TEPCO 'failed to heed warnings about tsunami risks'; Japan govt body detailed risks: documents

[bananas]

http://www.todayonline.com/World/EDC110516-0000220/TEPCO-failed-to-heed-warnings-about-tsunami-risks

TEPCO 'failed to heed warnings about tsunami risks'
04:46 AM May 16, 2011

TOKYO - A government body conducted analyses on the damage tsunamis of various scale would inflict on a nuclear power plant, according to documents made public yesterday, adding to allegations that Japan and its largest utility failed to heed warnings.

The latest revelation, reported by the Mainichi daily, emerged as the government prepares to help the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) compensate victims of the crisis at the tsunami-crippled nuclear Fukushima Dai-ichi plant.

The government and TEPCO have repeatedly described the combination of the magnitude 9.0 earthquake and the ensuing 15m tsunami as beyond expectations.

The institution affiliated with the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, however, analysed the dangers of tsunamis ranging from 3m to 23m in a report originally published in December.

<snip>

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/15/us-japan-nuclear-study-idUSTRE74E0M320110515

Japan govt body detailed tsunami risks before March 11:documents

TOKYO | Sun May 15, 2011 4:18am EDT

TOKYO (Reuters) - A government body conducted analyses on the damage tsunamis of various scale would inflict on a nuclear power plant, according to documents made public on Sunday, adding to allegations that Japan and its largest utility failed to heed warnings.

<snip>

The government and TEPCO have repeatedly described the combination of the magnitude 9.0 earthquake and the ensuing 15m tsunami as beyond expectations.

<snip>

"Our analysis shows that a tsunami of a certain height (some 7 meters in the absence of a seawall and some 15 meters if one were present) or higher would have almost a 100 percent chance of damaging the reactor core...," the Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organization said in the report.

"We presume a tsunami of at least 7 meters would destroy the functions of a seawater pump and that of at least 15 meters would destroy outside equipment such as an electrical transformer."

<snip>

(Reporting by Rie Ishiguro; Editing by Ron Popeski)

[snagglepuss]

1. So why didn't the govt do anything when it saw that TEPCO was ignoring

its warnings?

[Art_from_Ark]

2. This government report came out last December

Did TEPCO actually ignore it, or did they need time to design added protection? And even if they had started working on adding protection in December, construction probably wouldn't have started for a month or two after that. So chances are it would have been too little, too late anyway.

Regardless, there's not much that can be done about it now, unfortunately. TEPCO is screwed, the people of Fukushima are screwed, the customers of TEPCO are screwed, Japanese taxpayers are screwed. It's difficult to see a silver lining in all this.

[bananas]

4. Japanese scientists have been warning about it for years

It shouldn't have taken this long for a government agency to realize their was a problem.
TEPCO and the Japanese government acted irresponsibly, they ignored and suppressed the science.

[Art_from_Ark]

5. There was a Japanese scientist who wrote about a tsunami that occurred

1200 years ago in the area. But the tsunamis from the two most recent massive earthquake/tsunami disasters in NE Japan (roughly 80 and 110 years ago) wreaked considerable destruction in coastal Iwate Prefecture, but the level of severity decreased markedly in neighboring prefectures (Aomori and Miyagi), and was not such a problem in Fukushima Prefecture (wave height apparently less than 3m). So based on that historical background, would preparations for a 6m-high tsunami seem to be adequate? And given the release of the government report last December, would TEPCO had even had time to get a 15m seawall designed and built before March 11?

[bananas]

7. In 2006, a seismologist resigned from a nuclear safety commission in protest

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x871004

Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismology professor at Kobe University, has said Japan’s history of nuclear accidents stems from an overconfidence in plant engineering. In 2006, he resigned from a government panel on reactor safety, saying the review process was rigged and “unscientific.”

[bananas]

8. He wrote about it after the 2007 earthquake which crippled the KK nuclear plant

http://www.japanfocus.org/-Ishibashi-Katsuhiko/2495

I was a member of the expert panel that developed the new seismic design guidelines, but I resigned during the final stage of the work last August to protest the panel's stance on this issue. This defect must be fixed quickly, learning from what happened at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant.

[bananas]

9. He warned about it 14 years ago

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x292922

It was 14 years ago that Kobe University professor emeritus and seismologist Katsuhiko Ishibashi wrote a paper warning of the possibility of a nuclear accident, like the current one, triggered by a massive quake or tsunami.

[bananas]

11. In 2005 Katsuhiko Ishibashi appeared before the Lower House Budget Committee

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x283840

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110327a3.html

Sunday, March 27, 2011
Signs of disaster were there to see
Seismology experts warned for years nuclear plants can't withstand true worst-case scenario

By JUN HONGO
Staff writer

On Feb. 23, 2005, Kobe University professor Katsuhiko Ishibashi appeared before the Lower House Budget Committee and pointed out the risks of operating nuclear power plants in earthquake-prone Japan.

"An earthquake and its seismic thrust can hit multiple parts (of a nuclear plant)" and induce not one but a variety of breakdowns, Ishibashi, an expert on Earth and planetary sciences, told the lawmakers.

Such a scenario could knock out even the backup safety system and possibly result in a "severe accident," such as overheating of the reactor core or even a runaway nuclear reaction, he warned.

Warnings like this from Ishibashi and other experts went largely unheeded.

<snip>

[bananas]

10. Since 1969 seismology advisers to the Government have given warning ... but were ignored

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2112763.ece

Professor Ishibashi has fought the Government unsuccessfully for urgent reviews of quake-proofing standards throughout Japan’s nuclear industry. A member of the Government’s own panel on nuclear safety, he criticised the Government and the Japanese public yesterday for their failure to recognise how close the country was to genpat-su-shinsai. Since 1969 seismology advisers to the Government have given warning of the danger of building atomic plants, but were officially ignored.

[bananas]

12. 2007: group of scientists said KK plant should be shut permanently

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x109664

struggle4progress (1000+ posts) Wed Aug-22-07 08:57 PM

Japan Nuclear Plant Not Safe to Restart After Quake, Group Says
By Jason Clenfield

Aug. 22 (Bloomberg) -- A nuclear plant in northern Japan, the world's biggest, that leaked radiation after being damaged by an earthquake last month is unsafe and should be shut down permanently, a group of scientists said ...

``It will be impossible to prove empirically that all of the plant's damage has been repaired,'' the group, headed by Kobe University Professor of Seismology Katsuhiko Ishibashi and Hiromitsu Ino, an emeritus professor of metallurgy at Tokyo University, said in a statement yesterday ...

<snip>

[bananas]

13. 2007: "Genpatsu-shinsai: the language of disaster that is stalking Japan"

I think I originally posted this back in 2007, but I posted it again Mar-13-11:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x278499

From 2007 after another earthquake that couldn't possibly happen:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2112763.ece

July 21, 2007
Genpatsu-shinsai: the language of disaster that is stalking Japan
Leo Lewis in Tokyo

Japan’s turbulent history of war and natural catastrophe has already given the world a terrifying vocabulary of death: tsunami, kamikaze, Hiroshima.

But the country now stands on the brink of unleashing its most chilling phrase yet: genpatsu-shinsai – the combination of an earthquake and nuclear meltdown capable of destroying millions of lives and bringing a nation to its knees.

The phrase, derived from the Japanese words for “nuclear power” and “quake disaster”, is the creation of Katsuhiko Ishibashi, Japan’s leading seismologist and one of the Government’s top advisers on nuclear-quake safety. He said that the world may never know how close it came to its first genpatsu-shinsai this week. Luck, as much an anything else, helped to avert it.

A 6.8 magnitude quake, which shook Niigata on Monday and left thousands of homes uninhabitable, was three times more powerful than the designers of the nearest nuclear power plant – Kashiwazaki-Kariwa – had prepared for, or even imagined.

<snip>

and one of the replies in that thread:

1. this bears repeating:

'He said that the world may never know how close it came to its first genpatsu-shinsai this week. Luck, as much an anything else, helped to avert it.'

[snagglepuss]

14. Exactly. It seems to me the Japanese govt is now just trying to cover their ass.

The govt and TEPCO are both guilty of criminal neglience.

[Someguyinjapan]

6. The point you utterly miss

Is that TEPCO didn't even try. Whether they had started construction in time or not is moot; had they made the effort to at least try and rectify the safety flaws would have spoken volumes about their commitment to Japanese citizens' safety.

But it's not like TEPCO hasn't had a chance before to rectify safety issues at its facilities and failed. How many safety violations have they had in the past 20 years? Hundreds I believe. So don't make it sound like it TEPCO somehow doesn't bear a substantial portion of responsibility for what has happened, because they do.

[saras]

3. Maybe the same reason our government doesn't stop corporate crime?