Japan Earthquake: Political Aspects

[Caniche]

I have to say that it is a complete myth that there is media silence on this. Here in Japan, Fukushima continues to be top news on all stations, in all newspapers, and of course it is a consistently hot topic on the internet. There is so much testing going on in public and in private (with results being posted in various places online) that we are awash in data. We have detailed reports of radiation around the plants which are updated numerous times a day, and every prefecture is providing daily reports on atmospheric radiation. In addition, for those who read Japanese we have Twitter reports from workers on the site. When workers fall ill, we know within a few hours. We have access to so much information that we are able to tell you how many becquerels are in flounders caught off the coast of Fukushima and Iwaki.

The amount of information and the level of detail surrounding the Fukushima disaster is incomparable to Chernobyl. I had a friend in Kiev at the time of the Chernobyl accident, and it was not unusual for the phone to get mysteriously cut off if one brought up the Chernobyl meltdown. Having said all of that, there are tons of things that remain to be known, and surely Tepco is not telling us all they know of the situation. But when I think back on the Chernobyl disaster, and the very real blackout on information coming from the Soviet Union, it blows my mind when people claim that we know nothing about what's going on in Fukushima.

Most reassuring and I guess part of the reason why your premier has declared his desire for a nuclear free Japan.
But if you scrutinize my original post you will note that I was alluding to the blanket ban on media coverage in the UK, where strangely enough we are about to have imposed the biggest NPP construction programme since the 1950's.
I'm not for one moment claiming the daily Chernobyl fallout maps were produced by the Soviet authorities but they do tend to be more informative than the non existent information presentation concerning Fukushima radiation here in Europe

 

[Gary7]

I see. Actually I did not notice that your comment was alluding to the blanket ban on media coverage in the UK. In fact, I was not aware of such a ban. Very informative, thank you.

 

[Astronuc]

Most reassuring and I guess part of the reason why your premier has declared his desire for a nuclear free Japan.
But if you scrutinize my original post you will note that I was alluding to the blanket ban on media coverage in the UK, where strangely enough we are about to have imposed the biggest NPP construction programme since the 1950's.
I'm not for one moment claiming the daily Chernobyl fallout maps were produced by the Soviet authorities but they do tend to be more informative than the non existent information presentation concerning Fukushima radiation here in Europe

A review of the BBC, Guardian and Indpendent show that they still cover Fukushima and its consequences. However, other news stories, such as the News Corp scandal, EU debt worries, Paksitan/Afghanistan seem to occupy the front pages.

 

[gmax137]

Really, there is a huge difference between 'blanket ban on media' and 'editors decide other stories will sell more advertising,' don't you think? Or are you saying someone has imposed this 'ban?'

 

[NUCENG]

A review of the BBC, Guardian and Indpendent show that they still cover Fukushima and its consequences. However, other news stories, such as the News Corp scandal, EU debt worries, Paksitan/Afghanistan seem to occupy the front pages.

That is right. The old saw about the media is true. "If it bleeds, it leads." But if you are looking for a coverup on a news event you need to look further than the media. I have over two pages of links to websites on the Fukushima accident. These include news companies, blogs, government agencies, UN groups and even TEPCO. For a coverup, they are doing a terrible job.

In today's instant information age, information delayed, is considered coverup. It is actually possible that nobody yet knows the answers to some of the nagging questions. But if your agenda is to spread fear and hysteria, then claiming coverup is always the first tactic. Then it is possible to make any wild claim or speculation about the event without regard to information that is available - after all "they" are all lying as part of the coverup!

 

[tsutsuji]

Some new figures to take into account in the Fukushima Daiichi death toll :

From June 1 to 10, 26 people died from heatstroke, compared with six in the same period last year, according to the Fire and Disaster Management Agency.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110718n1.html

The above data cover Japan as a whole. If my understanding is correct, all thermal power plants have recovered from the earthquake and the power shortage is caused exclusively by nuclear power plants. The ratio of Fukushima Daiichi's 6 reactors to the 35 reactors shut down this summer is 6/35=17%. So perhaps Fukushima Daiichi is responsible for 17% of this year's additional heatstrokes.

 

[gmax137]

... So perhaps Fukushima Daiichi is responsible for 17% of this year's additional heatstrokes.

Umm, I might say, "lack of power output from the Fukushima Daiichi units is responsible for 17% of this year's additional heatstrokes"

 

[Caniche]

Really, there is a huge difference between 'blanket ban on media' and 'editors decide other stories will sell more advertising,' don't you think? Or are you saying someone has imposed this 'ban?'

It's wooly blanket ban.
Do a straw poll ,contact any of your chums in the UK and ask them how many Fukushima media reports they can recollect within the last three months.Problem ,what problem

 

[gmax137]

It's wooly blanket ban.
Do a straw poll ,contact any of your chums in the UK and ask them how many Fukushima media reports they can recollect within the last three months.Problem ,what problem

You might enjoy this film:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_Theory_(film)

 

[Astronuc]

It's wooly blanket ban.
Do a straw poll ,contact any of your chums in the UK and ask them how many Fukushima media reports they can recollect within the last three months.Problem ,what problem

Well there seem to be quite a lot of reports related to Fukushima in the BBC and Guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/search?q=Fukushima&section=&date=date%2Flast30days (43 articles in which Fukushima is mentioned in the last 30 days), and 469 articles in 2011, mostly after March 11.

In the BBC - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14292167 - one can scroll down and find Nuclear Fears and various links to stories about Fukushima.


Reuters has hundreds of articles on Fukushima related to the NPP failures and contamination, as well as earthquake and tsunami.

 

[robinson]

Revisiting the issue of hiding full resolution images, as well as pretending there are no images, from the original thread:

It's not. They have first rate equipment and much better images than any we have seen. Evidence provided upon request.

While it strays into the political, I imagine if this was a US event we wouldn't have any images at all. Except from a camera 30 miles away, that sometimes went dead at certain times.

Um, sry... what do you mean exactly?

Version 1: There's evidence of first rate equipment used because TEPCO provides high quality images etc. to organizations such as NISA, NRC, etc?

Version 2: You have evidence and will show it if we ask for it...? ^^;

http://www.suasnews.com/2011/03/470...se-footage-of-power-plant-taken-by-u-s-drone/

For some reason I thought the drone footage and the issue of Japan refusing to share was discussed a long time back.

There are multiple stories like the one above.

I don't think anyone ever responded after I provided evidence to support what I said. I can still remember my frustration and disbelief at the quality and lack of any video of the disaster early on. As well as the seemingly absence of any measurements of the fallout, especially the actual materials being detected.

It's obvious once you know the level of technology that exists. At some point even the hardened nuclear engineer may have to admit it's nonsense that they keep pretending no good images are to be found.

 

[Caniche]

Revisiting the issue of hiding full resolution images, as well as pretending there are no images, from the original thread:




I don't think anyone ever responded after I provided evidence to support what I said. I can still remember my frustration and disbelief at the quality and lack of any video of the disaster early on. As well as the seemingly absence of any measurements of the fallout, especially the actual materials being detected.

It's obvious once you know the level of technology that exists. At some point even the hardened nuclear engineer may have to admit it's nonsense that they keep pretending no good images are to be found.

It always did puzzle me ,how,when the biggest nuclear disaster the world has ever seen was unfolding ,no one managed to train a camera on unit 4 . Kaboom and not a scrap of photographic documentation. If I missed it all silly meIf Tepco or IAEA missed it then strangely lax?

 

[clancy688]

It always did puzzle me ,how,when the biggest nuclear disaster the world has ever seen was unfolding ,no one managed to train a camera on unit 4 .

IAEA was never on the scene during the first weeks. Only chance for news cameras to capture the scene would've been from hills or helicopters from outside the exclusion zone (20km). Webcam pictures from March 15th show very bad weather conditions, so getting an image from 20km away was probably impossible.

That leaves only TEPCO and the few soldiers who were there during the first few days. They were surrounded by melting down and exploding reactors. So they were in really deep **** and probably had better things to do than worrying about an around the clock video feed from all reactors.

 

[Caniche]

IAEA was never on the scene during the first weeks. Only chance for news cameras to capture the scene would've been from hills or helicopters from outside the exclusion zone (20km). Webcam pictures from March 15th show very bad weather conditions, so getting an image from 20km away was probably impossible.

That leaves only TEPCO and the few soldiers who were there during the first few days. They were surrounded by melting down and exploding reactors. So they were in really deep **** and probably had better things to do than worrying about an around the clock video feed from all reactors.

Still puzzled. They were in deep doodoo's when No.1 went pop, but still managed to document No 3's spectacular demise.
As for inclement weather preventing any recording of invaluable data, well you have to wonder if a bit of fog ;rain or low cloud can screw up your monitoring systems ,is it safe to build these things in the first place?

 

[clancy688]

Still puzzled. They were in deep doodoo's when No.1 went pop, but still managed to document No 3's spectacular demise.

Those were television cameras. News footage, nothing from TEPCO. Here's the webcam:



March 14th, no clouds, blue sky.
March 15th, at morning, clouds.

As for the monitoring systems, no systems were screwed up because there where no systems to be screwed up. Why should someone put a camera towards a nuclear reactor just in cause it blows up so that you'll have footage afterwards?
You don't equip lifeboats with cameras to film the sinking of the mother ship, and you don't monitor runways with cams so that you'll see what happened when a plane crashed.

 

[jlduh]

Most reassuring and I guess part of the reason why your premier has declared his desire for a nuclear free Japan.
But if you scrutinize my original post you will note that I was alluding to the blanket ban on media coverage in the UK, where strangely enough we are about to have imposed the biggest NPP construction programme since the 1950's.
I'm not for one moment claiming the daily Chernobyl fallout maps were produced by the Soviet authorities but they do tend to be more informative than the non existent information presentation concerning Fukushima radiation here in Europe

I tend to second the part of this message concerning the low level of information in the news now in France about the Fukushima situation. After some peak when the news were hot and spectacular, very quickly here the infos have vanished. In the end, I would assume that an average french citizen with no special interest on this is thinking that the situation is probably under control as there is no more explosions nor real news. Well, we just hear that EPR built in France now by EDF/AREVA is again delayed due to various tech problems and that the final cost will be the double of the planned one... because also of Fukushima consequences on safety standards they say ;o)

Obviously, there is today much more information available in Japan but also on the net about this disaster than there has been in 1986, but of course the problem is to assess the quality of this info (the forum has seen in the last months that data were difficult to interpret...), an other problem being that nowadays the difficulty is to extract some valid conclusions from a gigantic bunch of infos about everything, which can be as tricky as having no info at all.

In 1986, there was silence and only official infos (most of them being false purposely), in 2011 there is a huge mediatic noise on almost everything in the medias. The question still being: can an average citizen hear and understand on the long run the right signal of information on a (complex) subject like this one? Not sure.

You can hide things by releasing nothing and shut up. Or you can hide as many important infos by submerging the public with a bunch of data and shouting.

 

[jlduh]

At least maybe the Fukushima disaster is going to clarify what to do when there are damaged fuel rods in pools!

Chubu Electric Power Co. revealed Thursday it has been unable to remove a spent fuel rod that was damaged in an accident 17 years ago from its Hamaoka nuclear power plant in Shizuoka Prefecture.

While spent nuclear fuel is normally sent to the reprocessing plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture or elsewhere, the damaged rod remains inside the fuel pool of the plant's now decommissioned No. 1 reactor, in a special container, it said.

The company said it had asked domestic research organizations and foreign nuclear fuel firms to take it but to no avail, and is still pondering how to get the rod outside in the absence of clear government rules on how to dispose of damaged fuel that requires more delicate handling.

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110728p2g00m0dm100000c.html

 

[NUCENG]

NRC still did not comply with FOIA request by AP, right? And ZAMG stopped publishing source term estimates after first publication.

It is a fact that there is a massive coverup going on.

Furthermore it is a fact that deaths attributable to accident (e.g. hospital evacuation fatalities) are being ignored in the plain sight.
There may well be dozens dead workers (among sub-sub-contractors) and we would not know (due to lack of mechanism by which we'd know). Even ignoring the radiation hazards, given the conditions, and given the number of workers, some workers ought to have died from heart failure or heat stroke - we did not hear of those deaths - meaning deaths are being covered up. Given the secrecy already in place at nuclear power plants, given NRC's willingness to break the law (ignoring FOIA request), and given their willingness to officially deny and ignore even well known - nothing is guaranteed about the official data. The zero death toll is a lie so colossal and so stupid its mind-boggling.

Hi Dmytry, hadn't tweaked you for a while. FYI NRC just posted another 1600 pages in response to the AP FOIAs.
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/foia/japan-foia-info.html

 

[Astronuc]

At least maybe the Fukushima disaster is going to clarify what to do when there are damaged fuel rods in pools!

Chubu Electric Power Co. revealed Thursday it has been unable to remove a spent fuel rod that was damaged in an accident 17 years ago from its Hamaoka nuclear power plant in Shizuoka Prefecture.

While spent nuclear fuel is normally sent to the reprocessing plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture or elsewhere, the damaged rod remains inside the fuel pool of the plant's now decommissioned No. 1 reactor, in a special container, it said.

http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110728p2g00m0dm100000c.html

If that is the 1994 fuel failure, that wasn't an accident. Rather it was a typical fuel failure under normal operating conditions, unless they had a reactivity event or some unusual power or chemistry transient. It could have been a debris failure, or a PCI failure.

I suspect that they have no procedure for shipping damaged fuel. In the US, damaged fuel rods are placed in special containers, or they are left in the spent fuel pool until dispositioned. Otherwise, failed fuel can be placed in special containers and shipped to hotcell, which is occassionally done in the US. It is more routinely done in Europe.

 

[Caniche]

I tend to second the part of this message concerning the low level of information in the news now in France about the Fukushima situation. After some peak when the news were hot and spectacular, very quickly here the infos have vanished. In the end, I would assume that an average french citizen with no special interest on this is thinking that the situation is probably under control as there is no more explosions nor real news. Well, we just hear that EPR built in France now by EDF/AREVA is again delayed due to various tech problems and that the final cost will be the double of the planned one... because also of Fukushima consequences on safety standards they say ;o)

Obviously, there is today much more information available in Japan but also on the net about this disaster than there has been in 1986, but of course the problem is to assess the quality of this info (the forum has seen in the last months that data were difficult to interpret...), an other problem being that nowadays the difficulty is to extract some valid conclusions from a gigantic bunch of infos about everything, which can be as tricky as having no info at all.

In 1986, there was silence and only official infos (most of them being false purposely), in 2011 there is a huge mediatic noise on almost everything in the medias. The question still being: can an average citizen hear and understand on the long run the right signal of information on a (complex) subject like this one? Not sure.

You can hide things by releasing nothing and shut up. Or you can hide as many important infos by submerging the public with a bunch of data and shouting.

Absolutely correct in my experience. Just a numbers game.
Witness the the mass information dumps and then calculate what percentage of the population will take the time to sift the data mountain and then make the effort to track some obscure web link to determine the significance of Becquerels or Rotogens etc, etc.
Clarity of public information does not seem to be high on the list of priorities

 

[Susudake]

A couple of articles worth reading:

http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/new-japan-law-cleanses-bad-nuclear-news/article13589.html http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/26/us-fukushima-hazardous-idUSTRE76P73920110726

 

[Caniche]

Those were television cameras. News footage, nothing from TEPCO. Here's the webcam:



March 14th, no clouds, blue sky.
March 15th, at morning, clouds.

As for the monitoring systems, no systems were screwed up because there where no systems to be screwed up. Why should someone put a camera towards a nuclear reactor just in cause it blows up so that you'll have footage afterwards?
You don't equip lifeboats with cameras to film the sinking of the mother ship, and you don't monitor runways with cams so that you'll see what happened when a plane crashed.

Immaculate housekeeping

 

[robinson]

A couple of articles worth reading:

http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/new-japan-law-cleanses-bad-nuclear-news/article13589.html


http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/26/us-fukushima-hazardous-idUSTRE76P73920110726

Very interesting.

 

[tsutsuji]

http://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/politics/news/CK2011072802000029.html?ref=rank Minister Goshi Hosono said the fast breeder reactors are being debated as part of the revision of the Framework for Nuclear Energy Policy. The Framework for Nuclear Energy Policy was adopted by the Cabinet in October 2005. It targeted a 30~40% share of electricity production by 2030 and commercial fast breeder reactors by 2050. Its revision was started last November but was interrupted after the Fukushima Daiichi accident.

 

[Caniche]

http://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/politics/news/CK2011072802000029.html?ref=rank Minister Goshi Hosono said the fast breeder reactors are being debated as part of the revision of the Framework for Nuclear Energy Policy. The Framework for Nuclear Energy Policy was adopted by the Cabinet in October 2005. It targeted a 30~40% share of electricity production by 2030 and commercial fast breeder reactors by 2050. Its revision was started last November but was interrupted after the Fukushima Daiichi accident.

Monju caused no hiccup then

 

[Dmytry]

Hi Dmytry, hadn't tweaked you for a while. FYI NRC just posted another 1600 pages in response to the AP FOIAs.
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/foia/japan-foia-info.html

Hmm, was not tracking it very closely - was rather busy during the summer. There was no response from NRC for well over a month since deadline, was just looking at it today and whoopers they did actually start to release some communications beginning from june 30, better late than never. Very interesting. The communication seems to confirm the speculation regarding poor communication between TEPCO and NRC and absence of data from third party (non-TEPCO) experts on site during the first weeks.

Not that it is very useful considering that anything sensitive would be classified and thus not released, and it is very easy to justify classification of anything nuclear given the terrorist threat and such. Attachments are mostly absent as well.

What I am rather puzzled about is why the only source term estimates based on CTBT network and thus including what was blown into the ocean are early ones by ZAMG.
edit: There's some Japanese paper based on values in Japan:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnst/48/7/1129/_pdf
but given the prevailing wind direction during the release, the estimate based on the measurements taken in Japan only can only serve as a lower bound.

 

[Dmytry]

A couple of articles worth reading:

http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/new-japan-law-cleanses-bad-nuclear-news/article13589.html

It does seem kind of scary that politicians there could do this in the open without fearing for their popularity. Such things sound all reasonable - prevent disinformation and rumours - but it is clear that in practice they are not going to be targeting any posts promoting hormesis and claiming that it is all totally safe. Furthermore, the mere fact that they are pushing for such laws and creating task force to watch the blog posts can in itself provoke the panic.
During Chernobyl accident, the attempts by the government to suppress the information have only contributed to the public fears - how can Japan expect to do better job at information control - in today's world with the internet around - than a genuine police state could before the internet?

 

[robinson]

Good points.

 

[NUCENG]

Hmm, was not tracking it very closely - was rather busy during the summer. There was no response from NRC for well over a month since deadline, was just looking at it today and whoopers they did actually start to release some communications beginning from june 30, better late than never. Very interesting. The communication seems to confirm the speculation regarding poor communication between TEPCO and NRC and absence of data from third party (non-TEPCO) experts on site during the first weeks.

Not that it is very useful considering that anything sensitive would be classified and thus not released, and it is very easy to justify classification of anything nuclear given the terrorist threat and such. Attachments are mostly absent as well.

What I am rather puzzled about is why the only source term estimates based on CTBT network and thus including what was blown into the ocean are early ones by ZAMG.
edit: There's some Japanese paper based on values in Japan:
http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnst/48/7/1129/_pdf
but given the prevailing wind direction during the release, the estimate based on the measurements taken in Japan only can only serve as a lower bound.

About classification. In all the years I've worked in commercial nuclear power the only classified information has been related to physical and cyber security of the plants. With all of the photographs taken of Fukushima Daiichi, one of the basic security rules has appparently been dismissed as less important than trying to show what is going on.

Access to proprietary information is also limited, but I'm not sure anybody wants to copy the designs of Fukushima plants now. Some of AREVAs details in the water processing system have been withheld for this reason.

I think your concern about classified sensitive information is unfounded. I haven't seen any record of a spokeman refusing to answer a question due to Classified Information. We should be concentrate on the outright lies and deliberate withholding of information that revealed risks to the Japanese population. That was done by TEPCO and the Government of Japan.

The NRC files show the same poor resolution photography and information gaps we got from TEPCO, NISA, JAIF, and IAEA. So much for speculation that they were dumbing down the imagery released to the media.

There are snippets in the released files indicating that NRC thought the Japanese were denying the extent of the problem, and it might be interesting to compare dates to see whether they were ahead of the discussions here on PF.

 

[Dmytry]

About classification. In all the years I've worked in commercial nuclear power the only classified information has been related to physical and cyber security of the plants. With all of the photographs taken of Fukushima Daiichi, one of the basic security rules has appparently been dismissed as less important than trying to show what is going on.

Access to proprietary information is also limited, but I'm not sure anybody wants to copy the designs of Fukushima plants now. Some of AREVAs details in the water processing system have been withheld for this reason.

I think your concern about classified sensitive information is unfounded. I haven't seen any record of a spokeman refusing to answer a question due to Classified Information. We should be concentrate on the outright lies and deliberate withholding of information that revealed risks to the Japanese population. That was done by TEPCO and the Government of Japan.

Well, so far the spokespeople seem to simply tell that they don't know and not tell of things that happened but they were not asked about.

The NRC files show the same poor resolution photography and information gaps we got from TEPCO, NISA, JAIF, and IAEA. So much for speculation that they were dumbing down the imagery released to the media.

There are snippets in the released files indicating that NRC thought the Japanese were denying the extent of the problem, and it might be interesting to compare dates to see whether they were ahead of the discussions here on PF.

Well, yes. It is a little bit hard to believe at first that NRC would not have any better data about failure at US-built nuclear power plant in US-friendly country than what bits and pieces were released to the public, but that appears to be very much the case. Lack of facts is in a way even worse than a coverup.

Then there's scarcity of source term estimates. We have ZAMG, CTBT-based, putting it at something like 50% Chernobyl for Cs-137 in first 4 days, and the Japanese estimate, based solely on data from monitoring stations in Japan, putting it at something like 15% of Chernobyl for Cs-137. No further CTBT based estimates. The Japanese official data has proved itself utterly ridiculous, with '55% core damage' which represented at once a gross error, and a grossly arrogant belief in own accuracy (to 5%), which would have been rather funny had it not been so tragic.

The official response of japanese government, well, the idea of kids wearing dosimeter badges to playgrounds to stay right below playground exposure limit that is equal to the limit for nuclear workers in EU (but with no ALARA), that's utterly insane. The food contamination monitoring - they do some sampling and there's stories about each sample that's radioactive but it would appear that there is still no comprehensive monitoring. It must be understood that unless government provides full compensation for the cost of products that are to be destroyed (as in germany where government paid half a million euros last year for radioactive wild boars), the product is going to get shipped all over the place and the origins obscured to evade detection and avoid financial loss. TEPCO are not the only people who deny and understate when $ are at risk.

 

[tsutsuji]

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/06_11.html Hiroshima Mayor says Fukushima "shattered the public's trust in nuclear energy".

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/05_28.html As Tepco shuts down Kashiwazaki-Kariwa unit 1 (and unit 7 soon to follow) for regular inspection, NHK reminds that "earlier, Niigata Governor Hirohiko Izumida said he will not determine whether to allow restarting of the reactors unless investigation results into the nuclear accident at the Fukushima plant are presented".

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/06_19.html Naoto Kan "proposed at an energy and environmental panel of Cabinet members at the end of last month that the current policy be completely reversed".

 

[zapperzero]

NYT covers the Fukushima cover-up.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/09/world/asia/09japan.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

AP also
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/08/09/ap-impact-japan-ignored-own-radiation-forecasts/

 

[alpi]

Why do the politicians in Japan not just inform the public that the accidents in Fukushima happened because there were no plans in Japan or elsewhere for dealing with a total station blackout lasting for more than a couple of hours?

It appears that the only thing you have to do to ensure that no release of radioactivity occurs in the unlikely event of a new tsunami of this magnitude is to ensure lasting RPV ventilation and that hoses and fire engine pumps not requiring electricity - but capable of pumping in about 10 litres of seawater per second during the first few critical days - are available in a safe place nearby nuclear reactors.

 

[Astronuc]

Three Japanese ministers fired after Fukushima
http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?storyCode=2060333
10 August 2011

The BBC reports that the head of the Nuclear Industry and Safety Agency, Nobuaki Terasaka, the head of the natural resources and energy agency Tetsuhiro Hosono, and the vice-minister for economy, trade and industry, Kazuo Matsunaga, have been fired because of the problems at Fukushima Daiichi.

 

[zapperzero]

Three Japanese ministers fired after Fukushima
http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?storyCode=2060333
10 August 2011

The BBC reports that the head of the Nuclear Industry and Safety Agency, Nobuaki Terasaka, the head of the natural resources and energy agency Tetsuhiro Hosono, and the vice-minister for economy, trade and industry, Kazuo Matsunaga, have been fired because of the problems at Fukushima Daiichi.

What, no Takaki?