national

Kansai Electric restarts another reactor on Sea of Japan coast

29 Comments

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

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

Remember when they said they would NEVER do this against the wishes of the people? Haha... so do I... a few days before they realized they could not "convince" the people that it was a good idea to get the reactors online before the safety measures to guarantee they do were put into place.

Get ready for the "we couldn't have known" WHEN (not if) the next disaster comes. We won't get as lucky as we did with Fukushima.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

Smith. You nailed it.

Never do this against the wish of the people..smeh

Abe cares as much about public opinion as Kim Jong Un does.

Here we go people. the march back to the abyss. Just remember to lay the blame square on Abe. He is responsible for the next disaster. You heard it here first.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

I guess the Japanese Government does whatever the hell they want, with no regards for the people of their country. History always repeats itself.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

What gives JT?  You just deleting everything I write......

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Everybody loves MOX.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I'm pretty sure that, if I translated democracy into Japanese it would come up as fascism.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Hay folks Don,t You Know Nuclear energy is safe. Well i have news. Electricity kills so does Radiation. Bombs wipe out populations in mass . So what happens when one of these things have a Meltdown because of poor maintenance or an act of nature . The end

0 ( +3 / -3 )

In another year every single reactor will be on.

Its amazing how this can happen regardless of the circumstances or the desires of the populace.

Kim doesn't need a nuclear missile, he can just wait for these dousches to mess up a nuclear reactor again.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

著バカだよ。Absolutely moronic.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

What could possibly go wrong?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Contempt, utter contempt, the ldp always have & always will throw their own under the bus

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Is this one also on or close to a fault line? I have less of a problem with nuclear plants which are not susceptible to natural disasters, but from memory a full half of those active (but mostly non-operating) 42 are close to fault lines or in tsunami zones. And I daresay that some of those which should be safe aren't due to poor emergency planning and/or maintenance issues.

The Government had a chance back in 2012/2013 to reassure the public that the plants which could continue were totally safe but complete lack of regulatory oversight destroyed any confidence the public (including me) had. And now to make up for the loss of grid capacity, Japan is planning to build 45 brand new coal fired plants over the next 10 years. Way to drop the ball...

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Tragic mistake. You WILL be held responsible.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Why all the hostility towards nuclear power? How else can Japan get the copious amounts of CO2 free power it needs for its modern economy?

You can just cover the entire nation with windmills and solar panels. If the Japanese people truely believe that climate change is the number one threat, then massive numbers of nuclear power plants is a rational response. France is doing it - why not Japan?

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

Why all the hostility towards nuclear power? 

Where have you been living since 2011--the Moon? Then again, why not ask this question to the people of Fukushima, who have lost their homes permanently as well as others who have been suffering from this disaster for the past six years? I'm sure that they could give you plenty of answers (that is if you are willing to listen).

France is doing it - why not Japan?

Probably because France isn't an earthquake and other natural disaster-prone country which has its nuclear industry managed by an incompetent government and the international poster-boy for how not to run nuclear power plants--TEPCO.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

France is doing it - why not Japan?

Since when was France operating nuclear power stations in an area subject to frequent earthquakes, tsunamis and typhoons? And does France keep its radioactive material in plastic bags? Only yesterday it was reported that 5 workers at the Oarai plant in Ibaragi were exposed to radiation when a plastic bag containing uranium and plutonium they were handling split and leaked.

Can you spell i-n-c-o-m-p-e-t-e-n-c-e?

放射性物質拡散、体に付着か 研究施設で容器の点検中:朝日新聞デジタル

5 Exposed to Radiation at Nuclear Research Facility in Japan - JIJI PRESS

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Where have you been living since 2011--the Moon?

Oh I get it. Climates change really isn't that big a deal after all. So instead of risking the lives of a relatively small number of people, risk all of humanity with greater CO2 emissions. It's not as though the Japanese people are going to give up the massive amount of electricity they currently consume.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

. . . So instead of risking the lives of a relatively small number of people, 

Shame on you for thinking that the people of Fukushima and others who suffered from the 2011 nuclear disaster were "a relatively small number of people." People have died from this stupendous blunder, and others continue to suffer today.

I'm sure that it hasn't occurred to you that the next nuclear disaster here could affect A LOT more people--especially one which is predicted to hit off the Nankai Trough.

Try giving a little critical thinking a whirl before you post the next time.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Duck and cover

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Shame on you for thinking that the people of Fukushima and others who suffered from the 2011 nuclear disaster were "a relatively small number of people." 

Wow dmcacleod - when have I ever dismissed the suffering of those in Fukushima and elsewhere in that region of Japan? Please get off that high horse - you might fall and hurt yourself.

But while we are at it - How dare you not consider the lives of poor people the world over who are mortally endangered by the existential threat of climate change! Nuclear power is the only technology available today that can produce power in the massive amounts needed for those living in developed and those suffering in third world nations. Solar panels and wind mills are not enough to end the deprivation found in too many places in the world. Stop being self centered and think about plight of others.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Wow dmcacleod - when have I ever dismissed the suffering of those in Fukushima and elsewhere in that region of Japan? 

Yes, you did with your previous post--go back and look at them.

How dare you not consider the lives of poor people the world over who are mortally endangered by the existential threat of climate change!

No, I never did that. Do not put your ridiculous thoughts into my posts. My posts dealt with Fukushima. Go back and read them again.

 Nuclear power is the only technology available today that can produce power in the massive amounts needed for those living in developed and those suffering in third world nations. 

Simply not true. There are many other options available. Try taking your head out of the nuclear power industry's backside for a moment, and you would see them.

Solar panels and wind mills are not enough to end the deprivation found in too many places in the world.

Is that a fact? Show us your evidence.

Stop being self centered and think about plight of others.

There is nothing self-centered about my posts, especially when I am defending others. The only self-centered one here is you and your narrow-minded posts.

Try taking what you said here to the people of Fukushima. I'm sure they'd be quite interested to hear your superior take on this issue.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

No bickering please.

And does France keep its radioactive material in plastic bags?

Probably, when appropriate.

Only yesterday it was reported that 5 workers at the Oarai plant in Ibaragi were exposed to radiation when a plastic bag containing uranium and plutonium they were handling split and leaked.

It was an R & D facility. The reports are fairly vague. How much uranium and plutonium? The amount makes a difference.

Sorry if I appear cynical. I accept that nuclear power is potentially dangerous. But so are many things. Informed comment, etc.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Of course, nuclear power isn’t the only source Japan relies on, geothermal energy, fossil fuels and natural gas imported from overseas, and renewables such as hydroelectric, wind power and solar all contribute to keeping Japan moving. But while Japan doesn’t want to rely on imports for its energy needs, hydro, wind and even geothermal options offer unpredictable output. Nuclear power, in contrast, provides a steady source of electricity for their industries. All this suggests that nuclear power is absolutely necessary in Japan.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The plant is over 30 years old and uses MOX fuel. It no doubt gets better with age.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@sfjp330

hydro, wind and even geothermal options offer unpredictable output.

Actually... not when designed with salt or stored energy. Japan in particular can use more pumped storage. Salt is crystalline and wants to be solid again. Stores heat as it melts, releases heat as it goes back to solid. Neat material. Spain has a thermal solar plant that uses molten salt to store energy at 500 C to drive turbines for release at night. Other examples out there.

Also we waste a lot of energy when we're not home, water heater, refrigeration etc.

Better design of energy use plus actual renewables not excuses works quite well. Japan is sitting on a gold mine

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@mlodinow takahama is on an active fault line, that is why Shiga got it stopped. Sendai is surrounded by 7 active volcanoes and fault lines. Ehime is situated on the massive Tokai Fault, which expecting a M9 earthquake sometime soon.

if you are really interested in where major fault lines exist, google "japan NPPs" and sure enough, you will find them.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Simply not true. There are many other options available. Try taking your head out of the nuclear power industry's backside for a moment, and you would see them.

it is obvious that nuclear power plants are Japan's only option. If anything else worked on a large scale they would be doing it. France uses almost all nuclear. Germany has been shutting down their nuclear plants and are building fossil fuel plants again - despite their lecturing the US about the threat of global warming. If the Germans had any other option no doubt they would have pursued it.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

it is obvious that nuclear power plants are Japan's only option. 

No, it is not obvious. What should be obvious is that you do not build nuclear power plants on an earthquake-prone island or one that faces numerous natural disasters on a yearly basis. Nuclear power is not safe, not cheap, and definitely not for Japan. Japan has plenty of good alternatives such as wind, solar, and thermal power.

Germany has been shutting down their nuclear plants and are building fossil fuel plants again  . . . If the Germans had any other option no doubt they would have pursued it.

Simply not true. Germany has been building and investing in renewable energy. Try reading this from The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/nuclear-power-germany-renewable-energy

0 ( +1 / -1 )

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