national

Niigata governor tells TEPCO nuclear plant to stay shut

14 Comments
By Kentaro Hamada

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

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

14 Comments
Login to comment

How about TEPCO shaping up first be a requirement for restart and a return to the black, rather than TEPCO demand they return to the black before improving their performance and making up for their failures? Too much to ask?

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Renewables please !

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Niigata governor tells TEPCO nuclear plant to stay shut

Good.

How about TEPCO shaping up first be a requirement for restart and a return to the black, rather than TEPCO demand they return to the black before improving their performance and making up for their failures? Too much to ask?

Yes. Unfortunately. These idiots have a sense of entitlement that is unprecedented

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Per CL, I guess you have an answer for the 100,000 years storage needed for radioactive waste to fall below toxic levels?

3 ( +6 / -3 )

But, if TEPCO didn't cut so many corners and lie about their safety inspections people might support them, but as it stands now, they are just a bunch of money mongering liars that are putting half the country at risk of being exposed to another meltdown. Nuclear power can be safe if overkill is used in its instigation. However, that is not what these mullets have done.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Re: Karl, Then why isn't your solution being used absolutely everywhere if it is the solution? Re: CrucialS, why are you fabricating something I did not say?

Clearly, sustainable renewable energy sources are the only long term answer, and it will take a long time to move the powers that be towards this. The human race may not have that much time, witness Chinese coal clouds currently suffocating millions.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Thank you, Gov Yoneyama. NO NUKES.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Governors do not have the legal authority to prevent restarts but their agreement is usually required before a plant can resume operations.

This is rather scary in my opinion, TEPCO could very well end up telling him to get, you know what, and go their merry way.

If the Gov can't stop them, and Abe wants them to get restarted, just WHO is going to take responsibility WHEN the next accident occurs? Right, my tax money!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I can understand why the Niigata government did this: in 1964, there was a major earthquake in Niigata that caused a lot more damage than anticipated because much of the land around Niigata city was highly vulnerable to a type of damage called liquefaction, where the ground shaking causes the building to literally collapse into the ground. They want to make sure the nuclear power plant literally does not sink into the ground in case of another major earthquake in the area.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Patricia Yarrow, 100,000 years is a long time. Humans have only been using nuclear energy for power for how long? Surely, you understand that technology is going to improve & what is "nuclear waste" today is eventually going to be recycled. Today's reactors leave about 95% of the available energy in the "spent" fuel. We actually already have an answer: Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs) don't use EXPENSIVE water-cooled fuel elements like today's commercial reactors. The nuclear fuel is dissolved in a salt which has to be heated several hundred degrees to become liquid. If any leaks out of the system, it immediately freezes & cannot go anywhere. MSRs can burn "spent" fuel from today's reactors, the "pits" from defunct A-bombs and even Thorium.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Per CL, I guess you have an answer for the 100,000 years storage needed for radioactive waste to fall below toxic levels?

It's probably right next to your answer on the solution for stopping the more dangerous and environmental impacting increasing carbon levels as a result of Japan being forced to burn fossil fuels because of the lack of nuclear power.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The risk for lung cancer by the recent radiation will increase with one percent.

Proof please?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Evacuation Zon.

The risk for lung cancer by the recent radiation will increase with one percent. But if you do smoke the risk will be 1 500 percent, Even passive smoking do increase risk heavely.

Four scientist from Brittain do questioning the evacuation at all re Fukushima.

Do have an objective attach to risks in Connection to nuclear similar to all other risks. Why do weigh the risks harder than in other industrial activity.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Yonegawa-San is surfing on a global populistic wave where fact-based reasoning is losing out to emotions, personal opinions and often fabricated lies. It pity that also JR readers and the commentaries here are falling for this. Nuclear power is the safest large-scale energy option right now, although renewable energy such as wind and solar will take over on a longer time scale.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

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