Obamot wrote:The nuclear disaster of Fukushima Daiichi is the chronicle of an announced disaster, which should never have happened.
There is relief everywhere and even immediately BEHIND the power station.
For any expert in seismic risk in Japan, it seemed obvious that this plant (like others) should have been built a little higher up, sheltered from tsunamis (which are known phenomena in this country) . Taking this type of risk into account is part of the basic training of any civil engineer, it is basically one of the central points of his training.
The supervisory authorities, also those who issue building permits, all these bodies are also made up of civil engineers, who should have prohibited construction on this site, as was done! The question is like t and why did we let it happen, how were they able to build such plants in the face of a risk of catastrophe which we knew sooner or later would occur.
Must see the context of the time.
The construction of the first nuclear power station in Japan was planned in the 60s. There is no danger with nuclear power, there is no supervisory authority. There are no radiation protection standards. Nuclear tests are carried out in the atmosphere by the hundreds. The EDF reactors at Bugey, St-Laurent des Eaux, Marcoule, etc., do not even have containment enclosures. To do what ? There is no danger with nuclear power.
It should be noted that TEPCO has chosen to build the last 2 units of Fukushima-Daiichi, 5 and 6, at a higher level. They were little damaged by the tsunami. We were in the 70s and we were starting to realize that the first 4 units had been built at too low a level.