national

High court nixes call to halt nuclear reactors in southwestern Japan

35 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

35 Comments
Login to comment

The utility argued it adopts scientific methods based on experts' views to predict seismic shaking and is implementing necessary safety measures

Oh, yes! And these were the same 'experts' in charge of safety monitoring at Fukushima Dai-Ichi and we all know how that worked out, don't we?

Genkai 1 - 1975/02/14

Genkai 2 - 1980/06/03

Genkai 3 - 1993/06/15

Genkai 4 - 1996/11/12

Reactors 3 & 4 are only 25 years old. What's the problem? (roll eyes)

9 ( +16 / -7 )

A binding referendum would help.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

Just let these so called experts watch the tv show 'Chernobyl' or in fact send them over there to see if turning them on in a quake prone country is such a good idea.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Get ready for another nuclear disaster.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

The courts will only follow official Japanese policy. That's what they are paid to enforce.

What is ridiculous is that some of the power utilities have only submitted plans to improve the standards of the nuclear power plant, and yet have already received approval to restart. Elsewhere, you 'd have to have completed the improvements before you could get approval.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Residents, try again and get better lawyers! You are in the right. Nuclear power anywhere, but especially Japan for the long list of dangers, including bureaucratic inertia, is playing with nuclear fire. We know how well this went for Chernobyl and Fukushima.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Are the deciding panel Japanese too ???.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@vinarius Are the deciding panel Japanese too?

Yes. It is a Japanese Court.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

While energy is a concern . . . govt should start investigating clean energy from other sources:  sun, wind, natural gas, biofuels.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

New modular nukes could replace the reactors gradually at existing plants keeping much infrastructure

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Just let these so called experts watch the tv show 'Chernobyl'

You mean the laughable propaganda 'Chernobyl'?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

The plaintiffs argued that the utility underestimates potential effects of seismic ground motion, a key factor in a reactor's quake-resistance design, while degradation in piping could lead to serious accidents.

Yes but, no but, yes but, no but. This is Saga - MILES from Tokyo - just another "inaka" like Fukushima.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Japan has 42 operable reactors already, far more than it needs. Plus Japan has no safe place to store all the nuclear waste generated. All this in the ring of fire. Its madness. Madness and greed.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

If there were a nuclear disaster in Kyushu and as the wind blow from largely west to east then the Kansai region would receive the fallout!

However, as the ‘scientists’ have tools to predict earthquakes, according to the article,then western Japan is safe.

Such a pity that the Americans, having just suffered two heavy quakes aren’t as lucky as the Japanese.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Of course it did. TIJ. When disaster hits again, the courts will say, "Guffaw... chortle... who'd a thunk it?"

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The media exists to stoke paranoia among the ignorant.

The comments here illustrate that reality only too well. Kyushu Electric wouldn’t waste the money starting the reactors if the power wasn’t needed.

There is no reasonable alternative.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Japan wastes too much energy on unnecessary things like the washlets and automatic doors that are in every commercial building. Turn them off! Other countries don't need them and everybody's fine. Japan prides itself in having so many conveniences but they're also a waste. Save some energy and all these powerplants may not be needed.

"Mottainai" There, you pride yourself in that word, don't you??

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Well , well.... it's all about money. Those experts that bo-bood at Fukushima tragedy knows and just have to save the owners of those Nuke plants for something... Nothing new. I used to live at Fukushima Ken. And they lied to the bones saying radiation in Koriyama city was within normal limits.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

And they keep on lying and lying, to the whole country and to the whole world. "Under control" my azz.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Money = power = influence.  The residents never stood a chance.

P'shaw on the poor citizens/residents, who have to be told what to think & do by us with M-P-I.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The Japanese are such quiet, obedient sheeps. The government can herd them any way they want. The Japanese actually see demonstrations and protests happening in other countries as uncivilized!!

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Have to admire there optimism.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Thus spake HMV. The High Courts are where Japanese democracy goes to die. The Supreme Court, where it is buried.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

According to the experts the world will pretty much come to an end in 12 years without a drastic change in CO2 emissions. The world needs to go all in on nuclear power - the only source of reliable power on a large scale that can prevent the impending apocalypse.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

papigiulio, are you seriously suggesting that TV shows should be the most reliable source of scientific evidence?

Just let these so called experts watch the tv show 'Chernobyl' or in fact send them over there to see if turning them on in a quake prone country is such a good idea.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

We need a big grown-up debate about this. The choice is some mix of

stop using electricity.

make electricity using coal, with huge CO2 and air pollution problems. Air pollution is a proven killer killing people already. CO2 is changing the planet as we know it, with no empty land left to run to.

make electricity using nuclear with large cost, waste disposal problems, and potentially catastrophic accidents

make electricity using renewables, though any hope of self sufficiency can only be across nation states, not within them. It means relying on other countries for a lifeline.

None of these are particularly desirable choices in themselves.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The world needs to go all in on nuclear power - the only source of reliable power on a large scale that can prevent the impending apocalypse.

Except in more than 70 years of nuclear energy it has failed to generate more than 14% of total world power demand because the nuclear plants are too expensive to build for most countries. 31 countries have some level of nuclear energy. There's also the problem of countries using their nuclear reactors to produce material for atomic weapons, like in the current case with Iran and NK.

President Trump has shown greater favor to coal than nuclear energy, a campaign promise made to his miners voting block. There are more yoga teachers in America than miners.

Prior to the 3/11 disasters, Japan was generating 27% of total power but now down to about 5% and it will never again return to the prior position.

Many companies are collecting CO2 and turning it into other products.

Japan still has got a plan for the long term storage of the nuclear waste. The eventual cost of the Fukushima disaster is now expected to exceed ¥100 trillion.

That would a lot of renewable energy plants.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Nuclear power is not a solution — and certainly not an essential one — to global warming. Current nuclear power plants require a constant supply of lots of cool water to keep them from overheating. Climate change is raising water temperatures and causing severe changes in ground water distribution, threatening the supply of such water and putting nuclear plants in competition with local communities for fresh water.

Furthermore, climate change threatens to cause serious social and political instability and such an environment is not well suited for managing an ever increasing supply of nuclear material and nuclear waste for which there is no known or even envisioned method of safe storage under even the best of conditions.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Nuclear power is not a solution — and certainly not an essential one — to global warming. Current nuclear power plants require a constant supply of lots of cool water to keep them from overheating. Climate change is raising water temperatures and causing severe changes in ground water distribution, threatening the supply of such water and putting nuclear plants in competition with local communities for fresh water.

No, science does not back this theory.

The degree to which the temperature the water would have to increase in the world to reach a point where it wasn't able to act as a coolant to nuclear power would be so hot, we'd already be dead tens of degrees before the water ever got to that point.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The CIA pressurised Japan in the 1950's to go nuclear, because America wanted more source material for building atomic bombs.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

The Japanese actually see demonstrations and protests happening in other countries as uncivilized!!

I don't know about that. Japan actually has a long history of protests, going back (at least) to the times of the Saga rebellion. And there's been plenty of student protests, anti-nuclear protests, anti-base protests, the Burakumin (Levellers), protests against Narita Airport and so on.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

threatening the supply of such water and putting nuclear plants in competition with local communities for fresh water.

Not hardly. For secondary cooling nuclear plants can use seawater, as many do. For primary coolant they require processed water, basically dionized and ultra filter. They process this water themselves and can start with water unsuitable for drinking or irrigation.

As far as the temperature of the cooling water the claim is laughable. A few degrees increase is nothing compared to how much the water temperature changes from winter to summer. And since the cooling is to condense steam which is at 100 degrees C and increase of even 5 degrees in the cooling water is insignificant.

for which there is no known or even envisioned method of safe storage under even the best of conditions.

Well except for reprocessing and geological storage, which are clearly known, envisioned and safe.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Every Nuclear Scientist knows that Nuclear Radiation is Highly Magnetic. A nuclear meltdown unleashes this magnetism outward while being tethered to its source. The movement of the Magnetic North Pole towards Japan is because of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Triple Meltdowns Not being Entombed.

https://thebulletin.org/2017/04/fusion-reactors-not-what-theyre-cracked-up-to-be/

When a nuclear reactor is in good working order:

Excerpt: Magnetic confinement fusion plasmas require injection of significant power in atomic beams or electromagnetic energy to stabilize the fusion burn, while additional power is consumed by magnetic coils helping to control location and stability of the reacting plasma.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

https://www.euronews.com/2019/02/05/north-magnetic-pole-fast-moving-towards-siberia-forcing-navigation-fix

Nuclear Reactors in perfect working order still emit some level of electromagnetic radiation. But nothing like the magnitude or scale of a nuclear meltdown of a nuclear reactor.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

-1? I guess I should have just said Run....

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

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