Latest news with #TokyoElectricPowerCo
Asahi Shimbun
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Asahi Shimbun
EDITORIAL: Ignoring TEPCO leaders' decisions on Fukushima plant an outrage
Plaintiffs and their lawyers outside the Tokyo High Court on June 6 (Masaaki Kobayashi) We cannot but doubt that the judicial branch is squarely facing up to the irreparable damage caused by the accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant of Tokyo Electric Power Co. The Tokyo High Court rejected a request by TEPCO shareholders that former company executives compensate the company for the damages it incurred. The district court ruling ordered compensation of about 13 trillion yen ($90 billion) be paid, but plaintiffs lost on the appeal. Electric power companies that operate nuclear plants have an obligation to prevent a serious accident. Company executives in making management decisions are called upon to be vigilant so their company does not have to shoulder responsibility for massive compensation. However, the high court can be said to have taken the position that the responsibility of the executives will not be questioned even if no measures were taken unless there was an imminent possibility that called for halting nuclear plant operations because a huge earthquake might occur. We fear that the logic widening the range in which slack management decisions are no longer questioned will lead to a loosening of discipline regarding safety and could trigger another serious accident. While the ruling denied legal responsibility of the former executives, it also called on companies operating nuclear plants to fulfill their social and public interest duty to prevent accidents based on the latest knowledge. If such an accident were to occur, it would cause massive damage over a wide area and could lead to the collapse of the nation. The ruling pointed out that the former executives should shoulder major social responsibility because they were in a position to order measures to prevent an accident. There is dissonance in a logic that contains both aspects. The high court also included additional wording calling for consideration of moving in a direction of placing even greater responsibility on company directors in light of now having experienced an accident. But regardless of whether it was before or after an accident, there should be no change in calling for a high level of safety to prevent a serious accident from occurring at all. The accident 14 years ago caused irreversible damage to Japanese society. Many people had their quiet lives taken away and work continues to decommission nuclear reactors. The total cost of dealing with the accident has exceeded 10 trillion yen and the virtual burden on the people continues to accumulate. The committee set up by the Diet to look into the accident concluded it was a manmade disaster. But if the latest ruling is upheld, the legal responsibility of individuals well as TEPCO's negligence will not be called into question in other related lawsuits as well. It will be difficult to be convinced that the accident should be considered as only an act of God. As memory of the accident fades, the government has changed course on nuclear power and called for its maximum usage. Not only TEPCO, but all other electric power companies with nuclear plants as well as the relevant government agencies must once again embrace a sense of tension. Looking back, the major accident was the result of multiple layers of conceit and irresponsibility on the part of the electric power industry, relevant government agencies, politicians and local governments. There is a need for society as a whole to continue thinking about why the accident was not prevented, where the responsibility lies and how to take advantage of the lessons learned. --The Asahi Shimbun, June 7
Asahi Shimbun
5 days ago
- General
- Asahi Shimbun
EDITORIAL: Social agreement needed for disposing of Fukushima soil
The interim storage facility in Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, for soil collected in the decontamination work around the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in the background (Asahi Shimbun file photo) The government has decided on a basic policy direction for the huge volume of contaminated soil resulting from the 2011 triple meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant of Tokyo Electric Power Co. The two main measures are to recycle some of it and to eventually dispose of all the soil outside of Fukushima Prefecture. However, no course for those measures has been laid down because of difficulties in finding a location to serve as a final disposal site. This is a grave issue that society as a whole must squarely face. Soil removed during decontamination work within Fukushima Prefecture has been accumulating at an interim storage facility near the nuclear plant so as not to interfere with reconstruction efforts in the prefecture. The equivalent volume of 11 Tokyo Domes has been collected. In order to obtain local understanding, the government has proposed moving that soil outside of Fukushima for final disposal by 2045. The Fukushima governor accepted that proposal, but said it was an 'agonizing decision.' Many blocs in the Diet supported a legal revision that clearly stated it was the central government's responsibility to dispose of the soil outside of Fukushima. There is major significance to the promise made to disaster-stricken areas that were forced to shoulder serious environmental pollution and the bitterness of losing one's hometown. Because there were doubts about whether that goal could be realized, it is also a fact that politicians made a decision before thorough discussion was conducted. With only 20 years before the deadline for final disposal, the most pressing issue will be recycling the soil so the volume for final disposal is reduced. The plan is to use about three-fourths of the total volume with radiation concentration levels under 8,000 becquerels per kilogram of soil in public works projects in various parts of Japan. In the recently decided basic policy, one measure included was using the soil in shrubbery planted within the grounds of the prime minister's office as a sign the central government was taking the lead in the matter. To ensure sufficient safety, the government has said the radiation exposure of workers handling the soil would be kept under international standards and that measures would be taken to prevent the soil from becoming airborne or spilling out from the work site. But understanding will not deepen if only scientific safety is emphasized. The Environment Ministry's plan for experimental use of the soil in the Tokyo metropolitan area never got off the ground because of opposition from local residents. When the government recently sought out views about the recycling soil standard, many concerns and doubts were submitted. There was a sharp difference of opinion regarding the radiation risk from the nuclear plant accident in relation to farm products and the release of treated water into the ocean. Rather than imposing its views, the government has the responsibility of making every effort to achieve social agreement by removing concerns through civil dialogue with local governments and citizens. Now is also the time to enter into serious discussions about final disposal that will come after recycling. There are many issues to discuss, such as the cost and burden, including recycling of the soil, and what plans the government has for the areas around the nuclear plant once final disposal is completed. The handling of the removed soil is an especially difficult matter for the processing of the nuclear accident. According to an Environment Ministry study, only one in four respondents outside of Fukushima Prefecture know about the policy of final disposal outside of that prefecture. That is much lower than the slightly more than half of the Fukushima Prefecture respondents who are aware of that policy. The accident of 14 years ago occurred while Japanese society continued to use nuclear power under a 'safety myth.' The electricity generated at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant was mainly used in the Tokyo metropolitan area. There is a need for deep and careful consideration about how to achieve a resolution to the issue by having the entire nation tackle the task of dealing with the aftereffects. --The Asahi Shimbun, June 4
