national

12% of Fukushima town still a no-go zone

18 Comments
By MARI YAMAGUCHI

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


18 Comments
Login to comment

If TEPCO had built the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant on the Pacific-facing 35-meter bluff that existed beforehand, instead of first clearing away that bluff, the Fukushima meltdown would never have occurred. This was an engineering miscue for two purposes: (1) to build directly on bedrock (thought to be more earthquake-proof), and (2) to save on the cost of pumping cooling seawater up the 35-meter bluff.

16 ( +16 / -0 )

12% think that might be the lowest estimate. What's the % of residents after 10 years who want to/ able to return? The disaster ruined their lives, the subsequent actions or inaction of TEPCO and the government compounded the disasters impact on their lives. It's unfathnoble that the third largest economy is so bereft of effectively helping its own people. Doesn't take a super duper computer to see what's needed to be done, takes politicians to do what should not be done.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

@Asiaman7

I agree.

Mistakes have been definitely made. Including not having enough backup generators incase the ones you have get flooded from a second wave.

Giving up on nuclear power for Japan I'm not a fan off. Which some seem to support.

We are developing better safety features, we can make reactors smaller, we can even use the nuclear waste produce from older plants to recycle the fuel and use it again in newer plants. Fukushima reactor was old from 1967.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

The whole area needs to be shut down.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@ Asiaman7 you totally correct on that .It was avoidable.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Minus the weeds, this structure doesn't look out of place in any Japanese town or city anywhere in Japan, given how the Japanese never perform maintenance or DIY on their buildings.

15 ( +17 / -2 )

Very sad.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Animals are happy, they have more freedom

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

So the Japanese govt has the constitutional right to lock out citizens (Fukushima) but not lock down (COVID)? Yep, that makes perfect sense.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Furor in Japanese Town Casts Light on Fukushima’s Legacy:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/10/business/japan-fukushima-nuclear-waste.html

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Animals are happy, they have more freedom

I’ve been there a few times doing radiation checks for my blog. The thing that struck me the most, apart the the devastation and high radiation, was the silence. It was like when I was in the Sahara Desert. No birds, no insects. Just quiet.

true, wild animals have more freedom without hunters and traps, but the cows are still in prison farms before being trucked long distances to have their place of origin changed.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Minus the weeds, this structure doesn't look out of place in any Japanese town or city anywhere in Japan, given how the Japanese never perform maintenance or DIY on their buildings.

Agreed, the photos could be of any place in Japan

14 ( +14 / -0 )

ReasonandWisdomNippon

We are developing better safety features, we can make reactors smaller, we can even use the nuclear waste produce from older plants to recycle the fuel and use it again in newer plants. Fukushima reactor was old from 1967.

You keep posting that incorrect comment. Not all of the six reactors were built at the same time. The first reactor started to operate in 1971. The other five were 1974-1979.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Goodlucktoyou

I’ve been there a few times doing radiation checks for my blog.

blog?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Regarding the physics of nuclear radiation, what exactly is it that could make anyone think about something like from one meter outside a no-go zone it is healthy but being at the border or inside of a no-go zone is not?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

This is an extremely complex issue, because they will be people who want to stay/return in the same place and others who are prepared to move away, even if relunctantly.

Given the cost of tsunami walls, rebuilt towns, and scraping away square kilometers of topsoil, it's fair to assume that most of the money has been spent enabling people to stay or return. On a per capita basis, I would imagine it is a very high sum, far higher than anyone got in compensation or support for moving away.

In the mountains in particular, there are many "haison", abandoned villages. While some Japanese make a big thing of living in their grandfather's house or continuing to farm his land, it is just as Japanese to move away.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@zichi.

i have a Fukushima Daiichi NPP disaster related blog. I did 3 research trips in Tohoku, 4 in Tokyo. Many, many in Kansai. Last test was in Kyoto Eki, 0.155µSv at 1 meter.

my blog only has 100,000 views, but I will be doing more testing because of the Olympics. I think I need Japanese translation, not many foreigners around these days...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Radiation dose rate: 6.0 microsievert per hour / 75 times above normal. The normal rate before the Fukushima nuclear disaster was 0.08 microsieverts an hour. Radiation levels 38 – 160 times above normal. The normal rate before the Fukushima nuclear disaster was 0.08 microsieverts an hour."

A decade since the Fukushima disaster

Greenpeace Report March 9 2021

https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/46720/since-fukushima-disaster-decade/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites