From EDITOR’s desk
April 26, 1986, a disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear plant that shook the world from the hinges. The radioactive fall out affected then and thereafter, spreading all across eastern and western Europe devastated almost half of Soviet population.
Probably the nuclear fall out still haunts the people of Russia and neighboring countries but nobody denies nuclear energy is arguable the most potent of all, but in the recent Japan’s earthquake caused a nuclear crisis, which once again point out a fundamental question – do nuclear rich countries take appropriate measures to full proof the safety of people? Japan catastrophe also raises the question of discussion about the safety of nuclear energy within the self-styled bylaws of regulatory agencies.
On March 11, 2011, Japan had witnessed the worst natural calamity in decades. The 9.0-magnitude earthquake and subsequent tsunami not only wrecked normal life, but also damaged Tokyo Electrical Power Co. (TEPCO) Fukushima 1 Nuclear Power Plant, resulting fatal nuclear leak.
TEPCO doesn’t have the best record for safety or disclosure of information. In 2002, the nuclear plant was alleged for forging safety records, and subsequently was forced to shut down all 17 of its reactors.
The nuclear power plant have had been always in a flimsy state. In 2007, TEPCO was once again shut down all seven reactors at the world’s largest nuclear power station on the west coast of the country, owing to a smaller 6.6 earthquake.
The question of nuclear safety is indisputably more significant in countries like Japan, which are prone to earthquake or other natural disaster. Japan is world’s third largest developer of nuclear reactors (55) behind France and United States with 59 and over 100 respectively. Japan obtains one third of its electricity from these reactors, and planning to build 15 more nuclear reactors.
Japan environmental activists have blamed the regulatory agencies for negligence and a typical culture of management of covering up mistakes.
The problem is that nuclear power companies like TEPCO and the government regulators are "essentially one and the same," says Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, a civil society organization.
The problem lies in the mentality of industries who are very specific about their business, and both the industry and regulators do not want to educate people or policy makers. They never explain the nuances of radioactivity. The truth is radioactive reactors need to take extreme precautionary measurements because even it is shut down, it still generates an enormous amount of heat that hast to be removed to prevent a meltdown.
A perfect example of this pandemonium has been seen in TEPCO's Fukushima I reactor number 4, which was closed since December, but the recent earthquake damaged the cooling system and threatened to go fatal.
 |
| Japan Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant |
April 26, 1986, a disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear plant that shook the world from the hinges. The radioactive fall out affected then and thereafter, spreading all across eastern and western Europe devastated almost half of Soviet population.
Probably the nuclear fall out still haunts the people of Russia and neighboring countries but nobody denies nuclear energy is arguable the most potent of all, but in the recent Japan’s earthquake caused a nuclear crisis, which once again point out a fundamental question – do nuclear rich countries take appropriate measures to full proof the safety of people? Japan catastrophe also raises the question of discussion about the safety of nuclear energy within the self-styled bylaws of regulatory agencies.
On March 11, 2011, Japan had witnessed the worst natural calamity in decades. The 9.0-magnitude earthquake and subsequent tsunami not only wrecked normal life, but also damaged Tokyo Electrical Power Co. (TEPCO) Fukushima 1 Nuclear Power Plant, resulting fatal nuclear leak.
TEPCO doesn’t have the best record for safety or disclosure of information. In 2002, the nuclear plant was alleged for forging safety records, and subsequently was forced to shut down all 17 of its reactors.
The nuclear power plant have had been always in a flimsy state. In 2007, TEPCO was once again shut down all seven reactors at the world’s largest nuclear power station on the west coast of the country, owing to a smaller 6.6 earthquake.
The question of nuclear safety is indisputably more significant in countries like Japan, which are prone to earthquake or other natural disaster. Japan is world’s third largest developer of nuclear reactors (55) behind France and United States with 59 and over 100 respectively. Japan obtains one third of its electricity from these reactors, and planning to build 15 more nuclear reactors.
Japan environmental activists have blamed the regulatory agencies for negligence and a typical culture of management of covering up mistakes.
The problem is that nuclear power companies like TEPCO and the government regulators are "essentially one and the same," says Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, a civil society organization.
The problem lies in the mentality of industries who are very specific about their business, and both the industry and regulators do not want to educate people or policy makers. They never explain the nuances of radioactivity. The truth is radioactive reactors need to take extreme precautionary measurements because even it is shut down, it still generates an enormous amount of heat that hast to be removed to prevent a meltdown.
A perfect example of this pandemonium has been seen in TEPCO's Fukushima I reactor number 4, which was closed since December, but the recent earthquake damaged the cooling system and threatened to go fatal.
No comments:
Post a Comment
User comments posted on Asia Pacific News website are the sole views and opinions of the comment writer and are not representative of any of our staff, writer, agency, reporter or citizen journalist. We accept no liability and will not be held accountable for user comments.
We reserve the right to edit, to remove or to censor any comments.
Webmasters seeking for backlinks may contribute a guest post with two outbound links (Home page and internal page) and submit it in the below comment box, which will be shifted to blog post under suitable category by moderator.