Why you should care about Fukushima.

  • 50 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for pcty
pcty

367

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#1 pcty
Member since 2008 • 367 Posts

Big quake near Fukushima would ‘decimate Japan, lead to US West Coast evacuation’

The stricken nuclear plant at Fukushima in northern Japan is in such a delicate condition that a future earthquake could trigger a disaster that would decimate Japan and affect the entire West Coast of North America, a prominent scientist has warned.

Speaking at a symposium on water ecology at the University of Alberta in Canada, prominent Japanese-Canadian scientist David Suzuki said that the Japanese government had been

“lying through its teeth”

about the true extent of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.

He attributed the cover-up to the Japanese government’s collusion with the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) that administers the plant.

“Fukushima is the most terrifying situation that I can imagine,”

Suzuki said, adding that another earthquake could trigger a potentially catastrophic, nuclear disaster.

“The fourth [reactor] has been so badly damaged that the fear is if there’s another earthquake of a 7 or above then that building will go and all hell breaks loose,”

he said, adding that the chances of an earthquake measuring 7 or above in Japan over the next three years were over 95 percent.

“If the fourth [reactor] goes under an earthquake and those rods are exposed, then it’s bye, bye, Japan and everybody on the west coast of North America should be evacuated. And if that isn’t terrifying, I don’t know what is,”

Suzuki said.

http://youtu.be/iTqzqoKMLEg

‘Too proud’

Addressing the Japanese government’s attempts to bring the crisis under control, Suzuki said the scientists charged with the plant’s safety

“don’t know what to do.”

“The thing we need is to let a group of international experts go in with complete freedom to do what they suggest,”

Suzuki said, adding that the only thing impeding this was the “pride” of the Japanese government that was refusing to admit this was necessary.

Suzuki referred to the current scheme of freezing the soil around the reactor to prevent radioactive leaks as

“cockamany.”

TEPCO has accepted the US government’s help in undertaking the risky cleanup operation of the Fukushima site. Teams of experts will begin the removal of fuel rods from the fourth reactor in mid-November in a decommissioning process that is likely to take decades. One wrong move in the delicate operation could result in horrific quantities of radiation being released into the atmosphere or trigger a massive explosion.

Dr Helen Caldicott described the risks of removing the rods to RT as “terribly serious” because of the danger of releasing a large amount of radiation.

“Two rods could touch each other in this process which has been done before and there could be a fission reaction and a very large release of radiation.”

Suzuki, a prominent environmental campaigner and scientist from the University of British Columbia, whose television science programs and books have gained a wide international audience, has been very vocal in his criticisms of Japan in its handling of the disaster.

Despite his prominence in Canada, Suzuki has been criticized in the past by the media for double standards and his credentials as a scientist have been queried. While his television programs encourage society to consume less fossil fuel and adopt a more sustainable lifestyle, Suzuki reportedly lives in one of Vancouver’s most exclusive areas and has faced criticism over his globetrotting airplane travel.

However, with regard to the current situation at Fukushima, a number of scientists have echoed Suzuki’s concerns. Nuclear technology historian Robert Jacobs told RT that there could easily be more destruction at the plant’s fourth reactor.

“If this building were to collapse, which could happen, it would spill these spent nuclear fuel rods all over the ground which would make the 2020 Tokyo Olympics impossible and could threaten all kinds of health problems throughout northern Japan and Tokyo itself,”

Jacobs said.

SOURCE:http://rt.com/news/fukushima-destroy-japan-us-290/

http://youtu.be/iTqzqoKMLEg

Avatar image for Nengo_Flow
Nengo_Flow

10644

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Nengo_Flow
Member since 2011 • 10644 Posts

but Pearl Harbor tho...

Avatar image for k2theswiss
k2theswiss

16599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 1

#4  Edited By k2theswiss
Member since 2007 • 16599 Posts

exact reason why nuclear power plants should be banned from being built till They fucking learn how 100% prevent shit like this

"ooo they are safe" my ass you don't see no coal plants destroying whole city

Avatar image for lostrib
lostrib

49999

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 lostrib
Member since 2009 • 49999 Posts

but can i continue not caring any ways?

Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

19473

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 mattbbpl  Online
Member since 2006 • 19473 Posts

@k2theswiss said:

exact reason why nuclear power plants should be banned from being built till They fucking learn how 100% prevent shit like this

"ooo they are safe" my ass you don't see no coal plants destroying whole city

To see the extent of devastation widespread use of coal can bring see China.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts

David Suzuki?

Excuse me while I ask for a more credible source.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#8 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
@k2theswiss said:

exact reason why nuclear power plants should be banned from being built till They fucking learn how 100% prevent shit like this

"ooo they are safe" my ass you don't see no coal plants destroying whole city

They are perfectly safe when not built on extremely active volcanic regions and maintained properly.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

19473

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 mattbbpl  Online
Member since 2006 • 19473 Posts

@foxhound_fox said:

David Suzuki?

Excuse me while I ask for a more credible source.

I have no idea about this Suzuki character or his more alarming claims. I have heard from credible sources some of his foundations (the plant is still leaking significant radiation through mountain runoff into the ocean, original plans to stop that leak have failed, they're now proceeding with a plan B to freeze the soil around the plant as the article mentions), but that's the last significant update I've heard in quite a while.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#10 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
@mattbbpl said:

I have no idea about this Suzuki character or his more alarming claims.

He is an alarmist, and has been trotting around for decades trying to tell us that unless we hug more trees, the world is going to end. He gained notoriety due to the environmental movement in the late 1980's when "Global Warming!" was a huge concern for everyone and their grandmother. He's been known to exaggerate things to an incredible degree. And it still confuses me why people take him seriously.

Avatar image for Shottayouth13-
Shottayouth13-

7018

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 Shottayouth13-
Member since 2009 • 7018 Posts

Send it to the moon.

Avatar image for Smashbrossive50
Smashbrossive50

3915

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#13 Smashbrossive50
Member since 2009 • 3915 Posts
@foxhound_fox said:

They are perfectly safe when not built on extremely active volcanic regions and maintained properly.

Japan is a frequent country to suffer earthquake and typhoons as well,beat that!

they should've think twice. As a developed country,they should use more "green" technology such as wind power,solar,or hydroelectricity.

Avatar image for Master_Live
Master_Live

20448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#14 Master_Live
Member since 2004 • 20448 Posts

And that is that.

Avatar image for Makhaidos
Makhaidos

2162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 Makhaidos
Member since 2013 • 2162 Posts

Will the Twinkies be okay?

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#16 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
@Makhaidos said:

Will the Twinkies be okay?

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#17 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts

@Smashbrossive50 said:
they should use more "green" technology such as wind power,solar,or hydroelectricity.

Yes, because the output of those types of energy can support entire nations. Lol.

Nuclear fusion is the next major step in power production. "Green" energy will never amount to anything but a feel-good feeling for environmentalists.

Avatar image for deactivated-59f03d6ce656b
deactivated-59f03d6ce656b

2944

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 deactivated-59f03d6ce656b
Member since 2009 • 2944 Posts

@Iszdope: That article is definitely not exaggerated...not in the slightist

Avatar image for EagleEyedOne
EagleEyedOne

1675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21  Edited By EagleEyedOne
Member since 2013 • 1675 Posts

The DOW and NASDAQ have not reached record levels since Fukushima?... Oh, wait, they have. The speculation of prices do not depend upon the natural disasters of Japan. Woops!

Avatar image for Smashbrossive50
Smashbrossive50

3915

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#22 Smashbrossive50
Member since 2009 • 3915 Posts

@foxhound_fox: I can see why people rarely trusted renewable resources despite the energy itself was proposed by them many years ago

I heard that if we use that dangerous nuclear now and then,we can't live for the future,lots would have become desperate for power.take a gander on how the sun produced its own energy,it's an eternal energy,water and wind also do the same thing

Avatar image for EagleEyedOne
EagleEyedOne

1675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 EagleEyedOne
Member since 2013 • 1675 Posts

@Smashbrossive50 said:

@foxhound_fox: I can see why people rarely trusted renewable resources despite the energy itself was proposed by them many years ago

I heard that if we use that dangerous nuclear now and then,we can't live for the future,lots would have become desperate for power.take a gander on how the sun produced its own energy,it's an eternal energy,water and wind also do the same thing

The monopolist always chooses to produce less than what is demanded as that is what maximizes his profits. It's not like us Americans are living in poverty even though these practices exist.

Avatar image for Smashbrossive50
Smashbrossive50

3915

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By Smashbrossive50
Member since 2009 • 3915 Posts

the people's mind is divided into 2 parts.

1. they want control for themselves

2. help the need,and save the generation

yet what I see now is that there are more egoistic politicians who only care for its country than its people.

living in poverty is the biggest problem for a country.the politicians can't seem to solve the problem easily,say Obama.he could've helped the people if he didn't start his "Obamacare" in the first place,the recent debt too,if it was solved sooner,the people will prosper just like before

Avatar image for EagleEyedOne
EagleEyedOne

1675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 EagleEyedOne
Member since 2013 • 1675 Posts

@Smashbrossive50 said:

the people's mind is divided into 2 parts.

1. they want control for themselves

2. help the need,and save the generation

yet what I see now is that there are more egoistic politicians who only care for its country than its people,.

living in poverty is the biggest problem for a country.the politicians can't seem to solve the problem easily,say Obama.he could've helped the people if he didn't start his "Obamacare" in the first place,the recent debt too,if it was solved sooner,the people will prosper just like before

Living in poverty is not the biggest problem for a country. The biggest problem for a country is convincing investors that their investments will not be overtaken by the ruling politicians at any moment.

There must be a reliable legal system.

Avatar image for Smashbrossive50
Smashbrossive50

3915

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By Smashbrossive50
Member since 2009 • 3915 Posts

if financial support failed the country,then for what purpose we live?

property investment is huge in Indonesia,buy a home here will definitely cost about $10 mil. or higher(I am quite sorry if it's a wrong quote,I am still working on financial comparison)

Avatar image for EagleEyedOne
EagleEyedOne

1675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 EagleEyedOne
Member since 2013 • 1675 Posts

@Smashbrossive50 said:

if financial support failed the country,then for what purpose we live?

property investment is huge in Indonesia,buy a home here will definitely cost about $10 mil. or higher(I am quite sorry if it's a wrong quote,I am still working on financial comparison)

A home in Indonesia does not cost $10 Million. You are quoting Malibu, California prices at that number.

Avatar image for Smashbrossive50
Smashbrossive50

3915

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#28 Smashbrossive50
Member since 2009 • 3915 Posts

that's why I suck at doing this,good thing I don't work for the property agents.

back in those days I only can say a standard housing lot could cost at least $1k

let's go back to the topic.

if we don't rely on nuclear power for at least 1 year,do we feel any different?

Avatar image for Makhaidos
Makhaidos

2162

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By Makhaidos
Member since 2013 • 2162 Posts

@foxhound_fox said:

@Smashbrossive50 said:
they should use more "green" technology such as wind power,solar,or hydroelectricity.

Yes, because the output of those types of energy can support entire nations. Lol.

Nuclear fusion is the next major step in power production. "Green" energy will never amount to anything but a feel-good feeling for environmentalists.

Twenty percent of Germany's electricity is green-generated, and they're trying to get that up to thirty-five percent by 2020. Half of Sweden's electricity comes from renewable sources. Renewable energy is a perfectly viable option.

Avatar image for deactivated-5acfa3a8bc51d
deactivated-5acfa3a8bc51d

7914

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#30 deactivated-5acfa3a8bc51d
Member since 2005 • 7914 Posts

A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter.

Avatar image for ferrari2001
ferrari2001

17772

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#31 ferrari2001
Member since 2008 • 17772 Posts

@Makhaidos said:

@foxhound_fox said:

@Smashbrossive50 said:
they should use more "green" technology such as wind power,solar,or hydroelectricity.

Yes, because the output of those types of energy can support entire nations. Lol.

Nuclear fusion is the next major step in power production. "Green" energy will never amount to anything but a feel-good feeling for environmentalists.

Twenty percent of Germany's electricity is green-generated, and they're trying to get that up to thirty-five percent by 2020. Half of Sweden's electricity comes from renewable sources. Renewable energy is a perfectly viable option.

35% That's spending billions upon billions of dollars to set infrastructure up for that energy production. Not to mention you still have 65% of energy that has to come from other sources. Renewable energy sources are extremely low energy producers. Not to mention if the wind stops blowing and at night there is 0 energy production from those sources (excluding hydroelectric). Nuclear energy is the only viable source if you don't want to use coal or oil. Renewable energy is good to strengthen the grid but it cannot be used as the primary source of energy. Unless people are willing to go for periods of time without electricity.

Avatar image for Smashbrossive50
Smashbrossive50

3915

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#32 Smashbrossive50
Member since 2009 • 3915 Posts

Living in a world that relies too much nonrenewable energy would be a waste,only a few European country like what you (@Makhaidos) said did their best to avoid a new Chernobyl-esque incident

Speaking of Chernobyl...I can compare between Fukushima and Chernobyl's fallout.

I am undoubtly sure Chernobyl's fallout can empty Pripyat by means of human error,while Fukushima's fallout was from a natural disaster. Ironically,the government sued TEPCO(Tokyo Electric Power Company) for such,generally speaking the truth,I don't see the mistake TEPCO did.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#33 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts

@Smashbrossive50 said:
it's an eternal energy,water and wind also do the same thing

Water and wind are not "eternal". Wind stops blowing all the time. And water pathways change over time, requiring hydroelectric dams be closed down or relocated (though, we do our best to stop this).

Nuclear fusion is the safest and most environmentally friendly energy option we currently have (that produces on the level it does)... despite the stigma attached to it and the handful of catastrophic events we've had over the past 60 years. The only thing better is fusion, and we are working on that.

Avatar image for Barbariser
Barbariser

6785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#34  Edited By Barbariser
Member since 2009 • 6785 Posts

Even if this is true, I live nowhere near the west coast of North America so I still don't care.

Avatar image for Nibroc420
Nibroc420

13571

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#35  Edited By Nibroc420
Member since 2007 • 13571 Posts

Oh, TC is quoting David Suzuki?

There's a reason not even Canadians give a **** about what he says.

Avatar image for lamprey263
lamprey263

38075

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#36 lamprey263
Member since 2006 • 38075 Posts

I see banning the imagery of nuclear weapons in television, film, and video games has really given them the right respect for nuclear consequences.

Avatar image for chaplainDMK
chaplainDMK

7004

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37  Edited By chaplainDMK
Member since 2008 • 7004 Posts

@foxhound_fox said:

@Smashbrossive50 said:
it's an eternal energy,water and wind also do the same thing

Water and wind are not "eternal". Wind stops blowing all the time. And water pathways change over time, requiring hydroelectric dams be closed down or relocated (though, we do our best to stop this).

Nuclear fusion is the safest and most environmentally friendly energy option we currently have (that produces on the level it does)... despite the stigma attached to it and the handful of catastrophic events we've had over the past 60 years. The only thing better is fusion, and we are working on that.

And to get either Chernobyl or Fukushima you needed a massive cluster-**** to occur. I mean Fukushima needed the 5th largest earthquake in history along with a tsunami to get it to the state it is now. And even then it only occurred because the tsunamis damaged the cooling systems.

Avatar image for SUD123456
SUD123456

5965

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 SUD123456
Member since 2007 • 5965 Posts

David Suzuki - LMAO

The sky is falling, the sky is falling.

Avatar image for jer_1
jer_1

7451

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#39  Edited By jer_1
Member since 2003 • 7451 Posts

People better be concerned about this, the issue will never go away in our lifetime (safe energy my ass). Kiss the west coast good-bye soon if you wish to live without being irradiated and definitely stop eating the fish in cali.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#40 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts

@jer_1 said:

(safe energy my ass)

In terms of production levels, it's easily the safest and most environmentally friendly.

How many nuclear production incidents has their been? Four. Three Mile Island, SL-1, Chernobyl and Fukushima. How many times has there been a petroleum related explosion or fire? Those have been infinitely more damaging to the environment than radiation leaks. The Kuwaiti oil field fires blacked out the skies for weeks. Radiation exposure and related cancer deaths in both the Chernobyl and Fukushima incidents are considered "statistically undetectable".

There is a lot of hooplah associated with nuclear disasters, and their impact can often be highly exaggerated (but there is an impact). Unless you want to give up a lot of electricity-related luxuries, there is no other option to nuclear fission currently. Nothing produces anywhere close to the same amount of power.

Avatar image for jer_1
jer_1

7451

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#41 jer_1
Member since 2003 • 7451 Posts

@foxhound_fox said:

@jer_1 said:

(safe energy my ass)

In terms of production levels, it's easily the safest and most environmentally friendly.

How many nuclear production incidents has their been? Four. Three Mile Island, SL-1, Chernobyl and Fukushima. How many times has there been a petroleum related explosion or fire? Those have been infinitely more damaging to the environment than radiation leaks. The Kuwaiti oil field fires blacked out the skies for weeks. Radiation exposure and related cancer deaths in both the Chernobyl and Fukushima incidents are considered "statistically undetectable".

There is a lot of hooplah associated with nuclear disasters, and their impact can often be highly exaggerated (but there is an impact). Unless you want to give up a lot of electricity-related luxuries, there is no other option to nuclear fission currently. Nothing produces anywhere close to the same amount of power.

Definitely are options coming soon, and some that are quite amazing such as THIS.

Avatar image for SUD123456
SUD123456

5965

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 SUD123456
Member since 2007 • 5965 Posts

@jer_1 said:

@foxhound_fox said:

@jer_1 said:

(safe energy my ass)

In terms of production levels, it's easily the safest and most environmentally friendly.

How many nuclear production incidents has their been? Four. Three Mile Island, SL-1, Chernobyl and Fukushima. How many times has there been a petroleum related explosion or fire? Those have been infinitely more damaging to the environment than radiation leaks. The Kuwaiti oil field fires blacked out the skies for weeks. Radiation exposure and related cancer deaths in both the Chernobyl and Fukushima incidents are considered "statistically undetectable".

There is a lot of hooplah associated with nuclear disasters, and their impact can often be highly exaggerated (but there is an impact). Unless you want to give up a lot of electricity-related luxuries, there is no other option to nuclear fission currently. Nothing produces anywhere close to the same amount of power.

Definitely are options coming soon, and some that are quite amazing such as THIS.

Completely pointless. We have had combined heat and power and a gazillion heat recovery solutions for decades. This particular solution adds nothing material to the equation of today.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#43 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
@jer_1 said:

Definitely are options coming soon, and some that are quite amazing such as THIS.

Tornadoes are the essence of chaos and destruction. They are highly unpredictable and ridiculously powerful. Exactly what we should be "harnessing" for energy. ._.

Avatar image for destinhpark
destinhpark

4831

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#44  Edited By destinhpark
Member since 2006 • 4831 Posts

@lostrib said:

but can i continue not caring any ways?

Yes. It isn't hard.

Avatar image for jer_1
jer_1

7451

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#45  Edited By jer_1
Member since 2003 • 7451 Posts

@foxhound_fox said:
@jer_1 said:

Definitely are options coming soon, and some that are quite amazing such as THIS.

Tornadoes are the essence of chaos and destruction. They are highly unpredictable and ridiculously powerful. Exactly what we should be "harnessing" for energy. ._.

Good thing about the tornado powering this station is that the only way for it to operate is by having hot air pushed into the base, thus there's no way it can get out of control when they just shut down the hot air feed. It's apparently very safe and creates zero harmful chemicals. It's a win win by any measure.

Avatar image for capaho
capaho

1253

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#46  Edited By capaho
Member since 2003 • 1253 Posts

@pcty: Sad but true, neither the Japanese government nor TEPCO have been honest in dealing with the public on the Fukushima disaster, either domestically or internationally. TEPCO is responsible for the problem because they ignored warnings for decades from the US and the IAEA about upgrading the safety systems to prevent exactly this type of disaster but they didn't want to erode profits by spending money on safety upgrades. TEPCO ridiculed foreign advice over its safety systems believing that such systems were only needed by lazy foreigners because Japanese workers were too careful to have a nuclear accident.

Now, to make things worse, the Japanese government is making the export of Japanese nuclear technology a priority in order to help the Japanese nuclear power industry make up for the shortfalls in income due to the fact that most of Japan's nuclear power stations remain offline (but there is a major push to get them back into operation as quickly as possible, including the two undamaged reactors at Fukushima). If that's still not enough, the Japanese government is paying all of the disaster relief and recovery expenses with tax money while letting TEPCO keep the income from their remaining power generation operations. TEPCO is actually profitable while bungling through the largest nuclear power disaster recovery effort in history!

Avatar image for Jackc8
Jackc8

8515

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#47 Jackc8
Member since 2007 • 8515 Posts

The reactors were damaged by the tsunami which destroyed the backup generators used to pump coolant through them. One of them went full-on critical and that necessitated the evacuation of people in the area.

But the story is that if they have another earthquake the whole wold will basically be destroyed. But of course.

Avatar image for Evil_Saluki
Evil_Saluki

5217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 25

User Lists: 0

#48 Evil_Saluki
Member since 2008 • 5217 Posts

BBC Been having a few journalists keeping their eyes on it and they say the threats being downplayed.

Avatar image for FreedomFreeLife
FreedomFreeLife

3948

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#49  Edited By FreedomFreeLife
Member since 2013 • 3948 Posts

[url=http://postimage.org/][img]http://s8.postimg.org/62sermu9h/Intodarkness1.png[/img][/url]

[url=http://postimage.org/][img]http://s8.postimg.org/xngn55met/intodarkness2.png[/img][/url]

[url=http://postimage.org/][img]http://s8.postimg.org/v3l0b1yut/intodarkness3.png[/img][/url]

[url=http://postimage.org/][img]http://s8.postimg.org/f9apewzhx/intodarkness4.png[/img][/url]

We all should care of this. This fukushima already ruins ocean.

Avatar image for FreedomFreeLife
FreedomFreeLife

3948

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#50  Edited By FreedomFreeLife
Member since 2013 • 3948 Posts

Because we all live here. Poor fishes in ocean :(