Fukushima Case Study Flashcards

Fukushima Case Study

Lecture 1: Introduction to the Course and Case

• 3/11 Triple Disaster: Earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster.
• Japan's Disaster History:
  • Tokyo Earthquake (1923).
  • Kobe Earthquake (1995).
  • Typhoon Hagibis (2019).
  • Japan is well-prepared for natural disasters due to its location on the Ring of Fire.
• The Great East Japan Disaster (3/11):
  • Also known as the 'Great Tohoku Earthquake'.
  • Earthquake magnitude: M_w 9.0-9.1.
  • Most powerful earthquake recorded in Japan, fourth-largest globally.
  • The main island shifted 2.4 meters towards the US.
  • Severe damage to infrastructure.
  • Road inaccessibility complicated crisis management.
  • Power outages due to severed above-ground power lines.
• Tsunami:
  • Tsunami height: 3.5 to 9.3 meters, exceeding 30 meters in some areas.
  • Devastated a 500-kilometer section of the Japanese coast.
  • Water covered an area equivalent to 90% of Tokyo.
  • Highest recorded tsunami in Japanese history.
• Emergency Disaster Response:
  • Establishment of Crisis Management Center and Disaster Countermeasures HQ in the Prime Minister’s Office.
  • Similar HQs in other ministries.
  • Northeastern Japan designated a large-scale disaster area.
• Decapitation of Local Governments:
  • Damages hindered regional/local crisis response coordination.
  • Local governments, vital for crisis management, were largely incapacitated.
• Mobilization of Self-Defense Forces (SDF):
  • SDF played a key role in disaster relief due to Japan's unstable natural disaster context.
  • Largest-ever SDF mobilization: over 100,000 troops within three days for search and rescue.
• Support from the U.S.:
  • US-Japan Security Alliance: US military bases in Japan.
  • Deployment of nearly 20,000 US troops to support search and rescue.
  • Redeployment of USS Ronald Reagan to Tohoku coast.
  • 'Operation Tomodachi' (friend): symbolic of the Japan-US alliance.
• International Support & Volunteerism:
  • 163 countries and 43 international organizations provided assistance.
  • Significant role of Japan’s civil society: over 935,000 volunteers in the region within a year.
  • Volunteer Centers staffed by NGOs coordinated disaster relief.
• Disaster Relief Efforts:
  • Many areas were inaccessible.
  • Local governments were decapitated.
  • Over 300 medical institutions were destroyed/shut down, leading to alternative locations like high schools.
• Nuclear Crisis:
  • Four nuclear power plants on Japan’s northeastern coast.
  • INES Level: Measures the severity of nuclear incidents (0 to 7).
  • Fukushima Dai-ichi reactors 1, 2, 3 were operational; 5 & 6 were not.
• Effects of the Triple Disaster:
  • Earthquake disconnected reactors from the external power source, essential for cooling systems.
  • Backup power generators failed due to tsunami flooding.
  • Loss of cooling led to reactor core exposure, overheating, and nuclear meltdown.
  • Outdated reactor design caused hydrogen leaks and explosions.

Nuclear Crisis Management

• Actors Involved:
  • On-site workers: Provided crucial information about reactor conditions.
  • Off-site supervision: Control rooms were unusable; supervision moved to an emergency center.
  • Tokyo leadership.
• Restoring Power and Venting the Reactor:
  • 'The Fukushima 50': Workers who remained on-site despite hazardous conditions.
  • Hydrogen explosions at reactors:
    • Reactor no. 1: March 12, 15:36.
    • Reactor no. 3: March 14, 11:01.
  • SDF helicopters and concrete pumping cars were used for water-dropping and pumping operations.
• Stabilization and Decommissioning:
  • Plant prepared for decommissioning.
  • Efforts to minimize radiation leakage.
  • Decommissioning expected to take four decades.
• Support for Displaced & Evacuated People:
  • Public buildings used for temporary shelters, prefabricated houses, private and public-sector apartments.
  • Humanitarian crisis: Extended displacement for many.
  • Displacement Statistics:
    • Peak: 470,000 displaced (170,000 due to earthquake/tsunami, 300,000 due to nuclear disaster).
    • March 2012: 344,290 displaced.
    • February 2017: 123,000 displaced.
• Consequences and Aftermath:
  • Support for evacuees and reconstruction of the region.
  • Reviving industry and livelihoods.
  • Decommissioning Fukushima Dai-ichi and ensuring nuclear safety.
  • Evaluating and learning lessons.
  • Future of energy security in Japan: whither nuclear energy?

Lecture 2: Politics and Culture of Nuclear Energy in Japan

• Key Questions:
  • Causes of the 2011 nuclear disaster.
  • Preventability of the disaster.
  • Impact within Japan's historical context with nuclear technology.
  • Implications for Japan’s energy security and nuclear energy’s future.
• Key Themes:
  • Japan’s energy security.
  • Nuclear governance and regulatory capture.
  • Political culture and the ‘nuclear village’.
  • Trauma and nuclear energy in public discourse.
  • The future of nuclear energy in Japan.
• TEPCO’s Initial Explanation:
  • Attributed to a natural disaster beyond their control.
  • ‘Soteigai’ - a Black Swan event (unforeseeable).
  • Dismissed by experts and the public as a means of evading responsibility.
• Investigation of the Accident:
  • Independent investigation commission by National Diet.
  • First independent investigation institution established by the Japanese parliament, underscoring the scale of the event.
  • Chaired by Kiyoshi Kurokawa (FNAIIC), who deemed it a man-made disaster resulting from Japanese culture/politics.
  • Independent researchers cited technical, systematic, administrative, and societal failures.
• US Occupation of Japan (1945-1951):
  • Post-war US-drafted constitution focused on democratization and demilitarization.
  • Initially aimed to reduce Japan to an agricultural state.
  • Shifted due to the Cold War, with Japan becoming a key US security partner.
  • Japan forbidden from nuclear fission research (1947).
• Yasuhiro Nakasone's Role:
  • Instrumental in establishing Japan’s nuclear industry (1951-1955).
• Motivations for Nuclear Technology:
  1. Post-war rebuilding, industrial growth, and profit.
  2. Energy security: reducing import reliance.
  3. International power: technological ambitions and prestige.
  4. National security: peaceful nuclear program as a soft deterrent.
• Governance Structure:
  • National policy operation by private companies.
  • Government authorizes, private electric companies operate.
• Japanese Industrial Development:
  • Political economy of development.
  • Chalmers Johnson’s work on Japanese industrial policy (1982).
  • Japan as a ‘developmental state’ (mix of capitalism and communism).
  • Ministry of International Trade and Industry & ‘public policy companies’:
    • Used taxes to start key industries.
• Japan’s ‘Iron Triangle’:
  • Seeks to dominate policy areas.
  • Long-term strategic plans.
• Nuclear Industry:
  • A ‘state-planned privately operated’ industry.
• Nuclear Trauma:
  • Hiroshima bombing aftermath.
  • Organizations established by survivors to ban nuclear weaponry.
  • Atomic bombing retold and preserved in popular culture (e.g., comic books like ‘Barefoot Gen’).
• Eisenhower's Speech (1953):
  • Addressed the reality of nuclear weaponry.
  • Advocated for peaceful use of atomic energy.
  • Proposed an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
• ‘Atoms for Peace’ (1955-1956):
  • US pro-nuclear information campaigns.
  • Provided key technology for nuclear research and education.
  • Pledged peaceful uses.
• 1954 Bikini Atoll Accident:
  • Nuclear testing exposed Japanese fishermen to atomic bombs.
  • Sparked protests against atomic and hydrogen bombs.
  • Fueled anti-US sentiment and anti-nuclear movement.
• Godzilla (1954):
  • Critique against nuclear weapons.
• Atoms for Peace Exhibitions:
  • Promotional events by the United States Information Service (USIS) in Japan.
  • Exhibitions on peaceful uses of atomic energy.
  • Promoted contacts with scientists, engineers, media, and politicians.
  • Aimed to replace nuclear emotion with nuclear information.
• Pro-Nuclear Media Coverage:
  • Matsutaro (newspaper head) supported nuclear weapons.
  • Used media to present pro-nuclear content and collaborated with the CIA.
  • Sponsored Atoms for Peace exhibits.
• Pro-Nuclear Popular Culture:
  • Astro Boy: Personification of ‘Atoms for Peace’.
  • Series by Osamu Tezuka, who later distanced himself from Astro Boy’s endorsement of nuclear energy.
• ‘Site Fights’:
  • Potential host communities:
    • Regions with low social cohesion.
    • Regions with low mobilization potential.
    • Impoverished areas.
    • Elderly population.
    • Financial incentives.
    • ‘Cycle of addiction’.
    • ‘Culture of dependence’.
• 1980s Anti-Nuclear Movement:
  • After the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl incidents.
  • Censorship of antinuclear songs: ‘The Timers’.
  • Media silence on anti-nuclear views: press clubs, deference to advertisers, self-censorship.
• Stronger Pro-Nuclear PR Campaigns:
  • ‘Pluto Boy’ (1993).
  • Strategic priority after the 1970s oil crisis.
• Nuclear Accidents:
  • 1999, Tokaimura criticality incident.
  • 2007, Fire at Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant.
• Descending from Heaven:
  • Senior officials obtain post-retirement jobs in supervised firms.
  • Conflict of interest.
• 2009 DPJ Election Victory:
  • Ended decades of Liberal Democratic Party rule.
  • Promised political change and end of collusion.
• The Iron Triangle:
  • Politicians, bureaucrats, and big business leaders.
  • Media, academia, nuclear power companies intertwined.
• Japan’s ‘Nuclear Village’ (Kingston, 2012):
  • Powerful interest group.
  • Believed nuclear power is inherently safe, cheap, and reliable.
  • Vested interest in promoting nuclear energy.
  • Spread across government, politics, business, media, and academia.
  • Rewards agreement, punishes critics.
• Regulatory Capture:
  • Regulators defer to industry wishes.
  • Administrative complexity.
  • Structural collusion.
  • Personnel rotations and insufficient expertise.
  • Complacency and hesitance to act.
• Increasing Anti-Nuclear Demonstrations:
  • Trend: Commitment to nuclear energy in the short to medium term.
  • Resistance to new plants.
  • Focus on renewables.
  • Oil, gas, and coal to balance energy mix.
• Surveys:
  • Over 70% supported phasing out nuclear power (2011-2014).
  • 55% opposed restarting nuclear reactors (March 2017).
• Energy Security & Japan (Jake Wright):
  • Uninterrupted availability of energy sources at an affordable price.
• Types of Security:
  1. Long-term: Energy supply doesn't hamper economic development or harms the environment.
  2. Short-term: Prompt reaction to supply-demand disruptions.
• Trade and Geopolitics:
  • Trade interconnected.
  • Alliances of necessity.
  • Intervention to maintain status quo.
• Confounding Factors:
  • Economic crisis.
  • Internal/external turmoil.
  • Geography.
• Energy Resources:
  • Tool of grand strategy with risks.
• Arab Oil Embargoes (1973 & 1979):
  • US economy shrank by 2.5%.
  • Scramble for replacement oil.
  • Japan shifted to lighter industries.
  • Creation of IEA and IS strategic reserves.
• 2014 Germany-Russia Standoff over Ukraine:
  • Sanctions against Russia.
  • Concern over gas prices.
• 2017 GCC-Qatar Diplomatic Crisis
• Energy Security:
  • NOT energy independence.
  • Not vulnerable.
• Japan:
  • Shutdown of nuclear power plants after Fukushima.
  • Energy security crisis.
  • Reliance on fossil fuel imports increased.
  • Instability in global petroleum product supply (piracy, terrorism).
  • Information-gathering mission in the Gulf of Oman (January 2020).
• Nuclear Energy:
  • Doesn't grant complete independence as Japan imports uranium.
• Outlook for 2030:
  • Requires 25-30 nuclear reactors operational.

Lecture 3: Nuclear Technology & Ethics of Nuclear Energy

• Manhattan Project:

  • Led to the development of the nuclear bomb.
  • Initiated after Szilard and Einstein's letter (1939) regarding nuclear fission in Nazi Germany (1938).
  • Atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

• Nuclear Fission:

  • Splitting an atom's nucleus into smaller nuclei.
  • Releases gamma photons and a large amount of energy.
  • Neutron introduced into Uranium-235 core.
  • Lighter elements produced (Uranium, Plutonium, isotopes).
  • Chain reaction managed by controlling neutrons.

• Importance:

  1. Energy released (heat) for reactors.
  2. Neutrons released (chain reaction).
     • Advantage: massive power source.
     • Hazard: uncontrolled heat-production.

• Scientific Discovery:

  • Elements (isotopes) could be fissioned.
  • U-235 is fissionable (chain reaction due to neutron release).

• World’s First Nuclear Reactor:

  • Built in 1942 by Enrico Fermi in Chicago.
  • Fission uranium to produce plutonium (for Nagasaki bomb).
  • Pu-239 (weapons plutonium) useable in nuclear explosives.
  • Separation process: reprocessing.

• U-235 and Enrichment:

  • Natural uranium consists of isotopes (U-235 is fissionable, <1%).
  • Enrichment: increasing the number of U-235 isotopes.
  • First enrichment plant: Oakridge (Tennessee).
  • Little Boy (Hiroshima Bomb) based on highly enriched uranium (90%).

• 1957: IAEA Established:

  • The International Atomic Energy Agency established.

• Dual Use Technologies:

  • Civilian nuclear technologies built on the same scientific discoveries as weapons.
  • Uranium enrichment (3-5%) for reactors.
  • Reprocessing spent fuel to separate plutonium.
  • Uranium enrichment and reprocessing are dual-use technologies.

• From Nuclear Ethics to Ethics of Nuclear Energy:

  • Nuclear ethics and ethics of nuclear technology are not the same!
  • 1962 – Cuban Missile Crisis: Soviet missiles directed to the US.

• Nuclear Ethics in 1960s and 1970s:

  • Discussions about nuclear weapons production and use.
    • Second strike capability vs. first strike capability.
    • Limiting nuclear weapon countries.
    • Abolishing weapons.
  • Nuclear arms race (Cold War).
  • Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) – The Cuban Missile Crisis.
  • Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

• The Ethics of Nuclear Energy (1980 onwards):

  • Early discussions: binary (yes or no).
  • Arguments against nuclear energy due to its history, waste, and melt-down potential.
  • Discussions exacerbated after Three Mile Island (1979) and Chernobyl (1986).

• Different ‘Nuclear Renaissances’:

  • Early days (Atoms for Peace): Vast growth expected (‘too cheap to meter’).
  • Earlier this century: Expectations that nuclear energy will hit off.
  • Most recent: After the Paris agreement.

• Is Nuclear Energy Dying?

  • No! But major growth hasn’t taken place.
  • Landscape substantially changing.
  • About 400 nuclear reactors operational, number likely to stay steady or mildly grow.

• What’s Ethics Got To Do With It?

  • Many (hidden) ethical dilemmas involved (e.g. risk-risk dilemma).
  • Important questions must be answered (technology capabilities, methods).
  • Ethical implications for present and future generations.

• Sustainability:

  • Ability to maintain human existence at consistent levels.
  • Anthropocentric (focused on human-beings).

• Ethics and Sustainability:

  • Sustainability used as a surrogate for ethics in public discussions.
  • Question whether nuclear energy is sustainable is a proxy for whether it is ethically acceptable.

• Sustainability as Value:

  • Presented as a value that captures other important values.

• Six Other Values of Sustainability:

  • Resource durability.
  • Economic viability.
  • Technological applicability (human well-being).
  • Environmental friendliness.
  • Public safety.
  • Security (environmental and humankind).

• Sustaining What?

  • The environment and humankind safety.

• And Why?

  • Future generations.
  • Moral duty to sustain the environment and humankind’s safety, and human well-being.

• Sustaining the Environment:

  • Why should we care?
    • Anthropocentrism (human interest).
    • Non-anthropocentrism (intrinsic value).
  • Inevitable changes.
    • How to repair/compensate for changes (e.g. after toxic waste pollution).

• Sustaining Health and Safety:

  • Do not jeopardize future safety (negative duty).
  • How far in the future?
  • Distinguish between people (short-term/long-term)?

• Security:

  • Intentional impacts of nuclear technologies (theft, sabotage).
  • Nuclear Security Summits.
  • Non-proliferation.

• Safeguards:

  • Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT).
  • Accepting NPT: entitlement to nuclear technology for civil purposes.

• IAEA: Safety, Security, Safeguard:

  • Safety: Protection of people and environment against radiation risks.
  • Security: Prevention and detection of theft, sabotage, etc.
  • Safeguard: Deters nuclear weapon proliferation.

• Sustaining Natural Resources:

  • Well-being, durability of resources.
  • Compensation for depletion (Barry, 1999).

• Economic Durability:

  • Economically durable.
  • For whom? (present & future generations).
  • Economists introduce discounting.

• Open and Closed Fuel Cycles:

  1. Mining and milling of uranium ore Purifing the ore to make it usable (making it in smaller pieces).
  2. Enrichment, which makes the uranium into the U-235 (what is needed for nuclear power).
  3. Fuel fabrication (uranium -> fuel rods).
  4. Nuclear reactor (LWR) (= fission).
     • The spent (used) fuel could be reprocessed because of the plutonium extraction The closed cycle has the advantage of a less long waste-time (only 10.000 years).

• Dual Use Technologies: Enrichment:

  • Enrichment means that we increase the numbers of U^{235}
  • Signing NPT gives you – in principle - access to civil use.

• Dual Use Technologies: Reprocessing:

  • Reprocessing is a chemical activity to extract unused uranium and plutonium from spent (used) fuel.
  • Reprocessing is essentially a military practice
    Civilian plutonium stemming from an energy reactor is unsuitable for proliferation purposes, because it lacks enough weapon grade plutonium. However, it does have some yield and therefore destruction power.

• What is happening in Fukushima Daiichi?

  • The biggest problem in Japan was the problem of contaminated waste.
  • Radiation sources (toxic isotopes) got into the groundwater. They literally scraped the first layer of the ground so that these radiation sources would be cleaned up. However, this led to a huge amount of contaminated soil Japan had to deal with.

• What to do with contaminated waste?

  • They were categorized in blue bags (high- and low-contaminated) in the hills of Japan. They have to be careful so that it doesn’t leak. It is a major issue what to do with this contaminated waste.

• What kind of problem is this?

  • Is it a technical problem? We have to find technical solutions for this waste Is it a logistic (transportion) problem? Bags need to be transported several times over small roads Is it a policy & governance problem? Appropriate measures need to be taken to deal with the waste Is it a radiation protection problem? What level of radiation exposure is acceptable? Is it also an ethical
  • problem? Radiationlevels (millisivert per year), in the Netherlands the maximum is 2,5 mSv/y. What is an acceptable radiation level?

• ICRP’s Ethical Foundations of radiological protection

  • 3 principles of radiological protection (RP) – 1997
    • Justification Principle (when being exposed, you have to be able to state that the benefits are higher than the risks), Optimization Principles (you have to ensure that you always optimize the reduced amount of radiation take in possible, taken the economic and social aspects into account),
    • Dose Limit Principles (to a certain number of doses human-beings can be exposed to radiation).
  • Fundamental values of RP – 2018 Beneficence/non-maleficence, prudence, justice, dignity

• What is nuclear waste?

  • First, nuclear waste is an inaccurate term because it only relates to waste stemming from a nuclear energy reactor (more technically accurate term is radiological waste).
  • Second, in principle, radiological waste deactivates itself due to natural decay (half-life time, which could sometimes be very long).
  • Third, in addition to life-time, it is the activity content of radiation that matters.

• Open fuel cycle - pros

  • More secure in the short term, cheaper to complete a cycle, safer for the public in the short term.

• Open fuel cycle - cons

  • Wastes a rare isotope, waste lasts 20x longer, cost of maintaining underground storage higher.

• Closed fuel cycle - pros:

  • Reduces size of waste, maximises usage of rare isotope, much shorter timeline to maintain underground storage.

• Closed fuel cycle - cons:

  • Poses immediate risks to environment and society, requires additional facilities or dependence on external actors, threatens nuclear anti-proliferation.

Lecture 4: safety culture and TEPCO

• Concept of safety culture, investigating TEPCO. The NAIIC report (2012):
  • ‘The earthquake and tsunami of March 11 were natural disasters of a magnitude that shocked the entire world. Although triggered by these cataclysmic events, the subsequent accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant cannot be regarded as a natural disaster. It was a profoundly manmade disaster – that could and should have been foreseen and prevented’.
  • Societal and organisational failures that made this disaster happen!
  • Man-made disaster theory:
    • Engineering climatology of structural accidents - The combination of political, financial, professional and industrial pressures that may bear on a project to induce critical human errors or the oversight of critical safety issues that might lead to major structural failure.
    • Very few major accidents have a singular cause
• ‘incubation period’ of major disasters (= the background organizational, management and communication failings that occur before an accident).
  * Important to consider social, cultural and historical context.
  * New theories of organizational accidents:
  * Normal accidents: living with high-risk technologies. We have to accept the fact that accidents happen every once in a while.
  * High-reliability Organizations: examine cases where companies have been very successful in reducing the number of accidents from happening. These organizations contradict the normal accidents-theory.
  * Intellectual turning point on thinking about why high-risk organizations succeed or fail.
• Culture:
  • Pattern of shared basic assumptions learned by a group as it solved its problems of external adaptation and integration, which has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems.
• Levels of culture:
  • Artifacts: visible structures and processes, observed behaviour, which can be analysed. (e.g. the anti-nuclear band ‘ The Timers’).
  • Espoused beliefs & values: ideals, goals, values, aspirations, ideologies and rationalizations. (e.g. ‘ the safety of our communities’, ‘ getting rid of nuclear energy’).
  • Basic underlying assumptions: unconscious, taken-for-granted beliefs and values. (e.g. ‘ we need nuclear energy’).
• Categories of culture:
  • Macrocultures: nations, ethnic and religious groups, occupations that exist globally.
  • Organizational cultures: private, public, non-profit, government organizations.
  • Subcultures: occupational groups within organizations.
  • Microcultures: microsystems within or outside organizations.
• Safety culture:
  • 2012: ‘Nuclear safety culture is the core values and behaviours resulting from a collective commitment by leaders and individuals to emphasize safety over competing goals to ensure protection of people and the environment.’
• Crisis decision-making theoretical models:
  • Behavioural Organization ModelOrganizational cultureStandard operating proceduresGovernmental
  • Politics Model
• Japan’s energy utilities:
  • 10 energy utilities for different service areas, this was a kind of monopoly on energy per area (for use the areas of TEPCO are the most important).
  • 9 established in 1951 after WWII.
  • From Nihon Hatsusoden CO. to a more democratic economy (= a shift from only one governmental company providing all the energy in the country to private companies per area).
• TEPCO:
  • Collective worth 139 billion dollars on the stock market
  • TEPCO accounts for one third
  • TEPCO largest private power company in the world (right before the disaster)
• Nuclear safety regulation in Japan - 1955:
  • Atomic Energy Basic Act Atomic Energy Commission established this to implement nuclear energy policies in accordance with the Basic Act. Strong focus on nuclear fuel cycle policy and safeguards, they wanted to diminish their dependence on exporting sources. BUT: offered little guidance on how to pursue nuclear safety.
• 1961:
  • Act on Compensation for Nuclear Damage (who pays for the damage?).
  • Exempt electric companies from damage liability over 14 million dollars. Diet (Japanese government) decision needed on provision of such aid. No explicit government obligation to compensate victims.. There were some gaps!
• TEPCO’s initial explanation of accident
  • Natural disaster’soteigai’ – a black swan event (beyond the scope of what can be expected, anticipated and imagined).
  • BUT: Not accepted by experts & public (they saw it as shifting the responsibility, useful way against better preparations, stronger governance, and higher budgets).
• Warnings and criticisms
  • Design flaws in GE mark 1 BWR concrete containment shield1970s(the walls around the reactor had design flaws). U.S. NRC’s NUREG-1150 report (1991)
    • Warned Japanese government of vulnerability of backup cooling systems at Japanese power plants. These cooling systems were located in the basement, as they were well-secured against hurricanes right here.
• 2002 TEPCO falsification scandal
  • Tendency to conceal bad news: falsification of reports, editing of (video) evidence, issuing gag orders (zwijgbevel) to employees. Fear for public disclosure of problemsAll 17 TEPCO nuclear reactors show down for safety inspection from 2003-2005

Calls for reform nuclear safety regulation

Creations of an effective nuclear safety and regulatory commission (one that is independent, transparent, and has public participation).

• Research paper by geologist Koji Minoura (2001)

  • Tsunami of March 2011 was neither unprecedented nor unpredictable. Findings repeatedly presented to TEPCOStill under review when tsunami hit2007: Fire at Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant