national

No problems reported at nuclear plants after quake: IAEA

19 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.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

19 Comments
Login to comment

Actually, the Friday night quake wasn't all that big. But officials are making a big deal out of it, saying, see ... the nuclear facilities are safe after all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The quakes are effecting the coruim, no doubt.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Last year Fukushima was hit by a tsunami 13-15 meters high which took out the less than 6-meter-high sea wall. This year that coast has been hit by a one meter high tsunami. On the law of averages, how high could the next tsunami be and is it likely to come within the next year or two? Would a seven meter high tsunami be unrealistic? If not, why aren't they rebuilding, reinforcing or heightening the stonebags barrier?

Incidentally, running searches just now found suggestions that abnormal fluctuations in pressure occurred in the Daini reactor building, indicating some kind of possible incident.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

if there was any damage it will not come out now before the election, but after , when the pro - nuke LDP is safely back in power

If the LDP get in, after the election all the NPPs including Fukushima will be absolutely safe and ready to switch on immediately.

Btw if this quake 2 weeks before the vote does not remind J- public about the ever present danger of earthquakes / nuclear reactor combination in this country and make them think long and hard about electing a proven pro nuke government , than I honestly don,t know what will.

This. I couldn't agree more.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Does that possibility that nothing much really happen even occur to you cynics. It is almost like you WANT another nuclear disaster.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Jim GreenidgeDec. 08, 2012 - 11:21AM JST

Any word on how the gas and oil and chemical plants fared? Didn't even bother to check? Not very good reporting!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-07/magnitude-7-3-quake-hits-northeast-japan-raising-tsunami-alerts.html

Looks like no damage to anything this time around. Not like the last one where millions of dollars worth of oil caught fire and dozens of other plants and refineries suffered heavy damage.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

all it takes is a mega quake to hit those tanks stored up north with radioactive waste..and for that poison water to spill out and then "that's all she wrote" its all finished...all foreigners evacuate before its too late...

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Any word on how the gas and oil and chemical plants fared? Didn't even bother to check? Not very good reporting!

3 ( +4 / -1 )

No problems? Other than the continuing Level 7 catastrophes! No. NO PROBLEM!

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Seems we have heard this before.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

I deem the IAEA statement not more than another bureaucratic baloney...as this very agency concurred in every way with the Japanese authorities' reports after the March quake in Japan, reports which today are everyday exposed to be rife with falsehoods and cover-ups. Can't believe that with such an agency, we could find nuclear plants in a country like Japan wanting even in the most elementary of safety equipment for the personnel. Sorry, IAEA, spare us the white wash. All the plants have outdone their lifespan and its just a matter of time before they spill out their deadly contents...

2 ( +6 / -3 )

I deem the IAEA statement not more than another bureaucratic baloney...as the very agency concerned in every way with the Japanese authorities' reports after the March quake in Japan, reports which today are everyday to have been rife with falsehoods and cover-ups. Can't believe that with such an agency, we could find nuclear plants in a country like Japan, wanting in the most elementary of safety equipment and procedures for the personnel. Sorry, IAEA, spare us the white wash. All the plants have outdone their lifespan and its just a matter of time before they spill out their deadly contents...

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Rick KisaDec. 08, 2012 - 07:21AM JST

a tsunami 1 metre high thumped the coastline, even when the epicentre was 300km far away in the ocean. what would happen if the epicentre was directly under the nuke plants.

I don't think there's much chance of a tsunami if the quakes were under the nuke plants - that only seems to happen when the quake is at sea.

1 ( +4 / -2 )

And news just coming in ...... the moon is definitely made of some form of brie.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

the IAEA would do japan a good service if they declare the country not fit for nuke plants because of it being prone to dangerous earthquakes. a tsunami 1 metre high thumped the coastline, even when the epicentre was 300km far away in the ocean. what would happen if the epicentre was directly under the nuke plants. IAEA should learn that it is also good business to put people's safety above abnormal profits. you have failed the japan test...

13 ( +16 / -3 )

truth never comes so fast especially in Japan...troubles if any will be reported in coming months that too through foreign media.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

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