Japan may restart reactors in a year; Fukushima situation worsens
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - Japan may restart several reactors shut down by the Fukushima nuclear crisis in about a year, a senior regulator said in an interview on Tuesday, a day after new safety rules went into effect designed to avoid a repeat of the disaster.
At the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant north of Tokyo, the site of the world's worst atomic disaster since Chernobyl in 1986, the situation took a turn for the worse as radiation levels in groundwater soared, suggesting highly toxic materials from the plant are now close to the Pacific Ocean.
But Japan is forging ahead with attempts to restart idled reactors in the face of a sceptical public, after Fukushima highlighted weak oversight of the industry.
That is meant to change with the new rules.
Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/07/09/uk-japan-nuclear-idUKBRE9680DQ20130709
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Just really want to wreck the country.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)in Tokyo today. I guess that explains the timing.
By the way, there is an Upper House election coming up in Japan in less than 2 weeks. Maybe it will be a referendum on Prime Minister Abe's call to restart nuclear reactors in Japan.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Of course, they won't get many votes, but they have a lot of campaign signs around here. But there is also the Democratic Party of Japan, which currently has a slim plurality of Upper House seats. The DPJ is running on a platform of complete phaseout of nuclear power by the 2030s.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)you can't shut it off. That is why they are so potentially deadly. New rules and increased oversight will not change that. Nukes are the poster children for Murphy's famous maxim: "If anything can go wrong it will" (eventually) and his corollary: "If there are two or more ways to do something, and one of those can result in catastrophe, then someone will do it."
What even Murphy didn't realize was that some people will keep doing it. Hence, Einstein's observation: Insanity, is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)11 1/2 years before Fukushima. It happened on September 30, 1999 at Tokaimura, which is maybe 50-60 miles down the coast from Fukushima Dai-ichi. Known as the "Tokaimura JCO rinkai jiko", or "critical stage accident", it was Japan's first nuclear accident that resulted in fatalities. Three workers at the Tokaimura fuel processing complex were exposed to extremely high doses of radiation, and were transported by ambulance to hospital. An evacuation order was issued for everyone living within 350 meters of the complex (40 households), while people living within 500 meters were told to be on standby for possible evacuation, and residents within a 10km radius (310,000 people) were told to stay indoors. Three train lines in the area were temporarily shut down, and several roads in the area were closed off. Various measures were taken to avert a chain reaction. It took 20 hours before neutron rays were brought down to below the allowable limit. As a result of the accident, 2 of the 3 workers died, the other was seriously injured, and 667 other people were exposed to radiation. It was determined to be an INES Level 4 accident.
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/東海村JCO臨界事故
List left
(595 posts)There is a news blackout in Japan concerning the situation at Fukushima and any alternative to the status quo.
By constitution Japan is not allowed to have an army. They just purchased a battleship and a stealth bomber.
CIA and U.S.military economic interests.
1/3 of the population in Japan do not vote. Youth and young adults number 1 cause of death is suicide.
NickB79
(19,253 posts)and
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/08/08/uk-japan-economy-current-idUKBRE87706Y20120808
Having to import so much fossil fuel, and ration electricity to major manufacturing areas, is blowing a huge fucking hole in the government budget.
wordpix
(18,652 posts)I've never visited but I would think that as on US coasts, there is plenty of wind and a constant breeze on Japan's coastlines. Japan is a technologically innovative nation, why not wind?
There ARE alternatives to oil, coal, gas.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Some places like Tokyo are also providing monetary incentives to install solar panels and collectors.
NickB79
(19,253 posts)From what I've read, they are currently developing a lot of renewables, including wind. However, it takes thousands, if not tens of thousands, of wind turbines to replace 40-50 GW of nuclear power (the capacity of their reactor fleet before Fukushima), and a lot of time to site, build and install such things. It will likely take them DECADES to fully transition off of nuclear.
It's really a clusterfuck situation no matter how you look at it, and will be for years to come.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Geothermal may also be a factor.
But energy transitions take time, and they can't continue to import fossil fuels as they are doing for very long.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)for Japan's trade deficit. But why worry? Tokyo Electric Power's stock was up 40 points today. All is well!
daleo
(21,317 posts)They can blow huge holes in more than budgets, too.
the_chinuk
(332 posts)Toxic materials are close to the Pacific Ocean!
Ha, ha, what infinite jest!
THEY'RE IN THE PACIFIC OCEAN, FOR CRYSAKES!
and have been for some time now.