Japan to seek IAEA advice before restarting reactors

It's good that they're seeking advice, the question is if they'll listen or not. When the Japanese seek advice on something it is often merely a request for praise, and if they are criticized it quickly becomes a 'domestic issue' for which they need no foreign input. For example, if the IAEA stated that Japan should simply not restart their reactors, what do you think the response would be from the Japan side?

For example, if the IAEA stated that Japan should simply not restart their reactors, what do you think the response would be from the Japan side?

Well the Japanese are experts in hiding the truth in long documents of nothingness. I'm sure the IAEA will be shown no information that would indicate to them that there are any problems.

Well the Japanese are experts in hiding the truth in long documents of nothingness.

besides, IAEA Head is a Japanese national.

I am glad Japan is seeking an advice from IAEA as there is a global liability issue involved.

I would not underestimate the power of IAEA.

They are filled with 1st class nuclear scientists from all over the world. If the data shows misrepresentations and cracks, they are not afraid to say "No" to Japan. IAEA head has nothing to say if the majority of scientists find these nuclear plants are unsafe to restart. He will not give up his integrity and pride for Japan, I assure you, but he will be a great moderator in process.

I wouldn't expect too much here hindering Japan's desire to restart anything. The IAEA is complicit in any and all nuclear accidents worldwide just as much as those running the affected units, here kind of like a fox seeking advice from a committee of fellow foxes before raiding a chicken coop.

IAEA, in my opinion suffers much the same problems as NISA in Japan. It sits on two chairs, and is expected to promote nuclear power with one hand while regulating it with the other.

Squidbert, it's even worse. While NISA still had the supervision of plant safety as one of it's tasks, in terms of civil use the IAEA is purely a promotional agency. Please see the extract from the statute of the IAEA:

ARTICLE II: Objectives

The Agency shall seek to accelerate and enlarge the contribution of atomic energy to peace, health and prosperity throughout the world. It shall ensure, so far as it is able, that assistance provided by it or at its request or under its supervision or control is not used in such a way as to further any military purpose.

If I had my way they would not ask for two reasons: 1) they would not be able to find the fuel rods and 2) they would be at the proctologist's asking why their butts glow in the dark and hurt!

Japan has done fine without them it seems. Leave it.

Until alternative eco power is availiable to suffice Japanese energy requirments, the nuclear reactors are needed to service demand. I appreciate Hachiro,s cautionary seeking of advice from the U,N Atomic watch dog prior to restarting the reactors. The sooner alternative energy is brought online to replace nuclear energy, the better.,

Actually, Japan could shut down all its nuclear reactors (it almost has) and manage quite well, provided that it continued to promote energy saving, and used fossil fuels (mainly gas) to fill in while alternative renewables were developed. The downside is greenhouse gases, but it would absolutely eliminate the risk of another meltdown.

If Japan is able to fill the gap with fossil fueled electricity generators for the present, but to escalate their efforts to install eco energy as a matter of urgency, then yes, there is no need to recommision the nuclear reactors. As said by melguy it is preferable to the risks of yet another nuclear emergency

How about the IAEA and the Japanese authorities do something useful NOW like tell us how much radiation is still spewing from the catastrophe(s) at Dai-ichi. What isotopes have been released and MORE!

Part of the complicity I was referring to above is seen in the 1959 agreement WHO signed with the IAEA, as the Guardian says (see bit ly wsHsd, inserting the period & slash), gives

the IAEA an effective veto on any actions by the WHO that relate in any way to nuclear power -- and so prevent the WHO from playing its proper role in investigating and warning of the dangers of nuclear radiation on human health

or as another site says, gives "the unequivocally pro-nuclear IAEA a veto over WHO research into the effects of radiation". Unless this agreement has been revised since then, this could be yet another reason why the nuclear industry continues to wield so much power across the globe.

The fact that the current IAEA head is a Japanese national shouldn't matter (in a perfect world), but probably doesn't help.

I wonder what the relationship is between similar organizations/bureaus in the Japanese government, i.e. that which promotes nuclear power and that which is supposed to research & warn citizens of health effects & dangers.

Soon, every person on this planet may have to throw themselves at Fukushima to try to drown it. If it's not stopped, there is a threshold where it will be unreachable and uncontrollable. Once crossed, the entire planet is doomed!

The reactors should be examined case by case. Is it near a fault line? Forget it! The industry wants to keep the MOX burning, restart the reactors, so they can profiteer off of us some more. Did you know they are already making funds for future accidents? You can not eat money.