The Panic Over Fukushima

Unit 4 has significant structural damage, and contains the most (and most recently used) fuel rods, stored outside the containment wall. Another 7.5 earthquake could cause a collapse triggering a fuel rod fire that could not be put out. TEPCO's plan states that they cannot begin removing fuel rods until 2013, or possibly 2014. [1]. "There is as much cesium in the fuel pool at Unit 4 as there was in all of the atomic bombs dropped in all of the tests in the 1940's, the 1950's, the 1960's, and into the 1970's."

All that is required for a catastrophic release of radiation across the northern hemisphere is a significant seismic event.

Fukushima is now classed alongside Chernobyl as a category 7 reactor event, the area surrounding Fukushima will take decades to clean up, and the Japanese Government has admitted major human error within regulatory bodies, and within TEPCO and credulous government acceptance of the Nuclear industry's unfounded safety claims. [2]

And Muller claims that "Fukushima passed the test". You can't make this stuff up. But you can call it what it is, historical revisionism by an ardent supporter of the nuclear industry.

Considering the still perilous situation, it is a breathtakingly irresponsible and insensitive article to write. Truly astonishing.

[1] http://www.fairewinds.com/content/fukushima-daiichi-truth-an...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disas...

Insulation is a major factor and probably a main reason why you consider air conditioning in Tokyo that important: Insulation is virtually virtually virtually, i.e. air conditioning becomes more of a necessity and waste more energy. In the winter time, on the other hand, heating in Japan is very inefficient as well. During my last stay in Japan, I was happy to see at least some new building with better insulations, that is a beginning!

Another factor are long commuting times in Tokyo, another contributing factor to energy consumption.

And there is of course always the possibility of a siesta. The Japanese have somehow a reputation for Coping with summer heat is actually possible without air conditioning. I know because I live in a country where air conditioning is virtually inexistent in spite of summer temperatures comparable to Tokyo's.

Insulation is a major factor and probably a major reason why you consider air conditioning in Tokyo that important: Insulation is virtually inexistent, i.e. air conditioning becomes more of a necessity and waste more energy. In the winter time, on the other hand, heating in Japan is very inefficient as well.

Another factor are long commuting times in Tokyo, another contributing factor to energy consumption.

And there is of course always the possibility of a siesta. The Japanese have somehow a reputation for long and busy workdays, however, most of it is inefficiently spent office time. A siesta would therefore easily be possible or just try to be more efficient and spend less time in a warm office.

Do I like to work in a warm office in the summer? No but coping with summer heat is much easier than with winter cold … I hope the Japanese will get the priorities sooner or later right, despite the lamentable state of the country (and that began not with Fukushima). and busy workdays, however, most of it is inefficiently spent office time. I often compare the Japanese with the Italians in regard to their work ethic although the Italians at least admit that they are not efficient … anyway, a siesta at least would easily be possible or just try to be more efficient and spend less time in a warm office.

Do I like to work in a warm office in the summer? No but coping with summer heat is much easier than with winter cold … I hope the Japanese will get the priorities sooner or later right, despite the lamentable state of the country (and that began not with Fukushima).

The plant did not fail because "nuclear was bad", it failed because it wasn't designed to be hit by a tsunami of that magnitude; which if the same reason for many of the direct tsunami-related deaths. With that in mind, Japan needs to get better at tsunami planning and engineering, like they generally have with direct earthquake planning and engineering.

Now, as to comparing energy producing industries, the mortality metric would be deaths per kilowatt hour; in which nuclear fares extremely well compared to mainstays like coal, even if 200 additional cancer deaths out of a "normal" 4400 for the given population are added in.