On 5 July, exactly the day when Japan ceased to be a nuclear-free country, the Parliamentary Investigation Committee(appointed by the Parliament and not necessarily composed of MPs) on the Fukushima nuclear plant accident published a report of more than 600 pages. Here are some of its salient features.
First and foremost, it says that the basic cause of the accident goes back before 11 March 2011, the day of the disaster. The regulating authorities as well as the management of the Tokyo Electric Company actually in charge of the plant have, either through postponing the issues concerning security, inaction, or attempts to safeguard their own organizations, have not squarely faced the problems concerning the security till 11 March.
The Tokyo Electric Company, which should have been the object of regulating actions, has, through its monopoly of information, turned its position upside down and has been exerting strong pressure so that the carrying out of the necessary regulation would be postponed, or loosened. In this connection its close relation with the Ministry of Economy and Industries worked as the source of such pressure.
Thus a number of opportunities for improving the safety standard has been overlooked. Seen in this light the accident was not a natural disaster. It was a man-made one.
Secondly, it is yet to be clarified how the process of destruction of the plant has actually taken place. According to the Company, the main cause was the tsunami, the magnitude of which exceeded all the expectations, and therefore it was a natural disaster. But there are signs that the earthquake should also be taken into account as the main cause of the accident.
Thirdly, once the disaster took place, it was found that neither the PM' Office, the regulating bureaucracy, nor the Company, was prepared to cope with it. They also lacked the necessary will to do so. Also the boundaries between the parties concerned were not clear. The PM's Office, by directly giving orders to the Company, has added to the confusion. Moreover, the dissemination of e necessary information to the local bodies was not only delayed but flawed.
Fourthly, the local residents are still living in a condition of accident. Radioactivity-induced health, maintaining family and community life, contamination of a large area-estimated to be 1,800 square km-are the major problems. Thousands are forced to live in temporary housing without having an idea of for how long more.
The decision on reactivating the Ooi reactors, which has been discussed here recently, should have waited until the publication of, and a minimum discussion on, this report.
First and foremost, it says that the basic cause of the accident goes back before 11 March 2011, the day of the disaster. The regulating authorities as well as the management of the Tokyo Electric Company actually in charge of the plant have, either through postponing the issues concerning security, inaction, or attempts to safeguard their own organizations, have not squarely faced the problems concerning the security till 11 March.
The Tokyo Electric Company, which should have been the object of regulating actions, has, through its monopoly of information, turned its position upside down and has been exerting strong pressure so that the carrying out of the necessary regulation would be postponed, or loosened. In this connection its close relation with the Ministry of Economy and Industries worked as the source of such pressure.
Thus a number of opportunities for improving the safety standard has been overlooked. Seen in this light the accident was not a natural disaster. It was a man-made one.
Secondly, it is yet to be clarified how the process of destruction of the plant has actually taken place. According to the Company, the main cause was the tsunami, the magnitude of which exceeded all the expectations, and therefore it was a natural disaster. But there are signs that the earthquake should also be taken into account as the main cause of the accident.
Thirdly, once the disaster took place, it was found that neither the PM' Office, the regulating bureaucracy, nor the Company, was prepared to cope with it. They also lacked the necessary will to do so. Also the boundaries between the parties concerned were not clear. The PM's Office, by directly giving orders to the Company, has added to the confusion. Moreover, the dissemination of e necessary information to the local bodies was not only delayed but flawed.
Fourthly, the local residents are still living in a condition of accident. Radioactivity-induced health, maintaining family and community life, contamination of a large area-estimated to be 1,800 square km-are the major problems. Thousands are forced to live in temporary housing without having an idea of for how long more.
The decision on reactivating the Ooi reactors, which has been discussed here recently, should have waited until the publication of, and a minimum discussion on, this report.
No comments:
Post a Comment