By Matt Underwood Japan prepares to restart world’s biggest nuclear plant, 15 years after Fukushima, marking a significant moment in the country’s journey back to nuclear energy after the devastating 2011 disaster. It’s truly a testament to resilience and a long road traveled, isn’t it? Fifteen years is a substantial amount of time, a period during which the entire infrastructure has undoubtedly been scrutinized, assessed, and hopefully, significantly improved.
The decision to restart Kashiwazaki-Kariwa, located in Niigata, signals a pivotal shift. This plant, once part of the 54 reactors shut down after the Fukushima incident, holds the title of the world’s largest nuclear power plant, a title that adds to the weight of this decision. We’ve seen, over these years, that Japan hasn’t been idle. Fourteen out of the remaining 33 operable reactors have already been restarted, an indication of the slow, but steady, return to nuclear. This move is driven by the necessity to reduce reliance on imported fossil fuels, a critical factor for a nation with limited natural resources and pressing climate goals.
The passage of time since Fukushima has given rise to the expectation that all the safety measures are up to standard this time around, this is a huge undertaking. We can only hope that these 15 years have been spent meticulously ensuring the highest level of safety. It’s a critical aspect to address considering the understandable public apprehension following the disaster. It’s understandable that the stigma lingers, that fear is present. It’s a natural reaction to the events of 2011. There is no denying it.
The Fukushima incident highlighted a number of specific factors, but some of the other plants along the coast did better. One such plant was the Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant, which was located only 12 kilometers away but managed to withstand the tsunami with much less impact. They had implemented a higher seawall and extended cooling intake pipes further out to sea, and these measures made all the difference. This demonstrates that foresight and the right investments can make a massive difference in an emergency. This goes hand in hand with the fact that Fukushima’s regulators could have been much more proactive.
There was a profound lack of foresight, especially regarding the vulnerability of the backup generators. These vital components were housed in the basement and were subsequently flooded by the tsunami, leaving the cooling system inoperable. Many lessons have been learned. This could have been avoided. There were centuries-old markers of massive tsunami waves and warnings had been provided about the potential risks. Warnings that TEPCO seems to have ignored.
It is worth noting that the Fukushima plant itself wasn’t inherently flawed in its design. The problem was, its design never considered a situation where it would operate without backup power, which is exactly what happened. Had the backup generators been placed higher up, the meltdown could have been averted. It’s a stark reminder of the importance of anticipating worst-case scenarios and designing for them. Newer designs incorporate passive cooling systems, eliminating the need for backup power altogether and creating a safer operation.
A key factor in the Chernobyl disaster was a significant design flaw, a positive coefficient, that contributed to a runaway reaction. While the specifics of Chernobyl and Fukushima differ, it’s clear that in both cases, cutting corners in safety protocols and ignoring warnings played a role. These kinds of mistakes can have lasting consequences, far beyond the initial disaster.