Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

japantimes.co.jp

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 106 posts

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#11

Post by BelleOfTheBall »

pgt wrote: post #4

I used to be pro-nuclear, but here in South Africa, we can't even keep our coal plants running - nevermind nuclear. Last week a 930MW nuclear turbine at Koeberg went down because the cooling pump filters had not been cleaned in years and was filled with fish and jellyfish. Small-scale, independent solar producers and perhaps geothermal or CSP (molten salt) seem to be the only strategies that can work. There will alwa…

They might be better solutions but the coal industry and the general populace are pushing against them for now. While the people's opinions will likely change, we shouldn't expect any positive shifts from the coal moguls. Considering the fact that they're lobbying hard, is there that much we can do other than educating friends and family?

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#12

Post by mcguire »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #7
pgt wrote: post #4

I used to be pro-nuclear, but here in South Africa, we can't even keep our coal plants running - nevermind nuclear. Last week a 930MW nuclear turbine at Koeberg went down because the cooling pump filters had not been cleaned in years and was filled with fish and jellyfish. Small-scale, independent solar producers and perhaps geothermal or CSP (molten salt) seem to be the only strategies that can work. There will alwa…

> There will always be corruption, war and fraud. To be pro-nuclear, you have to guarantee political stability for 100+ years, and I don't think many places could guarantee that. Indeed. This is the crux of it. Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. Nuclear (as a power source, not talking munitions) run by the rest of the world as a commercial operation? Fraught with peril. I'm not anti-nuclear; I'm anti-humans-r…

"Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe."

Are you sure? Would we know?

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#13

Post by [deleted] »

mcguire wrote: post #12
toomuchtodo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There will always be corruption, war and fraud. To be pro-nuclear, you have to guarantee political stability for 100+ years, and I don't think many places could guarantee that. Indeed. This is the crux of it. Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. Nuclear (as a power source, not talking munitions) run by the rest of the world as a commercial operation? Fraught with peril. I'm not anti-nuclear; I'm anti-humans-r…

" Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. " Are you sure? Would we know?

[deleted]

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#14

Post by pgt »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #7
pgt wrote: post #4

I used to be pro-nuclear, but here in South Africa, we can't even keep our coal plants running - nevermind nuclear. Last week a 930MW nuclear turbine at Koeberg went down because the cooling pump filters had not been cleaned in years and was filled with fish and jellyfish. Small-scale, independent solar producers and perhaps geothermal or CSP (molten salt) seem to be the only strategies that can work. There will alwa…

> There will always be corruption, war and fraud. To be pro-nuclear, you have to guarantee political stability for 100+ years, and I don't think many places could guarantee that. Indeed. This is the crux of it. Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. Nuclear (as a power source, not talking munitions) run by the rest of the world as a commercial operation? Fraught with peril. I'm not anti-nuclear; I'm anti-humans-r…

I have far more faith in nuclear run for-profit than nuclear run for-loss, as our South African state-owned enterprises have demonstrated.

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#15

Post by [deleted] »

pgt wrote: post #14
toomuchtodo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There will always be corruption, war and fraud. To be pro-nuclear, you have to guarantee political stability for 100+ years, and I don't think many places could guarantee that. Indeed. This is the crux of it. Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. Nuclear (as a power source, not talking munitions) run by the rest of the world as a commercial operation? Fraught with peril. I'm not anti-nuclear; I'm anti-humans-r…

I have far more faith in nuclear run for-profit than nuclear run for-loss, as our South African state-owned enterprises have demonstrated.

[deleted]

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#16

Post by bumby »

mcguire wrote: post #12
toomuchtodo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There will always be corruption, war and fraud. To be pro-nuclear, you have to guarantee political stability for 100+ years, and I don't think many places could guarantee that. Indeed. This is the crux of it. Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. Nuclear (as a power source, not talking munitions) run by the rest of the world as a commercial operation? Fraught with peril. I'm not anti-nuclear; I'm anti-humans-r…

" Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. " Are you sure? Would we know?

It's not immediately clear what they were referring to. Maybe they're referring to the nuclear powered warship record?

"they have amassed over 5700 reactor-years of safe operation."[1]

[1]https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/n-america/us/security/fact0604...

Edit: On second thought, there seems to be more than I was expecting, especially early in the atomic era:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accid...

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#17

Post by oconnor663 »

pgt wrote: post #4

I used to be pro-nuclear, but here in South Africa, we can't even keep our coal plants running - nevermind nuclear. Last week a 930MW nuclear turbine at Koeberg went down because the cooling pump filters had not been cleaned in years and was filled with fish and jellyfish. Small-scale, independent solar producers and perhaps geothermal or CSP (molten salt) seem to be the only strategies that can work. There will alwa…

Question from a layman: What about "passively safe" reactor designs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_nuclear_safety

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#18

Post by jcheng »

atdrummond wrote: post #2

Not even 10,000 USD. A bit underwhelming even at the original award amount (3m Yen, ~27,600 USD).

> ...on top of the ¥8.5 million it paid per person based on estimates calculated under government-set interim standards.

So ¥9.5 million, or ~$88,000 total

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#19

Post by Godel_unicode »

mcguire wrote: post #12
toomuchtodo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There will always be corruption, war and fraud. To be pro-nuclear, you have to guarantee political stability for 100+ years, and I don't think many places could guarantee that. Indeed. This is the crux of it. Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. Nuclear (as a power source, not talking munitions) run by the rest of the world as a commercial operation? Fraught with peril. I'm not anti-nuclear; I'm anti-humans-r…

" Nuclear run by the US military? Very safe. " Are you sure? Would we know?

Given that we have heard about safety issues from the nuclear establishment in the US, and we have heard about all kinds of ship issues from the Navy, I feel confident that if there were problems we would have heard about them.

False negatives are what they are, but the preponderance of the evidence is on the side of safety. Can we say the same for fossil fuels? Is it really worth staying on them because of some hypothetical beyond-top-secret problems that probably don't exist?

Re: Tokyo High Court slashes damages to Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees

#20

Post by altcognito »

oconnor663 wrote: post #17
pgt wrote: post #4

I used to be pro-nuclear, but here in South Africa, we can't even keep our coal plants running - nevermind nuclear. Last week a 930MW nuclear turbine at Koeberg went down because the cooling pump filters had not been cleaned in years and was filled with fish and jellyfish. Small-scale, independent solar producers and perhaps geothermal or CSP (molten salt) seem to be the only strategies that can work. There will alwa…

Question from a layman: What about "passively safe" reactor designs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_nuclear_safety

you still have disposal issues
Post reply on HN