Paul Richards comments

"...to pay the money to 152 local residents..."

It's good TEPCO, hasn't filed for bankruptcy as arguably under Japan’s Act on Compensation, this entity could tip up, in effect leaving the Government with the whole liability.

A scenario, that in all probability, would have dire consequences for the whole nuclear industry.

Every year since the cease fire in the war with the United States of America and allies the same jingoistic celebrations in Democratic People's Republic of Korea roll out. Banging the metaphorical kerosene cans^, and creating internal and external newsworthy events. The fact this grows more threatening every year has more to do with matching any geopolitical noise created in North America.

The pattern is set, expect the same next year, and depending on any political posturing, there may be more.

**Foundation of the Korean People's Army Strategic Force on 3 July 1999. *

**Day of Victory in the Great Fatherland Liberation War 27 July *

**End of the Korean War in 1953, 15 August Liberation Day Established after the liberation of Korea in 1945 *

Day of Songun, on 25 August, 1960 is seen by the DPRK as the "start of the Songun revolutionary leadership" *

** Foundation Day of the DPRK on the 9 September *

____

^ Jane Goodall's 'Mike the alpha male chimpanzee', with the kero cans, creating a lot of noise and fear: http://www.chimpanzoo.org/african_notecards/chapter_21.html

'Solar and wind capacity have expanded rapidly worldwide, as costs have plummeted. And several new technologies for storing the energy they generate show huge promise for rapid deployment'.

This is a key point, no matter whether anyone believes in nuclear reactors being able to contribute or not, the time was taken to deploy any nuclear plant now we hold these corporations accountable for community health and safety, including the long-term viability of the environment, is around 20 years just to be ready for electricity and radionuclide. ^

Then it takes 30+ years for 'proof of concept' inclusive of economic viability to prove these experimental^ reactors are actually worth investing in. The only countries prepared to do this are putting sovereign capital investment into new projects, where it is complementary to the whole nuclear cycle, of producing weapons-grade plutonium.

An amoral corporate position of operating in a developed countries energy production cycle based demands are purely on an ROI - return on investment, nuclear power reads on a CFO spreadsheet bottom line, as dead. Nonetheless, there are countless ways to make money in the market in faster time after the paradigm shift from the carbon-based monopolistic model.

Renewable alternative energy is just one area, as the innovation cycle is fast, so is the ability recycle old infrastructure and profit is returned relatively quickly compared to any nuclear energy reactor; particularly with all the ancillary costs left of the balance sheet including indefinite storage of waste material.

The future will be grid integrating Japan with the Asian region, using current electrical control engineering management of the electricity across types, voltages, and demographics; all made available due to innovative algorithms, the doubling of processing ability of electrical control computers and an advanced worldview.✥ Doing this would be modelling European grid integration already in play, and pointing toward baseload theory being as redundant as the four stroke petrol engine in the near future. All strategic foresight practitioners point toward this monopolistic 1800s electricity supply model built by Eddison, soon being dead also.

^ In 2015, the General Accountability Office reported that it takes 20 to 25 years to develop a new reactor in the United States - source - Massachusetts Institute of Technology https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602155/nuclears-glacial-pace/

^^ every new nuclear reactor is experimental, demanding 'proof of concept' inclusive of economic viability, particularly after Fukushima; and not omitting the long list of expensive modifications needed post commissioning of every nuclear reactor ever built since the 1950s

✥ Asia Super Grid and Undersea Cable Project http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Companies/SoftBank-s-Son-embarks-on-power-grid-project-spanning-Northeast-Asia

'TEPCO has cut groundwater infiltration to 150 tons per day, nearly one-third of the amount two years ago, mainly by pumping out groundwater upstream and directing it to the ocean.'

Interesting. Because the fact ground water is not leaking doesn't mean the water being pumped out hasn't been irradiated or still carries radioactive particles.

After all the problem is the three 'China Syndrome' events or as the article put it;

'The three damaged reactors still need to be cooled with water to keep their melted cores from overheating.' There are decades needed to solve this problem, the plant is literally on top of these melted cores. In the Chernobyl reactor the meltdown poured outside of the reactor on the floor next to it.

The utility hopes the underground ice barrier will eliminate all groundwater inflow.'

This 'ice barrier' has been an utter failure, and in all probability will never do anything. Besides the fact, it has always been a temporary device meant for the short term.

'Radioactive water continues to leak into the ocean, but at a far lesser rate than it did early in the disaster.'

Well, that is true, it's not leaking now, it's being pumped into the ocean.

When in reality, all information Japanese people receive about nuclear energy and its alternatives has long been tightly controlled by both TEPCO and the government. The language being used is just double speak, designed to deceive and create the illusion all is going well.

The burning questions are:

How many are actually fooled by the political spin around the Fukushima Daichi nuclear accident?

How long are TEPCO and the government going to pretend this is not the world's worst nuclear accident?

How long are those responsible going to continue to put corporate profit as a first priority in all decisions?

'...Greenpeace should refrain from stating things like "apparent" mutations oif they want to be reliable. Things are or are not.' Roger Jolly

Actually, Roger, that is not how the body of scientific knowledge is acquired. There are no absolutes in science, it's about probabilities.

The purpose of the Greenpeace report; 'Radiation Reloaded: Ecological Impacts of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident 5 years later' ^ was about gathering the science, explaining it and adding to the body of scientific knowledge.

The undeniable issue is there are orders of magnitude of difference in the complexity in ecosystems affected radiation compared to the relative simplicity of the TEPCO/ IAEA/ Japanese Government planned decommissioning of the Fukushima plant and clean up. This magnitude of difference is the 'silent lie' about the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident.

Why is respecting the difference important, particularly with respect to the Fukushima incident?

Because absolutes or as you put it 'Things are or are not' are associated with dogma, religious belief, or circular logic that is not open to acquiring new knowledge.

Above all else the uniqueness of this incident affords an opportunity to learn about the real world effects of radiation, however, the neoliberal bottom line demands absolutes and is getting in the way of the science.

The context of the report is here in its conclusion; '...radionuclides released by the accident, and their incorporation into the materials cycle of ecosystems, the impacts of the disaster will last for decades and centuries. However, the understanding of the full scale of the Fukushima disaster for the natural environment is only it's early phase, highlighting the need for continued and expanded independent research into the multiple ecological effects. ^

^ http://www.greenpeace.org/japan/Global/japan/pdf/GPJ-%20Fukushima-Radiation%20Reloaded%20Report.pdf

'15-member panel dissented, saying the requirement violates a gender equality article in the constitution.'

This is a key point; women's rights are about equality. Until the constitutional changes are made the Japanese patriarchal-meritocratic culture is protected and will slip further behind in the globally framed equality rankings.

It would be interesting to see a referendum on these changes in the constitution.

However the more democracy the slower changes are made, so it may be sometime yet. The geopolitical changes in women's rights forcing equality are coming though.

'If you are comfortable with honoring this tradition, then by all means take the name of your husband...'

So many miss that about the use of surnames powderb, your point is well made.

After all it's about choice. The right to choose, the husbands, parents or both partners parents surname or family name.

It is interesting many cultures even use both surnames today. This strategy is particularly prevalent where the culture is making the transition out of patriarchal thinking.

Women's rights or in this case Abe's “womenomics” is about giving women choice.

Are “womenomics” moving fast enough for emerging generations though? Time will tell.

'How is it that J-women married to foreign men can have a different surname?

That's an interesting question Joeintokyo.

Because, if there is no differentiation between cultures there will be less patriarchy. Then there is the fear of the chaos of change brings, however slowing the inevitable change does not alter what follows.

It is good to remember emerging generations see time at a different cadence. The metronome of time runs slowly for earlier generations and change seems faster.

'...viewed as a setback for women’s rights and a victory for conservative family values...'

There are most definitely good values within the culture. Still the conservation of values is the premise of the Court and womens rights conflict with the patriarchal system of rules. Keeping the balance while evolving any culture is difficult.

As most developed nations have a patriarchal system of rules in one stage of evolution or other.

When any culture is be free to choose the surname of either gender in marriage, it becomes evident there is real cultural evolution. Steady steps bring less chaos.

However cultural change is inevitable, the Supreme Court is just limiting the generational damage.

All 'diesel engines' are dirty there is no way around this, they either need to be phased out or replaced by electric vehicles.

Why not sell out moot?

Everyone else has.

Hawkeye wrote: 'Stop the breeding grounds and you will stop this epidemic. Interesting premise, very simplistic.

Because the breeding ground from this perspective is where all Abrahamic values^ are promoted.

As these values are at the centre of all major conflict around the planet. Whether it's 8th through to 21st century adversarial Abrahamic thinking, the results are sickening.

So the issue of breeding grounds is subjective to a personal altitude and subsequent worldview.

After all it was the U.S. that waged nuclear war in the middle east using depleted uranium. An issue their centre of gravity is still wilful blind too. Not to go into the arms dealing corporations based in countries with the same values and the countless adversarial episodes in theatres of conflict.

^ http://goo.gl/aXGFIw

'American Sniper' triggers angry debate'

Debate that needs to be had.

Because front and centre is U.S. Foreign Policy we know was driven by ignorance of local sensitivities, and the need to dominate the Iraqi political power bases accent toward *modernisation, as imperfect as it was.

All due to an irrational fear of a carbon energy shortage that was predicted by the Carter Administration. Who put in place public and foreign policies as strategic foresight which were subsequently wound back by reactionary thinkers in denial of political or environmental change on the planet.

Little has changed in 2015, the reactionaries in the North American elite are still just as recalcitrant.

The same level of ignorance to change is evident in the denial of the international scientific consensus on global warming and subsequent climate change. The North American right wing conservatives just keep using the same pig headed ignorant values over and over again. Righteously indignant if anyone has another perspective on their precious woldview.

There is no heroic way to kill others, it's just war.

The hero does extraordinary things like helping friends and enemies without thinking.

The sniper in this movie is just a metaphor for all the injustice and unfair advantages given by the technologically superior weapons in all wars during all of human history.

' ...hold the Asahi responsible for spreading the impression that all comfort women were coerced. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told parliament last year that Asahi's mistaken report had hurt Japan's image.'

That's ironic. Far more damage is being done in denial. Everybody knows these were real events...

Reactionary politicians and their followers are always in denial, as if lying was justified as a core value in team support of fascist ideology.

Interesting fxgai to say this when you wrote:

'I guess the whale worshippers will be against...[biopsy collection]...next...'

That just goes to show how little is understood in Japan about gathering marine research data on Cetacea and the international scientific standard for many decades.

Reactionary thinkers seeding disinformation with snide comments never surprises, does it?

WhatMeWorry wrote:

'...she was locked up for a month without charge. I suspect a conspiracy by some group of right wingers to torment her.'

What are the probabilities this is real?

From this perspective it is highly probable this is orchestrated by those who fear gender equality.

WhatMeWorry wrote:

'...I suspect...some group...'

What are the probabilities it's the current reactionary government minister whose portfolio of responsibility touches Megumi Igarashi's art?

Himajin I understand the context of your comment.

I wrote in part earlier:

'One of the greatest problems in our era is the poor tolerance for failure...'

Himajin wrote;

" ...I disagree...I think it's in part the fault of the media, the 'instant superstar' status bestowed on people uncritically'

Which is true, not in dispute but part of the context of my comment.

The righteous indignation attacking Haruko Obokata has highlighted to pressure for genuine innovation without the necessary investment of profit back into innovation. The innovation cycle is broken. She is a victim of poor corporate culture and leadership.

Denigrating Haruko Obokata, highlighting her failure and apparent deception is as a effective as handing out speeding fines at an F1 Race.

That is the corporate business arena. Where it is common practice to deceive, shareholders, partners, financiers and the public.

What better example is the relationship between TEPCO executive and the Government?

Haruko Obokata is nothing but a public scapegoat...

Just how many of those who are against Megumi Igarashi's legitimate feminist stand have heard her speak?

How many know what principles she actually is creating art for?

Penfold wrote: '...she is certainly getting plenty of free publicity! ...'

Which for all of human history has been the primary purpose of artistic creation. It challenges the current levels of thought and on reflection looking back records the values of generations when it was created.

Conservative values are certainly a challenge for Japan in this era. I learned from Megumi Igarashi's about her anxiety of her genitals and her ignorance as a young woman about what natural women should look.

In the developed world anxiety about the female genitals is so extreme labiaplasty has become normal. Similar reasons demonising the shape and form of female genitals run even deeper in many developing cultures outside Japan.

Labiaplasty and circumcision is a serious feminist issue in more countries than many realise. I countries including highly developed Europe and North America. Women worldwide need to feel comfortable with how they were born, it is insidious that others values affect how women feel about their natural bodies.

The primary perpetrators of this shame in female genitals is the patriarchal system dominated by males and females alike. This is clear from the misogynistic comments denigrating Megumi Igarashi's legitimate feminist stand.

'To lose confidence in ones body is to lose confidence in oneself.' - Simone de Beauvoir

But that is point in a patriarchal society. Control of all females is seen as right good and proper. The primary weapon is removal of confidence.

What better place than to control the female appearance at it's most sensitive?

'...failure marked a stunning fall from grace for 31-year-old Haruko Obokata...'

One of the greatest problems in our era is the poor tolerance for failure. All great innovations have a history of great risk taking and the upside can be an of enormous benefit to the community.

Success includes a chance of failure and our lack of tolerance for failure has lead to little or no risk taking. The outcome is less innovation in our era.

This young woman should be pitied. As all around her is modelled low risk taking with an unrealistic demand for success based on monthly and yearly profit on spreadsheets.

This decision says more about tolerance for risk taking in the Riken institute and Government, than it does for Haruko Obokata's fall from grace.

Interesting article

'... to her astonishment, the manager and the other part-timer, locked in a passionate embrace behind a mountain of stock.'

This 'incident' in all probability crossed into the area of sexual harassment. The issue of who initiated the incident was not drawn out. Just that when the manager was confronted:

'The manager caved in. He got down on his knees. He begged forgiveness. 'Please, dont tell anyone'...'

Implying it was his job and family at stake. So who harassed who? So it is unclear who harassed who.

Was it the manager, the part timer, or the 40 year old?

But I will assume most readers could see this as a case of sexual harassment in the workplace and blame the manager. Which is an unfalsifiable assumption.

The rest of the article makes valid points about freedom of expression Highlighting the trend to take 'risks' increasing sexual excitement by breaking the law or community standards.

It must be said though, this trend is the tail end of sexual revolution started in the 1960s' in Europe and North America. This has swept through the world over decades and in some developed countries at a different rate.

It is good to be mindful procreation is the prime function of sex, as this has kept the human gene pool healthy and evolving for over many thousands of years.

However it is evolving values that allow freedom to use expression that are crucial to our species survival. Our communities biggest risk is the change in values effecting family structures. As these have the largest effect on following generations and it is decades before the results are know; with most in denial about the cause.

Because with the paradigm shift in morality has come narcissistic behaviour from both sexes. And that does not create well balanced and psychologically healthy generations for our future. No line of logic could support this trend is a anything but a self serving selfish act with disregard for others. But that can be all sex is for the narcissist. Its not that it happens it's how it is done. What is needed balance of respect for the easily offended that changes the intent.

From this perspective narcissism, which is the selfish disregard for others is our species greatest threat.

Sigh, yet another contribution to the 'climate of fear'.

When seen from the right perspective the 'climate of fear' generated by reactionary ideology is deliberately misleading.

Because unless you eat infected s...t, are handling an infected dead body, or work around the infected with an open wound or orifice as a medical professional does, there is little risk.

The fact is all the strains of the Ebola virus can't live outside of bodily fluids, as they die very fast.

Human risk is from open sewers and the practice in undeveloped countries of relatives handling the dead; or as we see in many African villages who practice of throwing the dead in the street. All these unsanitary practices are due to the level of development and extreme poverty.

So do you Japanese people live in an undeveloped country with open sewers or where it is common for relatives to handle the dead or toss them in the street?

For that matter, is any of the first world run under these conditions?

sangetsu03 wrote:

'I am sick and tired of hearing noise about the 200,000 "comfort women", and the lack of noise about the millions of innocent people who were murdered during the war.'

That may well be. However the Chinese government is using comfort women as a jingoistic foreign policy point of focus.

After all the regime in the Sino-Japanese War was slaughtered in vast numbers by the Japanese military as well as an incalculable number of Chinese civilians supporting both political factions during this era.

So the Armed Forces of the Empire were met with forces within China who had diametrically opposed ideology internally. Which on one level is why the Japanese chose to invade China in the first place; as China was fragmented politically and militarily so vulnerable as a country.

Given that why would the current Chinese regime raise any issues drawing attention to the carnage of their former internal enemies army, their ideologically opposed people and any military vulnerability?

Which raises the question of why are you so blind to the realities of 20th and 21 century geopolitics?

Nessie wrote

'What is "sandfish"?' The common name is sandfish, but there are many in the family of trichodontidae. The article is vague.^

some14some wrote:

'Still analyzing security camera footage? '

Which is interesting as it implies sabotage.

Raising the questions:

Would this be sabotage by competitors?

Is it sabotage as part of standover tactics by criminals?

Could this be sabotage by both competitors and criminals contracted to sabotage?

Could this just be from disgruntled employees sabotaging over grievances?

One thing is certain, this is taking an unnecessarily long time to solve if video evidence is available.

---> Which loops back to the - questions raised.

It could be clever being careful cooking anything from the Daiei supermarket in Sapporo

^ http://goo.gl/gqrvpS

HM7769 wrote:

'Good move. In this day and age people still think milk is good for them! We are not designed to drink it.

Interesting comment, this perspective presupposes we were designed by a creator.

'...11,000 years ago, cattle herders learned how to reduce lactose in dairy products to tolerable levels by fermenting milk to make cheese or yogurt. Several thousand years later, a genetic mutation spread through Europe that gave people the ability to produce lactase and drink milk throughout their lives'...gene culture co-evolution [between cattle and humans]. They feed off of each other ...'^

Humans have evolved to eat many things over hundreds of thousands of years of human history. Milk is one of the many food.

Cultural evolution however is another matter, as the 'creation story' demonstrates

^ http://www.nature.com/news/archaeology-the-milk-revolution-1.13471

dcog9065 wrote from his depth of experience: '...those who cannot for the life of them comprehend how systems like these operate and likely think they'll become self-aware or something'

That is a very subjective opinion and those who can't '...comprehend how systems like these operate' can't imagine machine sentience.

So I will take Stephen Hawking's^ perspective on machine code over yours dcog9065.

Stephen Hawking said recently: "Humans, who are limited by slow biological evolution, couldn't compete and would be superseded"

"We cannot quite know what will happen if a machine exceeds our own intelligence, so we can't know if we'll be infinitely helped by it, or ignored by it and sidelined, or conceivably destroyed by it."

lostrune wrote: 'The 3 Laws!' *

This is not about human laws, written in Isaac Asimov's .

We are having a conversation about machines developing their own laws.

It would be naive to believe with all the knowledge we have gathered over thousands of years that machines could not write their own laws after accessing it digitally.

The question is will humans be redundant?

^ Stepen Hawkings on machine code: http://goo.gl/urgMDz

The three laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics

Cyberdyne does exist: http://www.cyberdyne.jp/english/products/HAL/

sangetsu03 wrote: 'When they spend too much, then they borrow more. When they borrow too much, they push down interest rates so they can borrow more...' Interesting perspective and typical of reactionary values.

An old worldview the Thatcher/Reagan modeled version of austerity works and is a viable a solution to economic stagnation.

Austerity was part of the cherry picked Milton Friedman ideas that government spending needs to be cut. An outcome used to support those at the economic apex. The cuts are to the weakest and least powerful who actually pay for the elite executives erroneous management of financiers and corporate accounting practices.

Austerity policies as government strategies have failed to provide economic relief and restart any economies in Europe or North America. That fact is in bold written in recent history. Not only that, but austerity has never worked as a stimulus in all of recorded human history.

Austerity is a nothing more than a story or meme to placate the unaware. As Reckless put it: 'the emporer has no clothes...a common story...' Illustrating how few are willing to contradict the austerity story.

However international finance is nothing like the simplicity of personal banking, only the naive and certain think it is.

One of Japan's great economic builders was genuine innovation. Nothing humans have ever innovated has been achieved without risk.

It is over twenty years since Japanese industries became risk averse. What is interesting is it coincides with the graphs of economic decline.

There is little investing in real innovation and taking the risk of failure. Opting instead for the certainty of a guaranteed yearly capital return to the executive, shareholder and stakeholders.

CFOs have focused on parts of the innovation cycle only. The parts are the efficiencies of production, accountancy and the mantra of a guaranteed return of profit. Where is the truly new innovations? The ever present LED was a late 1950s innovation which is now near the peak of innovation efficiency. Which is an innovation cycle of over fifty years.

Cutting into or short circuiting the natural innovation cycle has been purely for a guaranteed return.

The creation of truly innovative products consumers benefit from is not getting capital investment. This is due to CFO, executive, stakeholder and financiers aversion for risk.

But Japan is not alone using this CFO mantra of risk aversion and reinvestment of profit into what has become a a global spiral into efficiencies. It now has entered all forms of machine code and is replacing people as we read here.

Innovation creates, wealth, generates job and motivates people to take further risk innovating. Certainty or guarantees leads to stagnation.

Who would deny stagnation is hanging over this generation of highly educated people who are more capable than any in human history?

Framing everyones life conditions based on economic guarantees for those at the economic apex is just not clever.

There needs to be a greater understanding of global economics by us all to reverse the trend of voter ignorance. Nothing good comes from believing 3-5 second political statements and listening to our favourite political 'teams' version of economics. ..

Heda_Madness wrote:

'...wrong to suggest that the issues with man made CO2 emissions have been [growing exponentially to a tipping point] for centuries.'

Interesting, so you don't believe in the international consensus in global warming, with the subsequent local and nonlocal climate change.

What makes you qualified^ to have such a certain opinion?

Are you a working earth or climate scientist published and peer reviewed?

^ http://goo.gl/LEJspX

Pandabelle wrote: 'Fairewinds is run by a man whose livelihood depends on spreading fear about nuclear power'

Interesting ad hominem. So using your line of logic.

Those vested interests overseen by the IAEA in the nuclear industries including the military needs to be questioned also.

Because vested interests make a living out of nuclear energy and spreading fear alsoFear of not having enough energy, fear of national security.

wtfjapan wrote: '...CO2 emmissions will do far more damage to the worlds enviroment than the Fukushima accident ever will.'

That is a subjective statement, so using your line of logic ...

Humans have only been playing with nuclear energy production for only decades and the man made CO2 timeline of change is measured in thousands of years.

These questions are appropriate:

Are you certain^ that if damage by nuclear energy to earth's environment was leveraged over centuries it would not have catastrophic consequences as well ?

What makes you qualified to separate the vested interest issue in nuclear and carbon energy production and declaring it safe?

There is also the fact nuclear waste alone as it is measured in hundreds of thousands of years. So far there has been no continuous governing leadership to guarantee stewardship of nuclear waste.

Have you considered who will care the waste if the geopolitical situation changes ?

^ http://goo.gl/gxkNMC

'This is a much more complex, much more difficult water management problem' Barrett said

Very true, there are other examples like all the piles of contaminated soil.

Where will this hot soil be stored?

What about the numerous hot zones identified by independent testing?

The issues are many and the serious ones are ignored. Leaving the problems for generations going into the future.

Voter unhappiness across all of Japan is the largest challenge for leadership grappling with the worst nuclear energy production disaster in human history.