national

IAEA sees significant nuclear safety progress since Fukushima

29 Comments

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2012.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

Great news. The horse has left the barn in regards to Japan, and folks there will b pig the price, literrally and figuratively, for decades. And now the IAEA decides to get serious about safety.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Great news. Before 3/11, the NPP were safe. Now, 17 months later, they are super safe. Wow! I'm voiceless.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

The IAEA says nothing. "Significant progress", "increased attention", "focus on vitally important areas"? These are mere marketing buzzwords, they don't mean anything!

What else one can expect from IAEA director Amano. By the way, he already got his amakudari position.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

Bring a screw driver.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

An entire news article of IAEA quotes that tell the public absolutely zero. Of course everything is "new and improved". The IAEA is the main nuclear industry cheerleader and business development agency. They need to have their mandate rewritten to only deal with proliferation and safety issues and be specifically forbidden to promote nuclear power.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Nancy FoustAug. 20, 2012 - 10:04AM JST

An entire news article of IAEA quotes that tell the public absolutely zero. Of course everything is "new and improved". The IAEA is the main nuclear industry cheerleader and business development agency. They need to have their mandate rewritten to only deal with proliferation and safety issues and be specifically forbidden to promote nuclear power.

You could always actually read their stuff instead of assuming the authors here were smart enough to do the same.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

No it hasn't.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Important progress has been made toward strengthening global nuclear safety after Japan’s Fukushima accident last year, according to the United Nations atomic watchdog.

Wait, I thought this was about IAEA, not some UN agency? IAEA is entirely independent of the UN, everything from their operation to funding is unrelated. The only thing they do with the UN is to provide a report once a year and occasionally some extra information.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

The IAEA told us we were safe prior to the manmade LEVEL 7 nuclear disaster. We are safer today because most of the reactors are shut down and without very serious improvements in safety standards, should stay that way. More than mid way through Aug and none of those predicted blackouts have happen, even with the hot weather.

Last week a reactor in America was shut down because the sea water was too hot to be used for cooling. There have been 10 events in 10 days.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/331111

0 ( +7 / -7 )

zichiAug. 20, 2012 - 10:52AM JST

Last week a reactor in America was shut down because the sea water was too hot to be used for cooling.

The most flagrantly misleading statement in a while. The temperature of the surrounding water, in order to conform to ISO and state and federal regulations, must not exceed a certain level at the exit point compared to the inlet, which is generally achieved by submerging the exit point 20m in the case of sea water. In the event of uneven heating, which happens often to inland plants but quite uncommon for sea based plants, the temperature difference can exceed regulations. It has nothing to do with plant safety and everything to do with ecological regulations that ALL power plants must conform to (including hydro).

There have been 10 events in 10 days.

Your website has, not including Fukushima as it is an ongoing event, one probable event, one possible event, and seven non-events. If you were compare those to fossil fuel plants, you would find more minor issues at the fossil fuel plants than nuclear.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

These included “improvements in emergency preparedness and response capabilities,” it added in the nine-page document posted on its website.

After the restart of KEPCO's Oi reactors, many nearby residents expressed concerns about the lack of evacuation plans. Then they asked the Fukui gov't they were told not to use the roads, which would be needed for emergency teams.

80% or about 80,000 workers at the atomic power plants, are untrained nuclear gypsies. Last week, they were building towers around the No3 reactor in Fukushima so that remote control lifting equipment can be installed to start removing the debris from the highly damaged reactor. Highly irradiated water leaked into a power control room in the No4.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

It's a self inflating press release, as for the UN it can not comment on this N Issue without IAEA approval to do so! Has nothing to do with the UN?

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Hydro and fossil fuel plants don't use nuclear energy and the topic of the post is about the IAEA report and the increased safety of atomic power plants.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Nuclear failed. The concept doesn't work because it's far too dangerous. We don't need it. And don't want it.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

LOL..

This is the funniest headline news I've heard in months!

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Part of the funding for IAEA comes from Japan's nuclear village and is one of a couple of country with an IAEA head office in Tokyo, established prior to the nuclear disaster. The IAEA has no authority.

The IAEA has no authority to inspect nuclear programs of nations which are not bound by treaty. In addition, the IAEA can only inspect those facilities that nations will allow it to inspect.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

It only took a few decades to create the cause for the worse nuclear disaster since Chernobyl, but it will take many tens of decades to remove the effects.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

zichiAug. 20, 2012 - 12:20PM JST

It only took a few decades to create the cause for the worse nuclear disaster since Chernobyl, but it will take many tens of decades to remove the effects.

What the hell does this have to do with the topic?

IAEA recommendations, if followed, would have prevented all of the cooling issues. IAEA investigated the physical structures and already released reports on that. What they are focusing on now, as I have stated in the past, is the actual emergency response plans and peer review methods. In essence, they wish to remove government interference from the equation, minimizing actual risk to the public rather than playing on their fears for political gain.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

These included “improvements in emergency preparedness and response capabilities,” it added in the nine-page document posted on its website.

Hope someone remembers to tell that to 200 evacuees from Futaba-machi who continue to live in the classrooms in a closed high school building in Saitama Prefecture where the town's government has temporarily relocated. They are mostly elderly residents, and they have nowhere else to go.

After nearly 17 months since the accident, the country is quite happy having them live in classrooms with card board partitions.

Particularly when just about everybody, from the top government officials on down and including you and me, continue to (or choose to) be ignorant of what has been happening to the people who had to evacuate their homes after the March 11, 2011 nuclear accident, with no prospect of going back any time soon.

Many of these people are becoming forgotten nuclear victims.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

In essence, they wish to remove government interference from the equation, minimizing actual risk to the public rather than playing on their fears for political gain.

The IAEA has no powers to do that, has stated in their constitution and elected governments are suppose to represent the wishes of the people, and in Japan, the majority of the people want no nuclear reactors.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2011...r-reactor-video 17 March 2011

And faith in the power of the defence forces.... Defence force always better than the force of reason... Whether the IAEA supports still so cooling reactors, or changed the sentence. ??

In order to provide the reactors in Fukushime from the bottom you have the mechanical tunnel. Then insert the two meters in diameter with 20 tubes. , Do the holes from the top and side, and on the bottom line fire resistant ZrO2. For large pipes enter the small tube to remove radioactive leaks or cooling corium had reached there...

http://www.herrenknecht.com/fileadmin/reda...GB_09-12-21.pdf

http://www.herrenknecht.com/fileadmin/reda...GB_08-10-29.pdf

http://www.new4stroke.com/herenknecht.jpg

Certainly not the cheapest, but it will give guarantees that the radioactive materials do not enter the land and ocean

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ful links

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2011/mar/17/japanese-helicopters-water-nuclear-reactor-video

http://www.herrenknecht.com/fileadmin/redaktion/PDF_Downloads/Direct_Pipe_Fly_GB_09-12-21.pdf

http://www.herrenknecht.com/fileadmin/redaktion/PDF_Downloads/AVN250XC_AVN700XC_DB_GB_08-10-29.pdf

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A survey of 109 of the largest Japanese companies reveals that over 30% see renewable energy sources as a positive, viable alternative to the current use of nuclear power.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

There are 154 IAEA member countries but only 30 countries use nuclear energy to generate power. Not sure of the benefits of a member country not using nuclear power? Israel is a member but has refused any inspections by the IAEA. North Korea resigned from the IAEA in 1994.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

IAEA sees significant benefits in perpetuating lies to bolster the nuclear industry....

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If aliens came down, inspected a nuclear plant and said it was safe posters here would still say it was a lie, lol

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Thunderbird2

If aliens came down, inspected a nuclear plant and said it was safe posters here would still say it was a lie, lol

It was the very long investigation by the Diet Commission which stated the nuclear disaster was manmade and basically, yes, the atomic power plants in this country are not safe unless those standards are greatly increased, which to date, hasn't happened.

Add to that, the very long investigation by Dr Kenchi Ohmae and his team.

There hasn't been much change at the atomic power plants since 3/11.

The IAEA haven't inspected many of the nuclear plants in Japan.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The IAEA haven't inspected many of the nuclear plants in Japan.

I need not because all the reactors are closed. And contributions to this organization, we should not pay Japan

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A day late and a dollar short. Only the future will tell us the truth.

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