national

Japan's nuclear power plants to undergo stress tests

36 Comments

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

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

36 Comments
Login to comment

The stress tests will help alleviate the concerns of local residents...

So the minister knows already the results of those tests??? Before they have been carried out???

0 ( +1 / -1 )

So the minister knows already the results of those tests??? Before they have been carried out???

I don't think that is what he is saying. Sounds more like he is confident that they will be a success rather than he already knows the results.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

“The stress tests will help alleviate the concerns of local residents. Once they are confident of the safety factor, we will be in a position to restart operations at some plants,” he said.

What if the tests show that some/all of the reactors aren't safe? Jumping the gun there a bit, aren't you?

These tests will probably just be done in the time-honoured Japanese tradition of "The Perception of Something Being Done".

1 ( +2 / -1 )

“The stress tests will help alleviate the concerns of local residents. Once they are confident of the safety factor, we will be in a position to restart operations at some plants,”

Oh they will, will they? Is Kaeida psychic?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Allow a totally independent agency from either Europe or the US to test them, then and only then would I believe any of the results.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

tokyokawasaki.

Seen the reports on how data and news are fudged in the USA, etc?

In short the same shenanigans are going on globally, extending a reactors life-span by 20yrs beyond the original specs, etc.

There was a recent report on how stats, etc were lowered overseas to pass regulations and thus they can extend the life-span of reactors.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Allow a totally independent agency from either Europe or the US to test them, then and only then would I believe any of the results.

What, with the US NRC being accused in the past month or two of doing far worse than Japan regulatory agencies have done? Keeping plants "safe" by constantly decreasing safety standards, lying about nuclear waste, lying to congress about the infallible safety of all nuclear plants. Yep, a US team is exactly what's needed :/

How about we let the inspectors do their jobs and see their results and then we can make some informed comments based on the findings? Isn't anything else just wild speculation?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Wasn't the Chernobyl accident caused by some kind of stress test, which went wrong?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I seriously hope that is a bad translation... a stress test is suppose to stress the "thing" until failure.... we don't want a nuclear power plant to fail from a test!

Review the systems, tighten all the nuts and bolts, take 20year old reactors offline and that will be good.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

as long as they do it all at once all at the same time..... and then watch all their cooling systems fail

0 ( +0 / -0 )

electric2004.

the reactors in that case were not capable of releasing the hydrogen excesses whereas Fukushima had externally ignited many times. The two were very differently designed

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Perhaps the JT article isn't detailed enough, below is a quote from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14040354 which should hopefully make the conext a little better/clearer (sounds like tests have already been performed).

"The safety of nuclear power plants has been secured, but this is to gain a further sense of security among the people," Mr Kaieda was cited as saying by Jiji Press news agency.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let's hope it's not the same inspectors who ignored test data, falsified test data, failed to inspect various cracks in welded joints, pipes, reactor shrouds, leaks, and generally colluded with the utilities to allow reactors to carry on. They were responsible for many of the deaths in the Maihama reactor accident, using data from another 'similar' reactor to extrapolate that Maihama was "safe".

And as for overseas regulatory agencies, they practice what is called pencil sharpening in the US nuclear industry, shifting the goalposts whenever there is a problem, or claiming the original specs were too stringent, and this will do.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Those reviews, which started June 1, are supposed to consider the impact of both natural and man-made events such as airplane crashes and terrorist attacks.

Okay, I don't know if the results are going to be good but good luck with that.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I bet these 'tests' will only have two results: A or B - like their 'tests' on the safety of swimming water.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"And as for overseas regulatory agencies, they practice what is called pencil sharpening in the US nuclear industry, shifting the goalposts whenever there is a problem, or claiming the original specs were too stringent, and this will do."

I heard that fukushima had american origins...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Even if everyone says they are "safe", I will never believe them. Never.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Since they take the tests done in the EU as an example, we can be sure the tests will be joke anyway: operators defining the criteria and operators checking the criteria. You don't need the test to know the results...

What Japan (and others) should do first is thoroughly reviewing the criteria it uses to judge reactor safety. Only after that you can check if and how each reactor meets these goals.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Even if everyone says they are "safe", I will never believe them. Never.

Well, OK. I would prefer not to live my life in perpetual fear, but that's just me.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I think it is great that they are doing that now. What else do you expect them to do in the present situation? We do need electricity from nuclear power stations right now since we do not have an alternative. Mr. Hosono surely is doing a fine job. He gives clear responses in his press conference and doesn't feel shy to ask again if he doesn't completely understand a question. Nothing is ever safe in life and if you are afraid of dying then why are you living in the first place?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Greta12 - So the minister knows already the results of those tests??? Before they have been carried out???

My sentiments exactly! Like they would release any details to the contrary. Could anyone imagine the consequences of negative findings to this 'stress' test?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Nothing is ever safe

and thinking like this got us where we are today : near enough is good enuf, don't build that wall too high Tarou! it costs money!

Of course everyone expect tests to be carried out, yet the results of the tests are surly only going to favor the power company shareholders.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Major? Don't they mean Mayor?

This is good. Let's rock!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

*it was not immediately clear what additional measures would be added by the stress tests. Officials provided few details

.* this is one of the problems. they say the tests will help alleviate concerns, but they'll never be truthful or thorough in passing on test results .

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I hope the "stress test" will involve or evolve into testing the backup generators at all 54 plants, and further test systems to evaluate and implement alternative power backup systems to provide power to the cooling system's generators, as well as backup alternative cooling systems, and alternative shut down processes. BTW also the location of these plants should also be evaluated for population proximity, environmental considerations, and replacement, removal or upgrades of the existing plants.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

“There is no change in our view that it is safe,” Kaieda said

Tell that to the parents of the kids in Fukushima pissing radioactive cesium!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I say go solar! Don't need another meltdown

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Kaieda said in an NHK documentary that nuclear safety was a myth. Why has he changed his mind? They'll probably just pretend to do them. But if they really give it a go, they're likely to create another disaster. They need an independent outside group, filled with some of the most vigourous critics, to monitor the tests. Nobody in the world should trust anything the Japanese government or nuclear power industry says at this point.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

they say the tests will help alleviate concerns, but they'll never be truthful or thorough in passing on test results .

It's a catch 22. They could be completely truthful and very thorough and a good percentage of the population won't believe them anyway. Actually they are being very thorough with the daily briefings on the Fukushima Daiichi yet there was an article a bit back where people were complaining it was 'too much information'. So...?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I say thorium or just no.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

chewie - Why didn't they use thorium in the first place?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Tell that to the parents of the kids in Fukushima pissing radioactive cesium!

Minute, below-dangerous, levels of cesium? Safe still means safe even if it's worse than normal - that simple truth has never changed.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Ken Adachi - I say go solar! Don't need another meltdown

This is not Australia! Geothermal is the obvious answer.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency says the tests are designed to determine how well nuclear power facilities can withstand earthquakes and tsunami.

The tests involve simulated quakes and tsunami whose strength is gradually raised to check their effects on the plant and its functions.

The goal is to identify a facility's weakness so countermeasures can be taken to prevent another nuclear disaster.

Umm, I don't think the reactors that are 40 years old should go through this, they should be decommissioned and new tech brought in.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

very ironic that the story after this one is entitled: Fire breaks out, extinguished soon at nuclear plant in Ibaraki

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Get independent engineers in. A team of pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear engineers.

Safe, Very safe, Extraordinary safety measures,etc.... is not enough. 100% safe it must be, because the consequences of an accident are just too much. Japan has not enough land for agriculture. Save this beautiful land!

@JT

In the headline it says 54 plants, but I thought there would be 54 reactors and the number of NPPs would be less? For example, in my understanding, wouldn't you say there are 2 plants in Fukushima-Ken, but 10 reactors?

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