Japan Earthquake: Political Aspects

[Borek]

Italian people rejet massively Berlusconi plan for nuclear energy in June 12 referendum, where for the first time in 16 years, more than 50% (57%) of the voters participated.

Almost 95% of the voters expressed their wish to withdraw from any nuclear power.

I wonder if the result would be so one sided if not for the fact in coincided in time with Fukushima disaster.

 

[jlduh]

Japan Steel works, which is the only company in the world able to manufacture big reactor vessels from one single piece of metal (above 1000 MWh) and that made all the 53 reactors vessels in Japan, takes a downturn, just compare these two informations:

2008:
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/C-Japan_Steel_Works_to_triple_capacity-0312085.html

June 2011:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/06/01/bloomberg1376-LM52RA07SXKX01-5QCK77VCM4BFNKHOTOK8GNUOJM.DTL

 

[jlduh]

I wonder if the result would be so one sided if not for the fact in coincided in time with Fukushima disaster.

Are you surprised that Fuskushima disaster has an impact on people mind in the world about nuclear energy?

If there was no Chernobyl, no Fukushima, no other problems and fears (waste storage and "retreatment" dead end for example, etc.) , if there was no huge implications for social communities after nuclear accidents, if ... if ... if nuclear energy was different than what is is in fact, then i can assure you that 95% of Italian (and others) would be favourable to this industry!

But... this is just NOT the case! These things exists and make what we call reality.

Hard time for nuclear proponents and those who earn their salary from this industry to admit reality (and especially "impossible" recent reality), it seems...

 

[westfield]

I wonder if the result would be so one sided if not for the fact in coincided in time with Fukushima disaster.

Apparently Italy had already had a referendum and said no to muclear power just after Chernobyl but technically that ruling only lasted 5 years.

They are a rather seismically active country, Berlusconi isn't too popular, Fukushima, take your pick.

If Italy could somehow harness the energy of automobile horns their energy issues would be over ;)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jc8f64FqRdHw4lyc7rx--EFRfG7g?docId=b70264b1519247ff995a06bf8aaeb7ee"

 

[Borek]

Are you surprised that Fuskushima disaster has an impact on people mind in the world about nuclear energy?

No, I am not. However, asking such question just after the accident will always give skewed answer, this is a known psychological effect. That means the answer given at this particular moment doesn't reflect average sentiments of Italians (whatever they are).

I am not even trying to analyze political aspects of the referendum, for sure they add to the result as well.

Hard time for nuclear proponents and those who earn their salary from this industry to admit reality (and especially "impossible" recent reality), it seems...

This is pure propaganda. Just like razzz, you are fighting statements that you judge as biased with your own biased statements.

 

[jlduh]

35 out of 54 reactors currently stopped in Japan, production down to 16 500 MWh from a total capacity of more than 49 000 MWh (33% of the full capacity):

http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20110614dy02.htm

The problem is also that many qualified people are right now full time on the Fukushima disaster, which will limit the ability to work on regular maintenance program and inspections on other reactors. By the way, Tepco i now also facing an other concern: how to replace workers who already have reached (and even more than reached for some!) their dose limits?

 

[jlduh]

No, I am not. However, asking such question just after the accident will always give skewed answer, this is a known psychological effect. That means the answer given at this particular moment doesn't reflect average sentiments of Italians (whatever they are).

I am not even trying to analyze political aspects of the referendum, for sure they add to the result as well.



This is pure propaganda. Just like razzz, you are fighting statements that you judge as biased with your own biased statements.

I can of course admit your last sentence. But at least my bias is free from any money, which is not the case of every bias, let's recognize it. It is still a bias maybe, but only a free time citizen one...

Now, personally, i don't see biases as abnormal. Democracy is (or should be) a system where biases from individuals or groups can continuously interact in a free way to create balanced power, with means Power AND Counter Power (not sure of my english translation, sorry) actions in decision making. What is abnormal is when biases are not confronting themselves in a balanced manner.

That is for example what i understand from reading this statement from Madarame (chairperson of Japan Nuclear Safety Commission):

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3341445&postcount=284

He said the guidelines were not revised because experts on nuclear power generation are an enclosed group and they tend to avoid vigorous discussions and uncomfortable subjects. He concluded that the Fukushima accidents were caused by human error.

Of course you can say also that his statement is biased because this is said just after the Fukushima accident, and that he wouldn't have said that publicly in "normal times"

So bias is everywhere, let's recognize it, maybe?

 

[robinson]

To err on the side of caution, when it comes to nuclear accidents, is no vice.

 

[zapperzero]

Speaking of errors.
The IAEA report says

The resulting ground acceleration at Units 1, 4 and 6 did not exceed the standard seismic ground motion, whereas at Units 2, 3 and 5, the resulting ground acceleration did exceed the standard seismic ground motion. The tsunami exceeded the design basis at all units.

Yomiuri Shinbun reports http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T110316005275.htm" :

FUKUSHIMA--Strong horizontal jolts dislodged ceiling pipes and massive amounts of water started flooding out--this was the frightening scene experienced by a worker who was in the building housing the No. 1 reactor of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant when the earthquake hit Friday.

Am I to understand that an earthquake that was not supposed to damage the #1 reactor, did in fact damage it?

 

[SteveElbows]

Speaking of errors.
The IAEA report says
Yomiuri Shinbun reports http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T110316005275.htm" :Am I to understand that an earthquake that was not supposed to damage the #1 reactor, did in fact damage it?

Well the reports words you quote about which units had higher than standard seismic ground motion does not actually make any claims as to damage, its only talking about what earthquake instruments measured within the different reactors.

As for what damage the earthquake may have caused, it clearly remains possible that there was some, but we still lack useful evidence. The article you link to is interesting, but it does not give enough information for us to judge what exactly was damaged, if anything. We need this eye witness report to be confirmed, and we need to know what system the pipes belonged to.

 

[Borek]

I wonder what it means for the building to be earthquake resistant. Perhaps it should survive with no structural damage, but without guarantee that everything inside stays intact? Or perhaps things inside are rated differently - some are designed to survive, some less important can be damaged?

 

[Luca Bevil]

http://www.jaif.or.jp/english/news_images/pdf/ENGNEWS02_1308214183P.pdf

Have a look at the trend for nuclear support polls in Japan.

Seems slow but unequivocable.

People are starting to feel the real pain, I guess...

 

[jlduh]

Municipal heads go anti-nuclear
Municipal heads and reconstruction experts are discussing ways to reduce the use of nuclear power after the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

...

On June 15th, a panel of experts in Fukushima Prefecture agreed on a draft of basic concepts for reconstruction that includes the idea of abandoning nuclear power and promoting renewable energy. The head of a town in Yamaguchi Prefecture, where the Chugoku Electric Power Company aims to operate a nuclear plant in 7 years, indicated the possibility of reviewing the town's nuclear-tolerant stance.

Kaminoseki Mayor Shigemi Kashiwabara told the municipal assembly on Tuesday that the town needs to consider breaking free from nuclear power.The mayor of Osaka City, Kunio Hiramatsu, has suggested that Kansai Electric Power Company should pursue new energy sources to replace nuclear power.

Goshi Hosono, the prime minister's advisor for the Fukushima accident, said it is natural for municipal heads and others to voice their objections to nuclear power amid the disaster at the Fukushima plant.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/22_02.html

 

[splitringtail]

Don't think it has already been mentionned...

Italian people rejet massively Berlusconi plan for nuclear energy in June 12 referendum, where for the first time in 16 years, more than 50% (57%) of the voters participated.

Almost 95% of the voters expressed their wish to withdraw from any nuclear power.

I can live that, but this makes me want go into fast food industry if this catches on:

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/05/italian-scientists-to-stand-trial.html?ref=hp

Seems like to me the political environment is not science friendly at all, which is ironic considering it was the birthplace of the Renaissance.

 

[Luca Bevil]

I can live that, but this makes me want go into fast food industry if this catches on:

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/05/italian-scientists-to-stand-trial.html?ref=hp

Seems like to me the political environment is not science friendly at all, which is ironic considering it was the birthplace of the Renaissance.

Sorry being Italian I can't refrain from commenting this statement.

There is no anti scientific mood in the country at all.

The referendum decision about nuclear power has been taken (more or less informedly, but lack of precise scientific knowledge was common in both camps) on rational concerns, among which I would certainly put first and foremost the risk of major accidents, just demonstrated in Fukushima.
One might or might not agree with that stance but it means nothing with respect to the country stance toward science.

The other case is a trial about the possibility of professional misconduct, for the L'Aquila quake, 3 years ago.

The politic environment, which has issues of its own has little to do with both facts.

 

[Borek]

L'Aquila process is already discussed here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=502291

 

[swl]

http://www.jaif.or.jp/english/news_images/pdf/ENGNEWS02_1308214183P.pdf

Have a look at the trend for nuclear support polls in Japan.

Seems slow but unequivocable.

People are starting to feel the real pain, I guess...

I find it interesting that the trend shows a progressive erosion of support for nuclear power as we get further from the earthquake and meltdowns. Perhaps people are starting to learn things about nuclear accidents that they had assumed to be impossible?

I wonder how long it will take for the trend to reverse. I also wonder how the reaction will be outside of Japan.

 

[Danuta]

... Perhaps people are starting to learn things about nuclear accidents that they had assumed to be impossible?

Yes, that is it exactly. And in addition, it makes one feel like a naive fool for assuming.

 

[splitringtail]

The referendum decision about nuclear power has been taken (more or less informedly, but lack of precise scientific knowledge was common in both camps) on rational concerns, among which I would certainly put first and foremost the risk of major accidents, just demonstrated in Fukushima. One might or might not agree with that stance but it means nothing with respect to the country stance toward science.

I was not referring to that actually. I support nuclear, but I will not push it on anyone. It is a country's own prerogative if they want nuclear power.

I have been trying to find some good evidence on Enzo Boschi's misconduct, If you know of any, then could you can add to the other thread.

Perhaps I made the erroneous assumption that if his and the other scientists misconduct was clear then geologists around the world would point it out pretty quick to protect themselves from similar situation. US Geologic Survey has been supportive.

Look at Fukushima, nuclear experts across the world have been critical of Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. It keeps the heat of them to be honest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/22/world/asia/22japan.html

 

[Luca Bevil]

I was not referring to that actually. I support nuclear, but I will not push it on anyone. It is a country's own prerogative if they want nuclear power.

I have been trying to find some good evidence on Enzo Boschi's misconduct, If you know of any, then could you can add to the other thread.

Perhaps I made the erroneous assumption that if his and the other scientists misconduct was clear then geologists around the world would point it out pretty quick to protect themselves from similar situation. US Geologic Survey has been supportive.

Look at Fukushima, nuclear experts across the world have been critical of Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. It keeps the heat of them to be honest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/22/world/asia/22japan.html

About Enzo Boschi conduct I've had no time to form a specific opinion.
It is more than likely than you know about it much more than I do.

I should perhaps have stated it more clearly but I just do not think that Italy's attitude toward science can be extrapolated form the two cases you mentioned.

This does not mean that I think Italy is having astounding successes in technical or scientific advances (quite the contrary in fact); it is just that I do not see around any prevailing persecutory mood toward science or scientists.

 

[NUCENG]

About Enzo Boschi conduct I've had no time to form a specific opinion.
It is more than likely than you know about it much more than I do.

I should perhaps have stated it more clearly but I just do not think that Italy's attitude toward science can be extrapolated form the two cases you mentioned.

This does not mean that I think Italy is having astounding successes in technical or scientific advances (quite the contrary in fact); it is just that I do not see around any prevailing persecutory mood toward science or scientists.

Generalization or inferring a general conclusion from a single example is tempting, but invalid in most cases. Using a prosecution of a scientist to say that Italy is anti science is wrong. Using the referendum on nuclear power in Italy to infer that nuclear power is wrong in other countries is wrong. Using Fukushima management and government mistakes or even criminal negligence to say that all nuclear is unsafe and should be shutdown is equally wrong.

In Latin it is "Non sequitur."

 

[QuantumPion]

Generalization or inferring a general conclusion from a single example is tempting, but invalid in most cases. Using a prosecution of a scientist to say that Italy is anti science is wrong. Using the referendum on nuclear power in Italy to infer that nuclear power is wrong in other countries is wrong. Using Fukushima management and government mistakes or even criminal negligence to say that all nuclear is unsafe and should be shutdown is equally wrong.

In Latin it is "Non sequitur."

I disagree.

In Latin it is a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid.

 

[NUCENG]

I disagree.

In Latin it is a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid.

I am back in High Scool Latin with Sister Mary San Quentin and I am having cold sweats. Thanks for the correction.

 

[NUCENG]

So, what happened to this? How serious is this violation? Is it something everyone violates all the time, or is it rare?

FYI NRC has responded to FOIAs

FOIA/PA 11-0118, 0119, and 0120

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/foia/japan-foia-info.html

Rough count is way over 1000 pp.

 

[zapperzero]

FYI NRC has responded to FOIAs

FOIA/PA 11-0118, 0119, and 0120

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/foia/japan-foia-info.html

Rough count is way over 1000 pp.

I love it how the gov't is making citizens pay for data that citizens' money made possible to gather in the first place. Quaint American idea. Other than that... many of the more interesting FOIA requests are still open (like the one on rad counts in the US).

 

[NUCENG]

I love it how the gov't is making citizens pay for data that citizens' money made possible to gather in the first place. Quaint American idea. Other than that... many of the more interesting FOIA requests are still open (like the one on rad counts in the US).

What are you talking about? There is no charge for downloading from ADAMS. Only charges are for duplication and research fees if the requestor doesn't meet the exemptions anmd there are lots of exemptions.

 

[zapperzero]

Only charges are for duplication and research fees if the requestor doesn't meet the exemptions and there are lots of exemptions.

Duplicating bits is free or nearly so. Research fees? For documents in electronic format, at least, those should be as near zero as makes no difference as well.

I remarked on this in passing, because I was sincerely amused at the ways of your country's bureaucracy (not being a US citizen, I could care less).

However, after reviewing some of the released documents, it became apparent to me that the process of release does indeed involve an actual human being moving actual bits of paper around (printouts of e-mails and presentations etc etc). If it sounds costly, quaint, antiquated and unwieldy to you, it's because it is.

I will also note that this habit, beside wasting paper and man-hours, strips away any and all metadata from electronic documents (such as authorship, editing history, distribution list, access control, signatures, comments, EXIF etc etc) and thus by its very nature violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the FOIA.

But we're drifting way off-topic here, I believe?

 

[nikkkom]

I do disagree. If life gives you lemons, you should return them and ask for a refund.

Folk wisdom disagrees with you.

But seriously, it's not such a good place to store lots of radwaste. There's a city nearby and the site geology is real bad.

In this case, you should think that the entire Japan is not a good place for NPPs, because NPPs are more vulnerable to earthquake than dry casks, which are nearly undestructible.

Considering that Japan also has no deserts to cover with photovoltaics and its total potential wind power capacity is probably less than country's energy demand, what do you propose they should base their long-term power generation needs on?

 

[NUCENG]

Duplicating bits is free or nearly so. Research fees? For documents in electronic format, at least, those should be as near zero as makes no difference as well.

I remarked on this in passing, because I was sincerely amused at the ways of your country's bureaucracy (not being a US citizen, I could care less).

However, after reviewing some of the released documents, it became apparent to me that the process of release does indeed involve an actual human being moving actual bits of paper around (printouts of e-mails and presentations etc etc). If it sounds costly, quaint, antiquated and unwieldy to you, it's because it is.

I will also note that this habit, beside wasting paper and man-hours, strips away any and all metadata from electronic documents (such as authorship, editing history, distribution list, access control, signatures, comments, EXIF etc etc) and thus by its very nature violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the FOIA.

But we're drifting way off-topic here, I believe?

This IS the more political thread, so I'd like to ask how your country would have responded to these requests?

 

[zapperzero]

This IS the more political thread, so I'd like to ask how your country would have responded to these requests?

My country is a godforsaken backwater, but we do have a law similar to FOIA, so I'd probably get an answer to a similar question within 30 days.

The request form provides a space for me to specify an e-mail address where I want the documents to be sent. There is a tax for hardcopies, but no research tax. All the documents on the commission's website are in electronic format (no scanned PDFs, just e-text).

One of the funny-weird features of the local NRC-equivalent website is the section containing the tax statements of the Commission members. A wise provision, in a country plagued by corruption and tax crime.

EDIT: to be honest, I'm almost sure printing out e-mails, re-scanning them and collating them into PDF copies is way beyond the technical competence of the Commission's clerical staff, so I'd get the electronic format documents faute de mieux, as it were...

EVEN LATER EDIT: Come to think of it, I might just ask them if they've seen any traces of radioactivity from Fukushima. Hmm...