• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report blasts Japan’s preparation for, response to Fukushima disaster

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
In contrast, the report released Thursday suggested that the 9.0-magnitude earthquake that triggered the tsunami may have caused critical damage that led to the series of meltdowns. It argued that the nuclear power plants should have been made more quake-proof, and blamed lax safety measures on what it called the country’s powerful and “collusive” decision-makers and on a conformist culture that allowed them to operate with little scrutiny.

Now, again, why don't we need government regulation? Please explain.

Article is here.
 
this all happened, because the power at Fukashima went out.

that's it. that's the cause.

how could they not have a plan to supply power in case of emergency on top of emergency?

every nuke power plant should have a plan to provide power to the cooling systems, in case of two catastrophic events that take out primary & secondary power supplies.
 
this all happened, because the power at Fukashima went out.

that's it. that's the cause.

how could they not have a plan to supply power in case of emergency on top of emergency?

every nuke power plant should have a plan to provide power to the cooling systems, in case of two catastrophic events that take out primary & secondary power supplies.

They had primary power, backup power, and batteries. How many backup systems would make you feel better?

Oh, and how many people died, again?

Ironically, resistance to nuclear power causes these kinds of problems. The NIMBY crowd makes it so hard to build newer, safer power plants that we're forced to leave older, less-safe plants running beyond their intended lifespans.
 
Last edited:
They had primary power, backup power, and batteries. How many backup systems would make you feel better?

Oh, and how many people died, again?

Ironically, resistance to nuclear power causes these kinds of problems. The NIMBY crowd makes it so hard to build newer, safer power plants that we're forced to leave older, less-safe plants running beyond their intended lifespans.

Ideally they would have had a fail safe that would have stopped the nuclear reactions from occuring or at least combining

Newer power plants have that if I am not mistaken
 
how could they not have a plan to supply power in case of emergency on top of emergency?

every nuke power plant should have a plan to provide power to the cooling systems, in case of two catastrophic events that take out primary & secondary power supplies.

The Fukushima nuclear reactors were manufactured by G.E. in the 1970s and there were no safety mechanisms in the original design. The Japanese nuclear regulators knew about it but both the government and Tokyo Electric Power Co. ignored the safety issues and refused to upgrade those ancient nuclear reactors because it would have cost too much money and time, which resulted in the preventable man-made disaster.
 
Ideally they would have had a fail safe that would have stopped the nuclear reactions from occuring or at least combining

Newer power plants have that if I am not mistaken

If it were that easy, it would have been done. You can't just shut off fission.
 
Back
Top Bottom