1,415 sue builders of Fukushima nuclear plant

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

  • 4

    JeffLee

    They're on the wrong track. The accident was due to failures in the cooling system. Whoever designed and sited the main and backup cooling systems are the ones who should be punished.

  • -10

    jeff198527

    I agree, but think that the whole thing was an act of nature.

  • 9

    zichi

    The Fukushima nuclear plant was extensively damaged by the earthquake including major damage to the reactors. The plant was destroyed by the tsunami which followed. The overall responsibility for the nuclear disaster lies with TEPCO which has addmitted the responsibility. The nuclear disaster could have been avoided if TEPCO hadn't put profits before safety.

    It's almost three years since the disasters and time TEPCO paid compensation to all the victims of the nuclear disaster.

    While its good to question the legal position of the reactor builders probably the case will be dismissed.

  • 3

    FizzBit

    The Fukushima plant has largely stabilized since the accident,

    a. Resistant to change of position or condition; not easily moved or disturbed:

    My morning laugh. Thanks Associated Press and Mari Yamaguchi for that bit of disinformation.

  • 4

    Peacetrain

    Without a doubt Tepco should be paying out. And any executives who were in charge before 3/11 should be prosecuted as they didn't take necessary steps to ensure safety.

  • 3

    ReformedBasher

    Without a doubt Tepco should be paying out. And any executives who were in charge before 3/11 should be prosecuted as they didn't take necessary steps to ensure safety.

    Agreed.

  • 8

    wanderlust

    @jefflee - TEPCO themselves sited the plant lower than the 20 m elevation recommended by GE. As this was Japan's first plant, they left the design to GE, but they were adamant that they were not going to pay to pump water 20 m uphill, their job was to generate electric it, not use it. This was revealed in 1996, when the minutes of the planning meeting were publicised. They know exactly who made the decision.

  • -2

    sangetsu03

    The Japanese governmnet itself created the standards to which the plant was built. The government specified the the height of the tsunami protection walls, and these specifications were all met. Unfortunately, the waves were much bigger than government planners had expected.

    It is Tepco's fault that the backup generators were not located in a secure space, and they are damingly at fault for not keeping the backup battery system supplied with fresh, fully charged batteries. Whoever was supposed to be doing regular load checks on the batteries carries a large share of the blame for the disaster.

  • 2

    gogogo

    Can we sue Tepco for installing substandard water tanks that will only last 2 years.

  • 0

    horizon360

    Toshiba and Hitachi declined to comment on the lawsuit, saying they have not received the legal documents."

    Declining to discuss a pending legal action is well advised (because any public comments can be introduced in the court as evidence). A simple "we cannot make any public comment at this time" is always the appropriate response to media inquiries. However, stating that "the legal documents have not been received" as a excuse for not commenting on a lawsuit is patent nonsense. All parties to lawsuits are "served" with a copy of the "legal documents" before the case is filed with the court. Here again we see the unfortunate tendency of Japanese organizations to be wholly unprepared to handle crisis management situations - and instead resort to denial of knowledge as their front line public relations strategy.

  • 0

    onedragon

    "The Fukushima plant has largely stabilized since the accident," What planet are these people living on? It has not been stabilized. It is getting worse day by day.

  • 2

    forzaducati

    And don't forget the internal memos that were found under the rug of the Tepco Old Boys Club, mentioning that the repeated IAEA warnings and recommendations to upgrade the damned plant were put aside for reasons, and I quote, that "daijoubu, daijoubu da yo, nothing can go wrong due our Japanese superior technology". Well, that display of arrogance bit them in the a$$ real bad. Wonder what those folks have to say now.

  • 1

    ka_chan

    It nuts to sue the builders when TEPCO refused to implement safety upgrades and didn't train their technical staff properly. After 3 Mile Island, recommendations were made to improve the cooling systems. Not implemented by TEPCO. After it was learned that tsunami waves possibilities were much higher than thought in 2007, TEPCO decided to study the issue. TEPCO never had their staff simulate an actual crisis and there the staff didn't know there in the middle of a meltdown until it was too late. The staff didn't know that if you send extra water in, you should be seeing steam come roaring out like a jet engine. Instead they thought that light puffs of steam which indicates a severe lack of water and possible meltdown, indicated that the reactors were getting enough water.
    Things change in 40 years, parts and systems need to get upgraded, and most of all, people properly trained.

  • -3

    VicMOsaka

    JeffLeeJan. 31, 2014 - 07:38AM JST They're on the wrong track. The accident was due to failures in the cooling system. Whoever designed and sited the main and backup cooling systems are the ones who should be punished.---------------------------------------------------------

    The reason there were failures in the cooling system and power supply to the pumps was due to the Stuxnet virus which was planted in the system.There was no critical damage from the tsunami or earthquake.The public have been fed a lot of disinformation over Fukushima. Contrary to what most people have been told, the generators never got swamped by water.

    I recommend people search " Jim Stone." He is very well versed on nuclear reactors and design and has special information on the Fukushima power plant and it's design. I will have to archive this as JT in the past has deleted my contraversial posts. The information is extensive.

  • -1

    CH3CHO

    The defendant will lose due to Article 4 of the following law.

    Genshiryokusonngaino baishouni kannsuru houritu

    (Law on Compensations of Damages of Nuclear Power)

    Article 3. If nuclear damage is caused by operation of a nuclear plant while the nuclear plant is in operation, the operator of the nuclear plant is liable to compensate the damages, UNLESS the damage was caused by an extraordinary natural disaster or by social rioting.

    Article 4. In the case the previous article applies, no other person but the operator is liable to compensate the damages.

  • 3

    BNlightened

    On 27 February 2012, NISA ordered TEPCO to report by 12 March 2012 regarding its reasoning in changing the piping layout for the emergency cooling system. These changes were made after the plans were registered in 1966 and the beginning of construction. The original plans separated the piping systems for two reactors in the isolation condenser from each other. However, the application for approval of the construction plan showed the two piping systems connected outside the reactor. The changes were not noted, in violation of regulations

    In 2002, TEPCO admitted falsifying safety records for unit 1. The scandal and a fuel leak at Fukushima Daini forced the company to shut all 17 of its reactors. A power board distributing electricity to temperature control valves was not examined for 11 years. Inspections did not cover cooling systems devices such as water pump motors and diesel generators.

    On 30 October 1991, one of two backup generators of reactor 1 failed, after flooding in the reactor's basement. Seawater used for cooling leaked into the turbine building from a corroded pipe at 20 cubic meters per hour. On 29 December 2011, TEPCO publicly admitted that the room was flooded through a door and some holes for cables, but the power supply was not cut off by the flooding, and the reactor was stopped for one day. One of the two power sources was completely submerged, but its drive mechanism had remained unaffected.

    In 2007, TEPCO set up a department to supervise its nuclear facilities. Until June 2011 its chairman was Masao Yoshida, the Fukushima Daiichi chief. An 2008 in-house study identified an immediate need to better protect the facility from flooding by seawater. This study mentioned the possibility of tsunami-waves up to 10.2 metres (33 ft). Headquarters officials insisted that such a risk was unrealistic and did not take the prediction seriously.

    All these failures and many more we'll probably never know about...are due to the reactors' designers?? No. They are clearly due to TEPCO's repeated and willful negligence, as well as the Kan government's asinine response to the emergency. As the Economist concluded on the matter: "The operating company was poorly regulated and did not know what was going on. The operators made mistakes. The representatives of the safety inspectorate fled. Some of the equipment failed. The establishment repeatedly played down the risks and suppressed information about the movement of the radioactive plume, so some people were evacuated from more lightly to more heavily contaminated places."

  • -1

    Jason Santana

    These people are just trolling. Find the leader and it will all go away!!

  • 1

    goldnugget

    onedragon,agreed!

  • 0

    sengoku38

    The plant operated for over 40 years, so there was nothing wrong with the original building. These people are just wasting their own time.

  • -1

    Cricky

    is a landmark challenge of current regulations that give manufacturers immunity from liability, immunity for manufacturers....so no matter how dangerous a product is, how failed or how much damage a product may cause...immunity!!! Company's have more rights than individuals, government ministers have more money than those who vote for them. Now that is balance?

  • -4

    Heda_Madness

    Zach I,

    You're the only person that I've seen claim that the earthquake caused the problems at Day I chi. In fact I've read on Forbes that it's unquestionably untrue.

    What evidence do you have for it to be the case?

  • 1

    Magnet

    I don't blame the builders. I blame TEPCO management for cost cutting for profit over recommended safeguards against natural disasters. Sue them!

  • 6

    wanderlust

    @heda_madness - a number of employees wrote of seeing the pipes rupture following the earthquake, so the emergency cooling water systems (gravity powered) had already lost their integrity. Whistleblowers and former staff also wrote of having to use heavy machinery to move pipes into position for welding, due to design and manufacturing deficiencies, thus the pipes were already under stress. Just search for it - it's out there...

  • -1

    Strangerland

    Just search for it - it's out there...

    It's your argument and your claim, so if it's out there, it's up to you to show where it is.

  • 2

    Cricky

    The alarms for a breach of containment were sounding off before the Tsunami hit, it was damaged, it was denied (unbelievable! a denial of fact) BBC were showing explosions but the government said its OK? Wanderlust is right, there are so many sources to see and read as to factual events that ( it's unbelievable people still trust the Gov). There might be more to come but we might not find out as it may be now a state secret and the press club really do not want to make trouble. Aahhhh Democracy Middle Ages style...got to love it.

  • 4

    zichi

    In recent developments TEPCO discovered a major flow of highly radiated water in the No3 reactor MSIV room, or Main Steam Isolation Valve, the most important piece of equipment next to the containment vessel.

    If the leak is coming from the MSIV because it was damaged by the earthquake then it makes for a very serious design problem, especially since same type reactors are operational.

    The level of radiation inside and near the No3 is too high to allow workers to enter to check the source of the leak.

    It is a very major concern if the MSIV and/or its ancillary systems failed in the March 2011 accident, because it would have stopped or slowed the cooling of the reactor which led to the nuclear meltdown of it.

    Tweets coming from workers at the plant are suggesting that the Main Steam Isolation Valve was damaged by the earthquake,

    Instead of talking about restarting the nuclear power plants in Japan, we would need to stop all reactors in the world to deal with the problem, just like when we stopped PWRs after the Three Mile Island accident.

    Its impossible for workers to enter the No3 reactor but its also very difficult for robots to enter because its a tight space with numerous pieces of equipment.

    The radiation levels are measured in sieverts/hour.

    TEPCO video of the water leak in the N03 MSIV Room http://youtu.be/WDC5PNS9bsY

  • 0

    Ian Duncan

    They are seeking compensation of 100 yen each

    Moderator, is this a typo?

    • Moderator

      No, it's correct. It is just a symbolic amount.

  • 1

    kurisupisu

    The design of the four affected Fukushima reactors “has proven to be safe for more than 40 years around the globe,” White said. Really? Is that why the safeguards failed within a minute at Fukushima? And so safe that nuclear plants cannot be insured as the damages from a nuclear accident are INCALCUABLE

    Fukushima and Chernobyl sites will still be dangerously active after Mr White is but a memory.....

  • 5

    wipeout

    You're the only person that I've seen claim that the earthquake caused the problems at Day I chi. In fact I've read on Forbes that it's unquestionably untrue.

    If you haven't seen it claimed elsewhere, you have been selectively blind about this disaster. This is a quote from the Diet Investigation Report published in July 2012:

    *We conclude that TEPCO was too quick to cite the tsunami as the cause of the nuclear accident and deny that the earthquake caused any damage. We believe there is a possibilility that the earthquake damaged equipment necessary for ensuring safety, and that there is also a possibility that a small-scale LOCA occured in Unit 1. We hope these points will be examined further by a third party. (see Recommendation 7)

    Although the two natural disasters - the earthquake and subsequent tsunami - were the direct causes of the accident, there are various points in the unfolding of the event that remain unresolved. The main reason for this is that almost all the equipment directly related to the accident is inside the reactor containers, which are inaccessible and will remain so for many years. A complete examination and full analysis are impossible at this time.

    TEPCO was quick, however, to assign the accident cause to the tsunami, and state that the earthquake was not responsible for damage to equipment necessary for safety (although it did add, "to the extent that has been confirmed", a phrase that also appears in TEPCO reports to the government and to the IAEA). However, it is impossible to limit the direct cause of the accident to the tsunami without substantive evidence. The Commission believes that this is an attempt to avoid responsibility by putting all the blame on the unexpected (the tsunami), as they wrote in their midterm report, and not on the more foreseeable earthquake.

    Through our investigation, we have verified that the people involved were aware of the risk from both earthquakes and tsunami. Further, the damage to Unit 1 was caused not only by the tsunami but also by the earthquake, a conclusion made after considering the facts that: 1) the largest tremor hit after the automatic shutdown (SCRAM); 2) JNES confirmed the possibility of a small-scale LOCA (loss of coolant accident); 3) the Unit 1 operators were concerned about leakage of coolant from the valve, and 4) the safety relief valve (SR) was not operating.

    Additionally, there were two causes for the loss of external power, both earthquake-related: there was no diversity or independence in the earthquake-resistant external power systems, and the Shin-Fukushima transformer station was not earthquake resistant.*

    http://warp.da.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/3856371/naiic.go.jp/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/NAIIC_report_lo_res10.pdf

  • 0

    kaimycahl

    Why don't the government sue TEPCO for the people who are affected then use the proceeds of the money to rebuild those areas affected and peoples lives? >

  • -5

    Heda_Madness

    So the conclusive evidence is that there is a possibility?

    I would say that there would be a strong possibility that if it hadn't been for the tsunami knocking out the back up power, causing untold damage and flooding the site with water then they could have prevented any escalation.

    But none of that supports a claim that Fukushima was extensively damaged in the earthquake or that there was major damage to the reactors.

  • 0

    Star-viking

    Hiroshima Syndrome suggests some of the "big" evidence for earthquake damage actually shows that the whistleblower does not know how Boiling Water Reactors work:

    Mr. Kimura’s interpretation of the data immediately following the earthquake seems to be based on misconceptions relative to BWR operating phenomena. He says that as soon as the quake ceased, “about 30 percent of coolant inside the core started flowing backwards and that after the coolant flow returned to the normal flow direction, the core flow fluctuated and eventually became less than zero.” If he had any operational training or experience with a BWR, he would have known what really happened.

    During full-power operation of a BWR, a massive amount of steam is constantly being produced inside the fuel core of the reactor vessel. Two large pumps are constantly recirculating the water flow through the core to uniformly admix the steam with the water. The monitored steam/water level is actually several feet above the fuel bundles showing the top of the mixture. When the reactor experiences a full, rapid automatic shutdown (SCRAM), the steam is quickly washed from the fuel core. Indicated water level necessarily drops due to the volume of steam no longer in the core area. Reactor operators and operation’s engineers call this phenomenon “shrink”. A reasonable analogy would be what happens when a pan of hot liquid boils-over on the household stove. When the pan is removed from the heat, the boiling almost immediately stops and the roiling mixture of bubbles and hot liquid rapidly “shrinks” down to only hot fluid.

  • 0

    Utrack

    @kaimycahl

    J Govt owns over 50% of TEPCO due to the trillions of Yen Bailout of 2012. So J Govt can't sue themselves. I think the 1,415 could have put some demands in their suet like entombment of those damaged reactors left open to the elements because asking for Yen no matter how small does not alleviate the problem of Contamination.

  • 3

    zichi

    The 2011 earthquake caused extensive damage to the plant, its equipment, the reactors and off site power and water supplies. It also damaged the roads making it difficult for vehicles like fire engines from reaching the plant.

    The power plant lost all off site power, and in addition the towers for the off site power supplies to reactors 1-4 collapsed during the earthquake because TEPCO had built them on a known dry river bed which meant the ground wasn't strong enough even for a predicted earthquake. It was more than three weeks before those power lines were restored.

    The site also lost all off site clean water supplies because of the lost of power and also because of earthquake damaged to underground pipes. Eventually TEPCO ran hoses many kilometers to a mountain to supply water to the site. There were no emergency or back up water supplies.

    Power and water were essential for the nuclear plant to avoid core meltdowns. The power plant had 13 emergency diesel generators one of which was out of service for maintenance. One generator was damaged by the earthquake. 10 of the generators were water cooled and supplied power to reactors 1-4. In order to run they needed a mains water supply which had been lost to the earthquake. Eventually they were all lost to the tsunami.

    The earthquake damaged the outside diesel fuel tanks but were also washed away by the tsunami.

    After the earthquake started and before the tsunami struck a radiation alarm sounded 1.5 km from the plant. Some event had happened. The earthquake cause cracks and holes in the No1-3 reactor containment vessels and suppression rings which now are part of the problem of leaking cooling water getting into the reactor basements.

    The earthquake caused extensive damage to important buildings like the main admin building which stores all the documentation and plans of the power plant. Since March 2011 no one has been allowed to enter it because its unsafe.

    Two other very important buildings were also damaged by the earthquake. The anti earthquake building and the emergency response center. The earthquake damaged the overhead crane for the common cooling pool.

    The earthquake damaged the No3 Main Steam Isolation Valve, an important piece of equipment.

    The meltdown of the No1 reactor began within 4 hours of the earthquake but the meltdowns of reactor No2&3 took longer. The level of the cooling water dropped very quickly. What happened with the No1 reactor that didn't happen with reactors 2-3?

    88 of the world's 442 nuclear power stations are in seismically active areas.

    In those critical first hours and days, TEPCO didn't have enough water now it has too much?

    The nuclear disaster was preventable. http://carnegieendowment.org/files/fukushima.pdf

  • 0

    Utrack

    **Fukushima cesium leaks 'equal 168 Hiroshima bombs,' says report

    National Aug. 26, 2011 - 10:45AM JS**

    http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/fukushima-cesium-leaks-equal-168-hiroshima-bombs-says-report

    Has anything changed since this article was written in August 2011? The Contamination may have gotten worse due to spreading it around for disposal and the weather plays a part in spreading contamination. The suet could have been more thought out to include something about contamination.

  • 0

    Star-viking

    Zichi,

    The PDF you link to makes clear that the tsunami damage to the sea water pumps was critical. Also, water cooled diesel generators just use water to move waste heat to a radiator - they do not require a constant supply of water. As for the water needed by the reactors, as in reality, fire pumps could have transported distilled water to them, or sea water could have been used.

    Utrack, just because potential cesium leaks could have as much cesium as 168 Hiroshima bombs does not mean they have the same potential to damage. I'm sure there are plenty of trucks which have as much metal as a Hiroshima bomb, but that does not mean they are as dangerous as one.

  • 3

    zichi

    Star-viking

    I don't deny that critical damage was from the tsunami but its clear from reading many of the extensive reports that the earthquake caused extensive damage to the plant and buildings and also damage to the reactors. The cracks and holes in the containment vessels and suppression rings were not caused by the tsunami. Earthquake damage to No3 Main Steam Isolation Valve is very serious problem in the reactor design. You don't explain what happened in No1 reactor to cause the meltdown much quicker than reactors 2&3?

    We can't be 100% sure that there wouldn't have been a major nuclear event even without the tsunami.

    Emergency vihicles had a problem trying to reach the plant because of earthquake damaged roads.

  • 0

    Utrack

    @Star-viking

    The article of the report does not say COULD it says CESIUM leaks equal 168 Hiroshima bombs. Nothing about metal either

  • 3

    zichi

    @Star-viking

    A monitoring post on the perimeter of the plant about 1.5 kilometers (1 mile) from the No. 1 reactor went off at 3:29 p.m., minutes before the station was overwhelmed by the tsunami that knocked out backup power that kept reactor cooling systems running, according to documents supplied by the company. The monitor was set to go off at high levels of radiation, an official said. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-19/fukushima-may-have-leaked-radiation-before-quake.html

    Toshio Kimura, a former Tepco plant engineer who worked at Fukushima Daiichi for 12 years is strongly of the view that reactor pipes in the plant were damaged seriously by the quake before a subsequent tsunami

    http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2013/11/17/commentary/cracks-in-tepcos-311-narrative/#.UuytQnmLf0h

    Problems with the fractured, deteriorating, poorly repaired pipes and the cooling system had been pointed out for years. In 2002, whistleblower allegations that TEPCO had deliberately falsified safety records came to light and the company was forced to shut down all of its reactors and inspect them, including the Fukushima Daiichi Power Plant. Sugaoka Kei, a General Electric on-site inspector first notified Japan's nuclear watchdog, Nuclear Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) in June of 2000. The government of Japan took two years to address the problem, then colluded in covering it up - and gave the name of the whistleblower to TEPCO.

    Tanaka Mitsuhiko, a former nuclear power plant designer and science writer asserts that at least the Number One reactor melted down as a result of the earthquake damage.

    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/MH12Dh01.html

    Since the radiation levels in reactors 1-3 remain very high, its impossible for workers to make an extensive survey to learn what parts of the plant were damaged from the earthquake.

  • 3

    wipeout

    So the conclusive evidence is that there is a possibility?

    There is no conclusive evidence, but you attempted to shed doubt on the claim even being made, by saying that as far as you were aware only Zichi had made it. This clearly shows that you haven't read about the Fukushima disaster very extensively, because the claims have certainly been reported, and as I showed, they are included in the Diet report. As sources go, it is better than Forbes (not that you even provided a source).

    I'm afraid you have a wee bit of a problem accepting things that are put right in front of your face. At the risk of boring everyone including myself, last week I tried to get you to acknowledge that the public foots the bill for Fukushima and in addition is expected to underwrite the Japanese nuclear industry for any future disaster, no matter how costly (because who else is going to pay). Despite asking the question at least four times, I could not squeeze that answer out of you.

    So I don't think your advocacy of nuclear power in this country is built on a foundation of honesty.

  • 3

    zichi

    The suppression pool of the Fukushima Daiichi Unit No. 2 reactor may have a 3-centimeter hole in it, through which the highly radioactive water might be leaking out, the plant operator said. http://rt.com/news/fukushima-reactor-hole-tepco-430/

    What damaged the No2 Reactor? In the beginning TEPCO said there had been a hydrogen explosion but later said there were only explosions in No1 and No3 reactors?

  • -5

    Heda_Madness

    Zichi

    You've said that the earthquake caused major damage to the reactors, you have said it caused extensive damage to the reactors

    Yet you haven't posted any corroborating evidence to show there was either major or extensive.

    You are clearly well read on this subject and people believe what you say to be true.

  • 3

    zichi

    @Heda_Madness

    You've said that the earthquake caused major damage to the reactors, you have said it caused extensive damage to the reactors. Yet you haven't posted any corroborating evidence to show there was either major or extensive. You are clearly well read on this subject and people believe what you say to be true.

    Actually, the sentence I used was,

    "The Fukushima nuclear plant was extensively damaged by the earthquake including major damage to the reactors."

    I have provided enough comments and links that show the nuclear power plant was badly damaged by the earthquake, and the reactors and associated plant was also damaged by the earthquake.

    How do you explain the damage inside the No2 reactor, which according to TEPCO didn't have an explosion? How do you explain the holes and cracks in the reactor containment vessels and suppression rings? How do you explain the damage on the upper levels of the reactor buildings where the tsunami didn't reach? Again, the collapse of the towers carrying the mains offsite power which happened before the tsunami. How do you explain the sounding of a radiation alarm before the tsunami struck? How do you explain the damage to the No3 Main Steam Isolation Valve, an important piece of equipment? How do you explain the extensive damage to major buildings?

    I'm sorry you can't accept the full extend of the biggest nuclear disaster since Chernobyl but at least the NRA have full realization and extend of the disaster, that it now requires nuclear plant operators to fully update the safety of those plants which also includes many additional features against damage by earthquakes, including offsite emergency control centers.

    Most countries which operate nuclear power plants have also taken action to increase the safety levels of their plants.

    Without those additional safety features, the NRA won't be giving its permission for any reactor restarts.

  • -4

    Heda_Madness

    The 2011 earthquake caused extensive damage to the plant, its equipment, the reactors and off site power and water supplies.

    You're claiming that there was extensive damage. This is untrue. A gross exaggeration of any facts that you may have presented. You have presented a guy who worked there 11 years ago. But there's no evidence from him that the reactors were damaged.

    So Zichi, why are you claiming that there was extensive damage to the reactors in the March 11 earthquake? When you've so far failed to present any evidence that there was any damage to the reactors never mind 'extensive'

  • 3

    zichi

    @Star-viking

    The PDF you link to makes clear that the tsunami damage to the sea water pumps was critical. Also, water cooled diesel generators just use water to move waste heat to a radiator - they do not require a constant supply of water.

    guess you never looked at the emergency generators. This is a photo of one. These are water cooled a need a water source.

    http://photo.tepco.co.jp/library/110906/110906_11b.jpg

    and another which was flooded by the tsunami

    http://photo.sankei.jp.msn.com/kodawari/data/2012/02/0209fukushima2/~/media/kodawari/2012/02/0209fukushima/G20120208TTT0700586G3000000.jpg

    As for the water needed by the reactors, as in reality, fire pumps could have transported distilled water to them, or sea water could have been used.

    There are design faults in the reactors which led to the nuclear core meltdowns. In a full emergency with the total loss of power, the reactor cores should continue to be cooled by the Isolation Condensers located on the upper floors of the reactor buildings. TEPCO has not even operated the No1 Isolation Condenser in 40 years, and no operator was even sure if it would work or not. Because of a design fault on an important pump, when the power was lost the water pumped into the reactor from fire engines, instead of going into the reactor core to cool the fuel, the pump diverted the water into the Isolation Condenser, which in the No1 had been turned off and remained off when the plant lost all power throwing the reactor control room into darkness and panic. The plant manager in the anti earthquake building assumed the No1 Isolation Condenser was on when in fact it was off.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtJjZKnLJ5M

  • 1

    Sam Huntington

    If people are looking for a perfect world, they are delusional. There is nothing that man can build that will withstand the energy produced by an earthquake of significant magnitude, or the power of a tsunami. If it can be shown that the construction was deficient, and this deficiency resulted in overheating of reactors, then by all means hold these builders accountable. Otherwise, the lawsuit is a waste of time and resources.

  • 3

    wipeout

    When you've so far failed to present any evidence that there was any damage to the reactors never mind 'extensive'

    Before you go further with pestering people for their sources of evidence, how about putting up a link to your own claims? So far you've offered nothing stronger than, and I quote: "In fact I've read on Forbes that it's unquestionably untrue." That's not substantiation, it's waffle.

    Zichi and I have both actually given links, which you deal with by trying to pick them apart (which would be perfectly acceptable if you backed up your own statements at all) or simply by shifting the goalposts. As I already showed, questions you don't like, you don't answer. This is a one-sided discussion, with you deciding the terms and changing them at will.

    I can engage in those alright, when I can be bothered, but let's face it, it's not very efficient when people who read your posts are essentially forced to spend time pointing out the dishonesty of your methods.

  • 2

    zichi

    @Heda_Madness

    as you are aware, the nuclear industry is a failed one which can't meet the global power demands or greatly change the climate changes. The urban myth of it being clean, safe and cheap was busted!

  • -3

    Heda_Madness

    Zichi, what relevance is that to this discussion? Whenever you get caught making an exaggerated statement (at best) you make an off topic, irrelevant attack.

    Just accept that there is no evidence that dai ichi's reactor suffered extensive damage. That you were wrong to claim otherwise and move on.

  • 2

    zichi

    Heda_Madness

    I haven't been caught out about any info provided and I have not exaggerated the extend of the damage to the reactors and the plant, which I have listed and provided links to. You are the one it seems to refuse to answer question from myself or wipeout. Dear, if anyone needs to move along its surly your good-self.

    • Moderator

      No bickering please.

  • 2

    zichi

    @Heda._Madness

    The reason you won't take your unsubstantiated claim back is because that's all you have. You believe that nuclear is unsafe because Japan suffers from earthquakes. Remove the fact that the reactor wasn't damaged and your argument has gone.

    The nuclear disaster wasn't just a result of the earthquake and tsunami although they were probably the strongest factors. There were/are major design faults with the reactors and the layout design of the plant. I have listed and linked some of those like the reason why the fire pumps could not get water into the reactors when the cooling system failed.

    There were plant owner (TEPCO) problems which had put profit before safety and had not updated the plant even at the advice of experts. A few days before the disasters TEPCO presented a three year overdue report to the gov't stating the expected maximum tsunami height would be 10 m. On the day of the disasters, it was more than 14+ m.

    TEPCO had seriously failed in its safety management, training and safety inspections of very important reactor equipment like the Isolation Condensers, which in the case of the No1 reactor, had not been operated in 40 years.

    TEPCO had failed to provide emergency manuals so that the workers would know what to do. The emergency manual was a single sheet of A4? TEPCO had a history of major failures when it came to nuclear plant safety.

    TEPCO failed in worker safety training.

    There were operator errors has in Three Mile Island and Chernobyl when the operators in the No1&2 central reactor control room thought the Isolation Condenser for the No1 reactor was operating when in fact it was switched off. This would have provided reactor cooling for at least 8 hours after the total loss of power. The plant manager, Yoshida in the anti quake building also believed the Isolation Condenser was working when it wasn't.

    The entire nuclear village which included all the atomic safety agencies had failed to build safe nuclear plants, which now must be updated at a cost of more than ¥1 trillion. Some of the updating, like offsite emergency control centres will take at least five years to build.

    The earthquake damaged the reactors, and I would call any damage to reactors and its important associated plant equipment very serious. I have never worked at a nuclear power plant but I have worked in the heavy chemical industry and know a great deal about plants. The cracks and holes in the reactor pressure vessels and suppression chambers were caused by the earthquake has was the damage to the No3 Main Steam Isolation Valve. You could read about all of this from the reports provided on the TEPCO website.

    With its long history of earthquakes and tsunami, you can't remove the fact that the country experiences very powerful and several Nankai earthquakes, according to experts, are well overdue and could happen at any time which could cause more than ¥20 trillion of damage to Osaka, and more than ¥100 trillion to Tokyo.

    When the massive radiation was pouring out of the Fukushima plant, the country got lucky, because the wind was blowing out to sea. Had it been blowing south to Tokyo it would have created an even worse disaster than the current one.

    Nuclear energy is too expensive and this country is not a place to have nuclear reactors which weren't built to the highest safety standards. There are also the additional problems of spent nuclear fuel, and plutonium, to name a few.

    Nuclear energy can't solve the problem of global power demand and can't provide enough nuclear plants to change the problem of climate change.

  • -6

    Heda_Madness

    Well it only took seven irrelevant paragraphs to get to this:

    The earthquake damaged the reactors, and I would call any damage to reactors and its important associated plant equipment very serious

    So, in your opinion, the damage to the reactor was serious.To the experts it wasn't.

    Secondly, you may think the couple of things were serious. It's certainly not extensive though, is it?

    But you then try and hide this by another inaccurate and irrelevant rant. Such as

    Nuclear energy can't solve the problem of global power demand and can't provide enough nuclear plants to change the problem of climate change.

    But coal can can't it? Gas can, can't it? You support the destruction of the planet. Just as long as it's not nuclear.

  • 3

    zichi

    @Heda_Madness

    So, in your opinion, the damage to the reactor was serious.To the experts it wasn't.

    Which experts and can we have links which so far on the post you have provided except for a mention of a news site?

    This is a quote from the Diet Investigation Report published in July 2012:

    *We conclude that TEPCO was too quick to cite the tsunami as the cause of the nuclear accident and deny that the earthquake caused any damage. We believe there is a possibilility that the earthquake damaged equipment necessary for ensuring safety, and that there is also a possibility that a small-scale LOCA occured in Unit 1. We hope these points will be examined further by a third party. (see Recommendation 7)

    Following the internal investigation by TEPCO it stated in its published report that there are more than 50 serious question about damage to the plant and reactors which it didn't have answers for but would try to find answers within 2-3 years?

  • -2

    Heda_Madness

    A possibilty Zichi, a possibility. Hardly proves that there was extensive damage does it?

    You know what Zichi, I bow to your amazing expertise on the subject. I believe that you know more than any expert. I realise that my university education on Chernobyl was a complete waste of time and that you know everything,

    I too wish I'd read a couple of pages from Enews and gained the levels of expertise that you have.

    http://enenews.com/former-tepco-engineer-fukushima-meltdown-ignited-quake-tsunami-serious-damage-caused-reactor-lose-coolant-wont-be-long-lies-exposed-expert-all-units-sustained-damage-quake-audio

    • Moderator

      Heda_Madness and zichi, please do not address each other on this thread any further since neither of you is being civil.

  • 1

    wipeout

    @heda

    You still haven't provided a single link to a source of information for your statements, such as "to the experts it wasn't serious".

    A half-remembered, unnamed article from Forbes is the best we can expect from you, is it? I'm sure there are arguments to be made for nuclear power in Japan (wrong ones, in my opinion), but I'm also fairly sure that there are better ways to make them than you are doing.

  • -6

    Heda_Madness

    Wipeout - here's an argument as to why nuclear power should be used in Japan

    More people have died in Japan since March 10, 2011 from fossil fuels than will die from the nuclear disaster. That's unquestionable. As a result of Japan changing their energy policy many, many more will die. Again this is without doubt.

    I'm not entirely sure why I need to provide the proof. I asked someone to prove that there was extensive damage, that hasn't happened. I've read countless arguments showing that this has been over played by the media. And it's not helped by the mistruths spread on message boards.

    But as this is the first time I'v e been asked for proof - I will go and find it.

  • 2

    zichi

    Last year, TEPCO buried new admissions about the reactor units and their damage in a couple of obscure reports. TEPCO buried this admission on a latter page of a document on nitrogen injection of unit 1.

    http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_130617_04-e.pdf

    In this obscure past progress document buried inside was this revelation:

    “Based on the results of field investigations using robots and fiberscopes, the status of leaks from the pressure suppression chambers at Units 1~3 were estimated. (It was estimated that leaks have occurred from the pressure suppression chambers at Units 1 and 2, and that the pressure suppression chamber at Unit 3 is mostly sound.)”

    http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/betu13_e/images/130726e0402.pdf

  • 4

    wipeout

    But as this is the first time I'v e been asked for proof - I will go and find it.

    Considering how long this is taking, it's probably going to be the last, too. Most people are capable of throwing up a couple of links after a few minutes' search.

  • 2

    wanderlust

    2 eye witness accounts of pipes buckling and coming apart after the earthquake and before the tsunami

    Meltdown: What Really Happened at Fukushima? http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2011/07/meltdown-what-really-happened-fukushima/39541/ Been picked up and repeated many times on different websites, but it's from:

    Jake Adelsteins' s article - based on interviews with workers at the plant.

    Also, Kei Sugaoka, former engineer at Fukushima, also talks about the vulnerability of pipes

  • -1

    Star-viking

    Zichi,

    Do you actually have data for the EPGs? While I may have been mixing up water-cooled engines with water-cooled generators - the latter requring no outside source of waters, how much of a flow-rate is necessary for the Dai-ichi EPGs? And more importantly, could they have been brought back online before the battery power was lost?

    On the subject of the isolation condenser, I don't have time to trawl through the youtube link, but TEPCO posted that the IC was operated correctly. Even if the account on youtube is accurate, if the tsunami was not a factor then staff would have been in the building to deal with such problems - if necessary.

    http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/info/12051001-e.html

  • -1

    Heda_Madness

    Sorry, I came back to this thread a day later but I couldn't post as I was the previous. Hadn't realised it had been continued.

    I haven't been able to find the exact link that I mentioned before. I did however find an article in January from TEPCO that confirmed that the situation of Dai Ichi was caused by the tsunami and not by the earthquake.

    I know that no-one will believe Tepco but still.

    There is simply no evidence that the reactors were damaged extensively in the earthquake. None.

Login to leave a comment

OR
  • Program Assistant

    Program Assistant
    Temple University, Japan Campus - テンプル大学ジャパンキャンパス、Tokyo
    Salary: Commensurate with experience plus transportation from/to TUJ
  • Recruitment / HR Generalist

    Recruitment / HR Generalist
    Temple University, Japan Campus - テンプル大学ジャパンキャンパス、Tokyo
    Salary: Commensurate with experience plus transportation from/to TUJ
  • IELTSインストラクター

    IELTSインストラクター
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥3,500 / Hour Negotiable
  • Bilingual Administrative Staff

    Bilingual Administrative Staff
    Star Kids International Preschool、Tokyo
    Salary: Salary negotiable Depending on experience
  • TOEICインストラクター

    TOEICインストラクター
    Berkeley House Language Center / バークレーハウス語学センター、Tokyo
    Salary: ¥3,000 / Hour Negotiable

More in National

View all

View all