Did Japan Lie?

[Otaku]

FIRST OFF, I'm not making accusations, rather asking a question?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/17/us-japan-quake-meltdown-specialreport-idUSTRE72G65Z20110317

According to this article it says, "authorities initially said they had safely shut down the four nuclear plants closest to the earthquake and tsunami zone."

Is this merely miscommunication? Could the authorities have been talking about one of the power plants in the area?

[SirDickusBacillus]

It could be that someone lied. If JAPAN has lied, we will not find out about it for a long time.

[jessen100]

they could just be stupid and decided they wanted to throw the word "safely" in there. They most certainly shut down, but obviously not safely. its also reasonable that they said it was safe before it was realized they didnt have the resources available to actually cool them

it also says the battle was with six, which i would say was inaccurate as well since they were only battling with 4. I know 6 are there, but they only had to battle with 4 if im not mistaken.

"rapidly deteriorating conditions inside Fukushima have threatened a meltdown with the potential to spread radioactive particles across the country and beyond."

seems like a pretty bold statement with no source. i suppose the ocean can count as beyond.

my estimate answer for your question is no.

[Otaku]

I don't think that is a bold statement. It's already a proven fact.

Radiation levels, rather insignificant, have been recorded in Tokyo. The US, also rather insignificant, is going to be getting some sprinkle of radiation.

It's VERY true that radiation has already been spread near and far.

Now, what do I find disappointing is how many of these types of articles 'playdown' the radiation being spread is not significant in terms to other types of radiation we are exposed to everyday. I find that abhorring and pandering to people's pre-conceived notions of the word 'radiation'.

[SirDickusBacillus]

I think there are things to consider even in the small doses that are discussed. If a Seivert is measured by the hour (it is), then I would most certainly not want to be exposed to a chest x-ray (or any other nominal radiation comparison) every hour. This would have severe long term effect.

As for the battle with 6 - All reactors were facing overheating problems, but the battle must have come from the installation of generators at 5 and 6.

[Otaku]

It was thought Unit 5 and Unit 6 weren't going to be problems, but now they recorded higher temperatures in those two plants.

I'm not a nuc expert, but I have been thoroughly engrossed in a ton of information the last few days.

It's my understanding that Unit 5 and Unit 6 are being a nuisance and possible problem in the future, but take a backseat to Unit 2, and especially Unit 3 since it's the only reactor that contains plutonium.

[moolooman]

The latest IAEA information that I got is that Unit 6 has gone from 62.5 degrees to 62.0 degrees over the space of 15 hrs.

[peet]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-17/japan-s-nuclear-disaster-caps-decades-of-faked-safety-reports-accidents.html

Botched Container?

Mitsuhiko Tanaka, 67, working as an engineer at Babcock Hitachi K.K., helped design and supervise the manufacture of a $250 million steel pressure vessel for Tokyo Electric in 1975. Today, that vessel holds the fuel rods in the core of the No. 4 reactor at Fukushima’s Dai-Ichi plant, hit by explosion and fire after the tsunami.

Tanaka says the vessel was damaged in the production process. He says he knows because he orchestrated the cover-up. When he brought his accusations to the government more than a decade later, he was ignored, he says.

The accident occurred when Tanaka and his team were strengthening the steel in the pressure vessel, heating it in a furnace to more than 600 degrees Celsius (1,112 degrees Fahrenheit), a temperature that melts metal. Braces that should have been inside the vessel during the blasting were either forgotten or fell over. After it cooled, Tanaka found that its walls had warped.

[Otaku]

Piggy-backing off what Peet posted, YIKES!

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-reports/operator-of-fukushima-nuke-plant-admitted-to-faking-repair-records/story-fn858jk3-1226024977934

Operator of Fukushima nuke plant admitted to faking repair records AFP

DAYS before Japan plunged into an atomic crisis after a giant earthquake and tsunami knocked out power at the ageing Fukushima nuclear plant, its operator had admitted faking repair records.

The revelation raises fresh questions about both Tokyo, the scandal-tainted past of the Electric Power Co (TEPCO), and the Japanese government's perceived soft regulation of a key industry.

The operator of the Fukushima No 1 plant submitted a report to the country's nuclear watchdog 10 days before the quake hit on March 11, admitting it had failed to inspect 33 pieces of equipment in its six reactors there.

A power board distributing electricity to a reactor's temperature control valves was not examined for 11 years, and inspectors faked records, pretending to make thorough inspections when in fact they were only cursory, TEPCO said.

It also said that inspections, which are voluntary, did not cover other devices related to cooling systems including water pump motors and diesel generators.

The report was submitted after the regulator ordered operators to examine whether inspections were suitably thorough.

"Long-term inspection plans and maintenance management were inadequate," the nuclear safety agency concluded in a follow-up report two days after TEPCO's admission.

"The quality of inspection was insufficient."

The safety agency ordered the operator to draw up a corrective plan by June 2.

But on March 11 the 9.0-magnitude earthquake unleashed a 10-metre tsunami, knocking out back-up generators hooked to the plant's cooling system aimed at keeping fuel rods from overheating and releasing dangerous radiation.

A nuclear safety agency official who declined to be named said: "We can't say that the lapses listed in the (February 28) report did not have an influence on the chain of events leading to this crisis.

"We will conduct thorough research on TEPCO's activities up until this crisis but that will come afterwards. For now we are only working on saving the plant."

Firefighters, policemen and troops are hosing the damaged reactors in a desperate bid to stop them overheating, and trying to restore electricity that would kick-start cooling systems.

Images of the exploding plant triggered global alarm, but for many in Japan, TEPCO's track record of safety issues and attempts to cover them up add to suspicion over a flow of opaque, erratic information about Fukushima.

In 2002, TEPCO admitted to falsifying safety reports which led to all 17 of its boiling-water reactors being shut down for inspection, including Fukushima.

The revelation forced the then TEPCO chairman and president to resign.

And in an eerily familiar event, a 2007 earthquake paralysed its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant - the world's biggest - and more radiation leaked than TEPCO initially acknowledged.

TEPCO later said it underestimated the potential impact of an earthquake on the facility.

"People don't trust TEPCO, they don't expect TEPCO to tell the truth," Philip White of the Tokyo-based Citizens' Nuclear Information Centre, a group of scientists and activists against nuclear power, said.

"The problem is one of a culture of denial - denial that this could occur, denial Japan could be subject to a big quake and the scale of the wave that could come."

Parallels with how TEPCO has handled Fukushima and BP's dealing with the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster have been drawn.

TEPCO has lost 1.93 trillion yen ($A24.6 billion) in market value since the disaster.

Prime Minister Naoto Kan was heard by a stray microphone furiously berating TEPCO officials after they took an hour to notify the government of the first explosion to hit the plant.

"What the hell is going on?" Kan was heard to say.

When the February report was released, the local Fukushima government also demanded redress, saying the "problem threatens the foundation of trust", media reported at the time.

TEPCO had issued the report after a fresh inspection at its Kashiwazaki Kariwa plant also revealed oversight.

"They had submitted the report because they were afraid they would get in trouble if they didn't," another nuclear safety official said.

[Paul]

Maybe Japan didnt lie but TEPCO sure seems like they have and on more than one occasion.

[jessen100]

i feel like there is a suspiciously low amount of information on the incident the other day. (2 days ago?)

[Otaku]

i feel like there is a suspiciously low amount of information on the incident the other day. (2 days ago?)

Which incident?

I like how PM Kan was caught by a mic asking, "WTF is going on over there?" (paraphrasing, of course)

[jessen100]

the one where a bunch of smoke came out of both buildings and they didnt know the cause for it, the radiation levels went way up, and they polluted the sea water a whole bunch.

obviously them not knowing the cause will make it hard to report a whole lot, but it seems like they could give a little more info.

[FujiFromMyWindowFujiFromMyWindow]

About the first link. I think "the reactors are safe" was too broad a statement. The TEPCO people knew the situation would likely be complicated but they wanted to reassure us. I think they were too general and I think translation from Japanese to English maybe unclear.

As for the story about the cover-ups...that is just insaine.

Sorry, but in my time here, I feel like this culture is one of cover-ups, face-saving, and deciet. I will be the first to say there are cover-ups in the west. Absolutely. But I like to think/hope that the west is quicker to admit mistakes.

Do Japanese companies ever immediately admit, "we made a mistake, we are wrong"?!

Scandles and delayed confessions are all over the papers. Companies eventually apologize. And sure, I believe in forgiveness. I even believe in being gracious and allowing someone to save face...but it seems that once Japanese executives apologize, they have very little obligation to really change their heart and go the right route.

America/England/Canada, these countries, were originally founded on ethics/concepts of "right and wrong". Here, the thinking is not so much about "that is right or wrong". Japan was built on "balancing bad with good".

However, when balancing the bad karma with good karma, does the "good karma" take responsibility for, or change the bad? The "good karma" comes in the form of "Gomen nasai" presents, or sometimes attempts at teary expressions. Does that really make "things right"?

What happens when a Japanese employee does something bad? The employee just gets demoted. Are they expected to take responsibility and improve the situation. I don't think so. Maybe Paul can comment and help me understand this...?

I think the fundamental difference is philosophy. I prefer the honesty I was taught in the west.