2 more nuclear reactors in Japan clear regulator's safety review


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


©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Japan, you need to wake up and discontinue nuclear power once it for all. Countries such as Germany and Switzerland have understood the magnitude and the price to pay and it is not worth the risk. Word from a physicist working with radiation. No to nuclear power. Period.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Earlier in the month the J Gov had said that they would not ask people to scale back use of electricity in the summer months. This is why, they know more reactors would be in service to cover the demand.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Oh, look! Another two boxes of matches for the kids to play with!

1 ( +5 / -4 )

they are on active fault lines and close to the sea with limited access in the event of a tsunami. Thanks Abe.

Oi is very dangerous. Accident in 15 July 2011. F6 fault running through the plant.

Takahama reactors are MOX, that contains 7% plutonium with half life of 1000+years. Plutonium form Daiichi reached Ibaraki, which means basically Fukui, Shiga, Kyoto and Osaka will be finished. Tsuruga and Mihama have also had accidents. Monju is closed.

If you don't believe that earthquakes happen in Japan, then research Niigata and Shimine. The Niigata earthquake knocked out a couple of reactors, which was purportedly the most earthquake proof reactor design, according to TEPCO.

this is a death penalty for the future citizens of Kansai.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Hi Jose,

 Word from a physicist working with radiation. No to nuclear power. Period.

What is your radiation research topic?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

How many nukes does a nation of 120 some million need in the 21st bc

0 ( +3 / -3 )

'Seismologist Kunihiko Shimazaki, a former commissioner of the NRA, has warned that the authority may have underestimated quake hazards at the Oi plant.'

And earthquakes are impossible to predict as I was told by a Japanese seismologist......

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Just from looking at the picture one can tell that this nuclear facility is on the ocean, and it looks like a 9 meter tidal wave like the one that struck at Fukushima would completely destroy this facility, as well.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Keep changing the rules and anything will pass. The reality of their lifespan plus earthquakes though has a habit of not conforming to corruption

2 ( +3 / -1 )

All I know is that I loathe everything nuclear. Everything. None of this mess will be good for earth's future. A question: why are nuclear power plants in USA all those huge round concrete smokestack looking thingamajigs, whereas in Japan they are much smaller, often box like? Just smaller capacity? Anyway, back to hating nuclear...

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"All I know is that I loathe everything nuclear. E why are nuclear power plants in USA all those huge round concrete smokestack looking thingamajigs,"

Do you think it is possible that your ignorance of "everything nuclear" is tied to your loathing of "everything nuclear"? And if so, how is that situation ever going to correct itself?

OK. Where to start? Seems to me that a lot of outsiders want to tell people with all the knowledge and all the expertise what they should be doing. Seems to me that the operators of these plants met all of the technical requirements and they want to use the reactors to do what their company charter legally entitles them to do. The only knowledgeable person voicing any negativity at all is a former NRA person complaining about some possibility of earthquake, but his concerns must not be too important or he would not have been overridden.

And finally, please, let's all remember that Japanese nuclear reactors all reacted correctly to the strongest earthquake ever recorded in Japan. And let's all remember that safety measures have been taken given all Fukushima information available. Even with the information I have available to me, I would have to say that this facility can definitely withstand the same forces Fukushima Daiichi did. And this is not the Pacific Coast.

"Niigata earthquake knocked out a couple of reactors, "

I think it might have caused the reactors to shut down, as they are designed to do. I think "knocked out" is not accurate.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@iglen the tsunami that hit Tohoku was 26 meters in some places. there was another one the same height about 80 years ago that decimated Iwate. there is a recurring history of earthquakes, tsunamis and typhoons. Also NPPs are built by the sea to cool the core in emergencies, but salt water is very bad for melting down reactors.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Who needs enemies when you have Kepco, Tepco and Govt all in bed to make money now destroying your child's future, congratulation to Abe.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The UK has seen sense, they have stopped work on a new nuclear power plant, its already behind schedule, there is one in Sweden (i think) that way behind in the construction by years and its so over budget, 40 years ago Nuclear power WAS the way forward, but not now there are to many alternatives, solar, wind power, to name a few. So do we need them? I don't think so.

1 ( +1 / -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