Legal Expert in Tokyo: Fukushima perpetrators are escaping responsibility

Published: December 27th, 2012 at 7:04 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
31 comments


(Subscription Only) Title: Fukushima victims take a stand with human rights declaration
Source: THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
Date: December 28, 2012

Fukushima victims take a stand with human rights declaration

[...] It was drafted by Yoshitaro Nomura, a Tokyo-based lawyer who has been providing legal consultations for those affected by the reactor meltdowns that caused mass evacuations [...]

Nomura refers to the parties directly involved, and in his view responsible for the disaster, as “perpetrators.”

“Those who caused the accident switched from having responsibility to escaping from responsibility,” he said. “In essence, they are trivializing the disaster, cutting the amount of compensation and announcing the crisis is over.” [...]

“The government delayed giving evacuation orders. Now it is giving priority to economic recovery over the health of residents.” [...]

“We want Fukushima to return to the way it was, where we can eat tasty rice, vegetables, fruit, fish and meat without the slightest fear,” says one passage in the declaration. [...]

See also: Navy crew members sue Japan over Fukushima cover-up -- "Irreparable harm to life expectancy" -- Gov't and Tepco conspired

Published: December 27th, 2012 at 7:04 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
31 comments

Related Posts

  1. Japanese Legal Expert: “Even residents of Tokyo are evacuating” — More and more people fleeing Fukushima (VIDEO) October 26, 2012
  2. Tokyo Legal Expert: Once a nuclear accident occurs EVERYTHING is over! — Zero prospect of ever restoring fishing grounds — Warns Californians of quake risks, “All will be lost, this is the reality of nuclear energy” (VIDEO) October 20, 2012
  3. “Shocking”: Officials make it mandatory to use Fukushima rice in school lunches December 17, 2012
  4. Japan Legal Expert: Another nuclear accident will mean no future for country — You and us are taking on the most important issue, be confident in yourselves and spread this movement further (VIDEO) October 9, 2012
  5. Radiation levels rise for 5th month straight in Fukushima city (PHOTO) December 14, 2012

31 comments to Legal Expert in Tokyo: Fukushima perpetrators are escaping responsibility

  • PavewayIII PavewayIII

    Why is the Asahi Shimbun interested in news about victims now? They didn't give a damn about their fellow Japanese when they were busy censoring vital health information from their readers. The government and TEPCO must have stopped paying them (for the time being).


    Report comment

    • FREEDOMROX

      I wanted to give all of you a gift that are in the fight for Fuku and Japan.

      Hopefully it will help you in your research…especially you Paveway, razzz, TM2020, Cat, Rose…all of you.

      If you have all of this already, then apologize for showing up on a Fuku thread. Peace Out!

      http://cryptome.org/eyeball/index.html


      Report comment

      • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

        Thanks FR.. I have seen this site before, but forgot about it.. thanks for bringing up again.. it was an amazing source of pictures in the fiery debate regarding the spent fuel pools by James 2 and Kevin…

        Nice to have so much data that we can hardly keep track of it.. things have sure changed since 3-11-11, back then you could hardly find a thing..

        gonna bookmark it this time :)


        Report comment

        • FREEDOMROX

          Can I ask a stupid question then? Why didn't they just put the spent fuel rods in dry cask storage? We have them all over the US. They had the room there as well. Just saying…


          Report comment

          • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

            costs more :( less profit for shareholders.. and we have so much spent fuel in pools in the US, that I read somewhere, that if it was mandated it would not only cost a bajillion, but would take over three years just to manufacture enough casts to hold it all..

            "virtually all U.S. spent fuel pools have been “re-racked” to hold spent fuel assemblies at densities that approach those in reactor cores. In order to prevent the spent fuel from going critical, the spent fuel assemblies are placed in metal boxes whose walls contain neutron-absorbing boron." http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/safer-storage-of-spent-fuel.html

            The cost of on-site dry-cask storage for an additional 35,000 tons of older spent fuel is estimated at $3.5–7 billion dollars http://allthingsnuclear.org/dry-cask-storage-vs-spent-fuel-pools/

            if you want to be really pissed, read this http://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/sgs/pdf/11%202-3%20Author%20Rev%20of%20NRC%20p213-223.pdf


            Report comment

            • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

              Because it did not take custody of the spent fuel
              starting in 1998, DOE reports that as of September 2011, 76 lawsuits
              have been filed against it by utilities to recover claimed damages
              resulting from the delay. These lawsuits have resulted in a cost to
              taxpayers of about $1.6 billion from the U.S. Treasury’s judgment
              fund. DOE estimates that future liabilities will total about an
              additional $19.1 billion through 2020 and that they may cost about
              $500 million each year after that.[Footnote 6]

              http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/648320.txt

              Dig through this one.. will raise your blood pressure..


              Report comment

              • FREEDOMROX

                Thank you very much. Very informative. Create a tech that is so affordable until spent, then it becomes the most hazardous and expensive 'by-product', not to mention the most deadly for 1000's of years. Whatta racket!


                Report comment

                • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

                  ..and certainly the "U.S. Treasury’s judgment
                  fund" is tax dollars.. so another $20 billion in industry costs supported by the tax payer.. and not truly accounted for.

                  Why is industry allowed to profit one cent if the taxpayer has at minimal a $20 billion bill? Before even one stinking death spewing plant is even decommissioned???

                  Not to mention all those rate payers that are paying tons for nuke plants that will never be built.. the more it costs to build, the more the utility can charge, and even if all the funds to build the over budget machine of death and mutation, were ratepayer's to begin with, and they(utility co) had no skin in the game.. yes, racket is right.. they should all be brought up on racketeering ;)


                  Report comment

              • HoTaters HoTaters

                Cataclysmic, this is from the report gao.gov/assets which you cited above:

                "What GAO Found:

                The amount of spent fuel stored on-site at commercial nuclear reactors will continue to accumulate-—increasing by about 2,000 metric tons per year and likely more than doubling to about 140,000 metric tons—-before it can be moved off-site, because storage or disposal facilities may take decades to develop. In examining centralized storage or permanent disposal options, GAO found that new facilities may take from 15 to 40 years before they are ready to begin accepting
                spent fuel. Once an off-site facility is available, it will take several more decades to ship spent fuel to that facility. This
                situation will be challenging because by about 2040 most currently operating reactors will have ceased operations, and options for managing spent fuel, if needed to meet transportation, storage, or disposal requirements, may be limited."


                Report comment

                • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

                  @hotaters, lots in that report..cost of just spent fuel storage is outrageous. "In addition, we note that once a reactor is decommissioned, spent fuel is less expensive to safeguard in dry storage than in wet storage. Specifically, we previously reported that the cost of operating a
                  spent fuel pool at a decommissioned reactor could range from about $8 million to nearly $13 million a year but that the cost of operating a
                  dry storage facility might amount to about $3 million to nearly $7 million per year.[Footnote 38]"


                  Report comment

                  • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

                    or this..Furthermore, EPRI has reported
                    that industry is moving to high-burn-up fuel for greater efficiency. But this high-burn-up fuel is hotter and more radioactive than
                    conventional fuel and requires cooling for about 7 years before it can be safely transferred to dry storage. If transfer is accelerated, this high-burn-up fuel could potentially increase worker dose.

                    High burn up fuel is mox fuel gen v tech.


                    Report comment

                    • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

                      "We estimated in a November 2009 report that the transfer cost for about five canisters is about $5.1 million to
                      $8.8 million.[Footnote 46] One industry representative told us that if
                      the transfer of spent fuel to dry storage were accelerated, the
                      associated high up-front costs could strain some nuclear power plants'
                      budgets. These up-front costs, which would be incurred over a longer
                      period without acceleration, include the construction of a storage pad
                      with accompanying safety and security features, which, we reported,
                      could cost about $19 million to $44 million.[Footnote 47] These costs
                      are initially borne by ratepayers or plant owners but may be passed on
                      to taxpayers as a result of industry lawsuits against DOE for failure
                      to take custody of the spent fuel. Moreover, EPRI reported that as
                      older, cooler spent fuel is loaded into canisters, reactor operators
                      eventually will be left with younger, hotter spent fuel to transfer
                      from wet to dry storage. Spent fuel stored in canisters generally
                      should not exceed about 752 degrees Fahrenheit (400 degrees Celsius),
                      and, as we reported earlier, spent fuel being discharged from reactors
                      today may have to cool at least 7 years before it can be placed in dry storage. Given the heat load requirements for storing spent fuel, EPRI noted that it may not be possible to fill some canisters to capacity…"


                      Report comment

                    • Cataclysmic Cataclysmic

                      more costs..The Blue Ribbon Commission recommended that the nation open one or more centralized storage facilities and put a high priority on transferring the so-called stranded spent fuel to free
                      decommissioned reactor sites for other uses. We previously reported the cost of developing two federal centralized storage facilities to be about $16 billion to $30 billion, although this estimate does not include final disposal costs, which could cost tens of billions of dollars more.[Footnote 50] In addition, we also previously reported
                      that if spent fuel needs to be repackaged because of degradation,
                      repackaging could cost from $180 million to nearly $500 million, [Footnote 51] with costs depending on the number of canisters to be repackaged and whether a site has a transfer facility, such as a
                      storage pool.[Footnote 52]


                      Report comment

                • FREEDOMROX

                  Seems it would be more cost efficient to build high payload rockets blast it all towards the Sun, but for God's Sake don't blow them up in orbit just to see what will happen, like they did in the 50's and 60's, thereby creating another Van Allen Belt…

                  Here is a recently released video of 'Starfish Prime' by National Petroleum Radio.

                  Watch the video….insanity!


                  Report comment

          • Sickputer

            Dry casking in itself is not a guaranteed final solution for the 10,000 years the rods will be highly dangerous. And caskjng is an option only after about five years of storage in a deep pool so many rods are always going to be in a flimsy Mes-Tex enclosure subject to natural and human hazards.

            So figure the cost of paying for a second containment building just for hot fresh spent rods and with a catchment basement. Now we're talking a trillion dollars just for the 63 commercial nuclear sites in America.

            Nuclear energy is the most budget-busting item for any country so unlucky to have "electricity too cheap to meter".

            But hey, we will always have plenty of plutonium bombs to blow North Korea or whoever into the Stone Age. What a horrible deterrent, but we can't let the other nuclear powers blow us up without an equal response. Right? ;-)


            Report comment

      • HoTaters HoTaters

        Beautiful. I love this stuff.


        Report comment

  • razzz razzz

    Maybe they can tell us who the 'blurred out' persons are from the videos included with the documents dump released by TEPCO recently. Why blur out some face when there is a bunch of other people in the room to ask to identify who it really is? Why was it so important to blur the face, anyway?


    Report comment

  • markww markww

    THE WORLD SHOULD SUE JAPAN GOV. AND TEPCO

    MARKWW


    Report comment

  • VyseLegendaire VyseLegendaire

    It may be a tragedy, but a human rights declaration is moot because…it already happened. The only 'right' you have is what you can do to prepare, escape, minimize, or ameliorate the problem. God does not owe anybody safety, sorry to say.


    Report comment

  • markww markww

    There is not time limits on MURDER

    Markww


    Report comment

  • PavewayIII PavewayIII

    Dear Prez Abe,

    Thought I would take the time to clear up a few things between the U.S. and Japan before you get started:

    1. You are to immediately present the 17 cowardly senior directors of TEPCO to the International Criminal Court in the Hauge. Someone will figure out the specific charges later. Non-compliance will be viewed as an act of terror against the U.S. and subject you and the LDP to detainment and interrogation. Google the pictures of Abu Dhabi. See?

    2. I'm really sorry about the rapes and murders on Okinawa committed by our sailors and marines. This whole arrangement of the U.S. paying $3.5B in military costs a year to defend Japan really needs to come to an end – it's time to evict us. The $2B Japan will save each year can be invested in thyroid clinics and crematoriums for the benefit of Japanese children.

    3. Everyone on earth knows you're working on your secret nuclear weapons stuff. That non-aggression deal or whatever with your 'self-defense' forces is null and void. Please provide proper armed forces for your own country if you see fit. The U.S. is scrapping the 7th Fleet – we got drones and nukes to 'take care of business'.

    Thanks!

    P.S.: Give us a ring if China starts picking on you. We'll embargo iPhones for a few weeks.


    Report comment

  • Pavewaylll, good point,Yeah, of course there is a deal with US and Japan. Just look how CNN reported Fukushima. Expect the same when one of GE's crap nukes in USA has an accident. The perpetrators always get away with it from cigarette companies, toxic chemicals including oil, plastics, genetically modified food, fatty food, liquor illegal drugs and of course the nuclear industry throughout the world, the top 1% of wealth comes from all that, but still they get to keep their money no matter even if they run a triple melt through.


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.