This web site covers the Fukushima crisis on a daily basis. If you have any interest in this situation I recommend you subscribe. I do.
James Pilant
This web site covers the Fukushima crisis on a daily basis. If you have any interest in this situation I recommend you subscribe. I do.
James Pilant
Accountability, how strange. I have doubts that such a poor performance would always cost the job of an American CEO. We have learned to insulate our governing and corporate classes from the petty pain of suffering for their actions.
Here’s a news story about the resignation.
Here’s another take on the issue, discussing whether or not the company can continue.
I fully agree with the author. Fairewinds has been the best source of information about the disaster that I have been able to find. I am a subscriber to the site and I recommend you sign up as well. It’s intelligent and full of information usually backed up by photography and films. I visit regularly.
James Pilant
What are the business ethics problems revealed in this particular news article? First we have a with holding from the residents of critical information about their exposure to radiation. Second, we have worker safety issues on a very large scale. Workers have already died at the site. Third, we have a continuous underestimate of the radiation being released. It seems every time, TEPCO gives the public radiation numbers, it is later discovered to be too low.
It seems that the Japanese government and the utility, TEPCO, are in full damage control mode. They now hold one press conference a week. They invite only establishment press. They limit access to the site, not so much for safety’s sake but to prevent independent coverage.
As a business ethics disaster, these events will be featured in textbooks for generations.
James Pilant
The more kinds of radioactive material can be reasonably assumed to mean more leakage from the plant. Fortunately strontium is bad but not as bad as many other nuclear deposits.
James Pilant
via
This post discusses the defacto censorship by the Japanese government and TEPCO, the Japanese utility that owns the plants. There are also charges that dangerous levels of plutonium exist around the plant. Since No. 4 reactor ran hotter than any of the other nuclear plants because it was using a hybrid fuel of regular uranium and plutonium, it would only stand to reason that there must be some contamination.
There are also fairly lengthy discussions of Chernobyl, independent journalism and government censorship. It’s lengthy but it has to be to provide so much information.
James Pilant
via Udolicko’s Blog
It appears that Fukushima will be generating stories for some time. It seems our old favorite No. 4 reactor is trying out a new crisis on the world.
One of the more interesting parts of the story is that the Japanese government has decided that children living near the plant can have the same exposure as a nuclear plant worker. That’s right, the local children are in the same boat as nuclear workers when it comes to radiation exposure.
Time marches on and as the disaster becomes more and more boring to the public, it slips away from view. But radiation and nuclear disaster don’t depend on publicity to function.
James Pilant
via Follow The Money
This documentary is chilling look at the Chernobyl disaster with all the benefits of hindsight. I was familiar with the original coverage – this is way beyond this. Fron just a serious nuclear incident in the popular press, this documentary shows you a cataclysm that Gorbachav explains was one of the causes of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Please watch it!
James Pilant
You can get this video at –
This is a very good summary of the situation as of today. This is, however, a “gotcha” video where they veer off into obscenity laden rants. There is no problem – just click out a little after three minutes into the video.
James Pilant
I am utterly astonished. I can’t figure this one out. The government is in the industry’s pocket. The American press really isn’t interested. The American public is opposed but if you have lived here any length of time, you know how little public opinion means. So, a utility is giving up builing a plant with loan guarantees from the federal government and indemnification if there were a crisis or future meltdown? I don’t get it.
Did some official in the company decided to exercise some judgment? Did somebody grow a backbone? Or did someone take out a calculator and figure out how much the building costs would increase if all the cures for the safety problems at the Fukushima plant were incorporated into the new plant’s design?
James Pilant
You must be logged in to post a comment.