Fukushima: History of “cover-ups”

10
69

Well before the present Fukushima nuclear power plant emergency, the Tokyo-based Citizens Nuclear Information Centre had reported about a history of “cover-ups” in the Japanese nuclear energy industry.

The cover-ups included data falsification during voluntary site inspections and attempts to camouflage damage. “There have been a growing number of damage cover-ups and data falsifications around 1994 when electric companies had started shortening the time for a periodical inspection having learned from the ‘success’ experience in the US,” said the CNIC.

Among the plants included in the report were the Fukushima I plant.

The NISA and the TEPCO published interim reports on September 13 and 17 (2002) respectively, which addressed the 29 suspected cases in more detail. Regarding the cracks detected in the core shroud, according to the report, they had been already found at Fukushima I Unit-1 and Unit-4 in 1993, where the cracks in the middle part of the shroud at Fukushima I Unit-2 in 1994 were reported officially as the first case. The magnitude of the cracks in Fukushima I Unit-2 turned out to be far greater and more serious than the ones announced by the official report. It has also become clear that reactors in Fukushima I Unit 1, 3, and 5 have cracks in each shroud, so the claim that no cracks were found in the core shrouds and that they were replaced as a “preventive measure” is completely false.

See the report on the CNIC website.

You can also see the “accident concealment and data fudge” chart at Fukushima I on the CNIC website.

Please help to support this blog if you can.

Read the commenting guidlelines for this blog.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

10 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mido

Cities usually flourish along the fault lines where resources are abundant.
However,nothing comes for free.

LBJ

This sin will come to haunt them and the people of Japan for decades to come. I think TEP is done for.

Ho Ho Ho

SAY NO TO RACISM n SAYS NO TO NUCLEAR PLANT TOO…

tunglang

Where government and big businesses are money-brothers, there is no question of cover ups when things go wrong. Public relation will go the extra miles to say the weather’s fine, don’t worry. Everything is AOK! But when the inevitable screw ups cannot be solved the public will be the guinea pigs of big corporation mistakes and adventurism of bad businesses. Then the government will come forward with overflowing crocodile’s tears to say this is the most ‘challenging’ time of the decade since WW2 and the citizens must ‘sacrifice’ in the name of patriotism to bear thro’ the ‘nonsense’. Where is… Read more »

wira

The Japanese government, like most governments including ours, will lie to their people.
However, the big difference between them and us is that their media is free.

You can see and hear how their PM, the Chief Secretary to the Cabinet and the senior staff of Tokyo Electric Power Company are being rudely questioned and criticised by the media on national TV over the.

That kind of scenario won’t happen in this country.

wandererAUS

Developed countries like Germany, Switzerland and Australia are abandoning the idea of introducing nuke plants in their countries.
Yet, Muhyddin UMNO DPM is pressing ahead with the nuclear ambition for the nation!….

UMNO corrupted … you cannot even build a stadium and manage a public toilet…a nuclear plant?!! God helps us all……

looes74

Plus the Australians dumping their Radiation Plant in Malaysia

Check out Lynas corporation

FenceSitter

I wonder why they built those reactors on the southern coast right where tsunamis are likely to occur. Why not on the northern coast where it is sheltered?

Sean

It seems like most of their population is on that south-eastern coast. If you look at a topographical map of Japan, the population centres correspond to large lowland plains. Malaysia is similar, isn’t it? Most of our population faces seismically-active Indonesia, although I don’t think the East coast is that mountainous. Is it to do with trade / shipping here?

Ajikato

Still, they could have built the plant away from the coast on the balance of loss of lives if there is a double bummer – earthquake and tsunami damage.

But every inch of Japan is at risk of earthquake damage. How to build safety ratings above the last known disaster? This one was 9.0 . Top limit is 10.0 so how?

They could emigrate or Japan can buy some lands or islands elsewhere…