far worse if Kan hadn't intervened," Temple University's Kingston said. ($1 = 79.7950 yen)[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/05/japan-nuclear-disaster_n_1650264.html?1341493871[/url]

That article seems to be missing the part where they said it was "a profoundly man-made disaster".

While I appreciate them admitting that better preparations could have been made (as is the case 99% of the time), why are people so unwilling to discuss how phenomenally rare and powerful the disaster was? I know people like to have someone else to blame other than Mother Nature, but come on! A 9.0 earthquake lasting longer than any earthquake in recorded history, followed by a staggeringly massive 27' tsunami that simply overwhelmed even the most outlandishly tall flood barriers they had. Yeah, theoretically they could have raised the generators even higher than they were to keep the coolant flowing, but the fact of the matter is that nobody could really predict these disasters occurring, much less at the same time.

Because earthquakes and tsunami's are totally man-made disasters. /sarcasm

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36634080]While I appreciate them admitting that better preparations could have been made (as is the case 99% of the time), why are people so unwilling to discuss how phenomenally rare and powerful the disaster was? I know people like to have someone else to blame other than Mother Nature, but come on! A 9.0 earthquake lasting longer than any earthquake in recorded history, followed by a staggeringly massive 27' tsunami that simply overwhelmed even the most outlandishly tall flood barriers they had. Yeah, theoretically they could have raised the generators even higher than they were to keep the coolant flowing, but the fact of the matter is that nobody could really predict these disasters occurring, much less at the same time.[/QUOTE] This. The mother nature threw everything it had on the powerplant, the fact that it didn't get obliterated and go chernobyl was a magnificent show of engineering and construction.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36634080]While I appreciate them admitting that better preparations could have been made (as is the case 99% of the time), why are people so unwilling to discuss how phenomenally rare and powerful the disaster was? I know people like to have someone else to blame other than Mother Nature, but come on! A 9.0 earthquake lasting longer than any earthquake in recorded history, followed by a staggeringly massive 27' tsunami that simply overwhelmed even the most outlandishly tall flood barriers they had. Yeah, theoretically they could have raised the generators even higher than they were to keep the coolant flowing, but the fact of the matter is that nobody could really predict these disasters occurring, much less at the same time.[/QUOTE] At least from now on nuclear regulatory commissions will have better motivations for more stringent guidelines for the construction and maintenance of these reactors. This actually reminds me of all of the innumerable safety features modern reactors have. My personal favorite are the spring-loaded graphite rods that are designed to stop a nuclear reaction dead in the off event that [I]gravity fails[/I].

[video=vimeo;16315458]http://vimeo.com/16315458[/video]

So wait, you mean they could have prevented it buy not building the plants in a place so regularly fucked in the ass by natural disasters that they built PAPER houses for the longest time? [B]NO WAY.[/B]

TL;DR: People were stubborn as fuck and didn't want to say they were having problems and need help.

I remember Tepco constantly downplaying the severity of the situation to the public when really it only got worse. I can understand the building specifications not being prepared for such a monster earthquake and tsunami but there response to the situation seemed pretty poor.

Thank you captain hindsight.

[QUOTE=soccerskyman;36634677][video=vimeo;16315458]http://vimeo.com/16315458[/video][/QUOTE] For some reason, this is autoplaying even with the panel closed.

[QUOTE=Saxon;36634774]I remember Tepco constantly downplaying the severity of the situation to the public when really it only got worse. I can understand the building specifications not being prepared for such a monster earthquake and tsunami but there response to the situation seemed pretty poor.[/QUOTE]Sounds like the complete opposite to me, building any sort of energy plant next to fault lines sounds like they were trying to build another unsinkable ship.

As far as Im aware there were no radiation related deaths... how is this a nuclear disaster at all?

[QUOTE=Scotchair;36635756]As far as Im aware there were no radiation related deaths... how is this a nuclear disaster at all?[/QUOTE] Lets forget all the land which is now basically uninhabitable for some time.

[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;36634080]While I appreciate them admitting that better preparations could have been made (as is the case 99% of the time), why are people so unwilling to discuss how phenomenally rare and powerful the disaster was? I know people like to have someone else to blame other than Mother Nature, but come on! A 9.0 earthquake lasting longer than any earthquake in recorded history, followed by a staggeringly massive 27' tsunami that simply overwhelmed even the most outlandishly tall flood barriers they had. Yeah, theoretically they could have raised the generators even higher than they were to keep the coolant flowing, but the fact of the matter is that nobody could really predict these disasters occurring, much less at the same time.[/QUOTE] probably becuase they are thinking that they should have thought of that happening

Wow, this changes everything!

[QUOTE=viperfan7;36636385]probably becuase they are thinking that they should have thought of that happening[/QUOTE] Well, that's hindsight for you, but it's difficult to prepare for something that has never happened in recorded history. The plant was more than capable of withstanding the earthquake (even though it wasn't designed to) and even a moderate tsunami, but nobody was expecting the tsunami to reach the baffling height of 27'.

Hindsight is always 20-20

Of course everythings preventable. 9/11 would have been prevented by not electring president bush

They knew this place had a high risk of severe earthquake. Just because we haven't had such a powerful one in a buckload of time doesn't make it impossible. I would have understood if a meteor struck it and the plant wasn't prepared for such a thing, but I'm sorry, this is a risky sismic area, they should have made it 99.99% safe on this side. And they definitly shouldn't have made it waterside. We're talking about km²s of land irradiated here, not a simple factory going boom.

I thought the title was talking about the atomic bombs, mostly because I watched this video earlier in the day [video=youtube;BfJZ6nwxD38]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfJZ6nwxD38[/video]

[QUOTE=The Baconator;36645464]I thought the title was talking about the atomic bombs, mostly because I watched this video earlier in the day [video=youtube;BfJZ6nwxD38]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfJZ6nwxD38[/video][/QUOTE] What the christ.