national

Chubu Electric completes 22-meter-high seawall to protect Hamaoka nuclear plant

19 Comments

Chubu Electric Power Co said Thursday it has completed construction of a seawall to protect its Hamaoka nuclear plant in Shizuoka Prefecture.

The seawall, which rises 22 meters above sea level, is 1.6 kilometers long, and along with other safety measures at the plant, cost about 400 billion yen, Fuji TV reported. Construction began in November 2011.

The Hamaoka plant, which is said to be above a major faultline, is just 100 meters away from the Pacific Ocean and sits in the Tokai region, southwest of Tokyo, where seismologists have long warned that a major quake is overdue because two major continental plates meet here in the Nankai Trough.

Chubu Electric said it is also working on other measures to prevent flooding inside the plant, and programs to safeguard cooling systems that bring reactors to safe shutdown in case of severe accidents. Those measures are expected to be completed on the No. 4 reactor building in September this year and on the No. 3 reactor building in September 2017.

Chubu Electric has applied to the Nuclear Regulation Authority for a safety check of the two reactors. However, the inspection has been on hold pending the investigation of a geologic fault under the plant. Chubu Electric said its own geological survey in the area found no active faultlines.

The NRA has requested sea floor inspections near the faultlines, and more detailed diagrams of the movement of the plates near the plant.

© Japan Today

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

19 Comments
Login to comment

cost about 400 billion yen

Perfunctory. Another non-surprise from the unclear village (typo intended).

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Excellent. Do not worry about the fault under it. Fire away and hit the start button!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

cost about 400 billion yen

Roughly $3.5 billion US. This is why they want them restarted, have to justify the money spent "protecting" the unprotectable. I wonder if they plan on spending just as much money on try to fix the "crack" waiting to split underneath the reactor?.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

400 billion yen. Another example of cheap & safe nuclear energy?

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Pic from the air:

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=%e4%b8%ad%e9%83%a8%e6%b5%9c%e5%b2%a1&view=detailv2&id=2D43B769BF2FA5F4E03EDE45CDD3A635A19972AD&selectedindex=4&ccid=QpTsPwyr&simid=607992899892217980&thid=OIP.M4294ec3f0cab1d2837ecfb97de3dd283o0&mode=overlay&first=1

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So when the long overdue mega-quake flattens the wall, is all that rubble still going to protect the plant?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"Chubu Electric said its own geological survey in the area found no active faultiness."

Of course they found nothing! Then when the big one hits they can say they had 'no idea it was there', and 'how could they have known'. Oh wait... that doesn't make sense... but then, it's the nuclear village we're talking about, so they'll never pay for it anyway.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

@ Stuart haywardMar

400 billion yen. Another example of cheap & safe nuclear energy?

You took the words out of my keyboard...

1 ( +3 / -2 )

"Chubu Electric said its own geological survey in the area found no active faultiness." Must be safe then. Case closed.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

From Wikipedia, "On 6 May 2011, Prime Minister Naoto Kan requested the Hamaoka Nuclear Power Plant be shut down as an earthquake of magnitude 8.0 or higher is estimated 87% likely to hit the area within the next 30 years.[3][4][5] Kan wanted to avoid a possible repeat of the Fukushima I nuclear accidents.[6] "

The sea wall will help against tsunamis from other areas, which is good, but this is the region of the expected "mega-quake, as David, above, mentions. It may be that directly under the plant itself there is no faultline, but it really doesn't matter. When that quake hits, the plant and the region are toast.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

How does the LDP cost these projects: votes per tonne of concrete, or %age KB?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

shonanbbMAR. 31, 2016 - 05:34PM JST Excellent. Do not worry about the fault under it. Fire away and hit the start button!

Exactly. Tsunamis result from earthquakes, but not all earthquakes cause tsunamis.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The ldp & yakuza are laughing all the way to the bank, what a sick disgrace

0 ( +2 / -2 )

A fault underneath the reactor plant could cause a tsunami, but any tsunami resulting from the earthquake would be traveling AWAY from the reactor.

The Tohoku Earthquake actually LOWERED the elevation of the nearby lands - up to 1.2 meters in Miyagi prefecture, so you can probably expect something similar to happen near this plant. The wall may reach 22 meters above sea level now, but after the land snaps back? Also, the 3/11 tsunami reached 40 meters high in some places, so a 22 meter wall isn't that much to brag about.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Japan with Fukushima at home takes another safety approch than distant Germany. Seems that Japan, despite its historic experience, and other Asian countries react more rationally than some European countries.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Fadamor

It was 40 metres in some places at the back of the town where it had gone over the sea wall and reached the cliffs/mountains and the force of the water pushed it up. This was caused by the natural incline of the land and the fact the water reached a point it had nowhere to go and wasn't the height of the wave as it made landfall.

It wasn't 40 meters high as it went over the sea walls.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

That 400 billion yen would have gone a long way to developing safer renewable energy sources. However, as stated above, they will not let go of this investment regardless of the dangers and costs. They openly state this plant is on an active fault line, but still spend all that money on a sea wall that,ought stop a tsunami, but will do very little in the event of a another super quake. It would have been more cost effective just to waterproof the electrics and get the back up generators off the ground, as was suggested to TEPCO in the early 2000's. One of the towns that was swamped by the 3/11 tsunami had a 20 meter sea wall, but the town sunk by a meter in the quake causing the wall to fail. This sea wall is a great afterthought, but it's also just a huge waste of money that could have been better spent.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Carl Magnusson:

" apan with Fukushima at home takes another safety approch than distant Germany. "

Germany is buying nuclear produced electricity from neighbouring countries, including places such as Belgium where islamic radicals have been shadowing workers at the local nuclear plants and planning to attack and blow them up, discovered documents have show. That is what you recommend for Japan?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Meanwhile, this little bitty kind of thing goes on:

http://www.jma.go.jp/en/quake/20160401114334395-011139.html

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