It is a START!
It is a START!
The Dollar/Yen exchange rate is approximately 1:80.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120726a1.html
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Tokyo Electric Power Co. will begin accepting claims in September for lump-sum compensation for psychological distress, unemployment and damage to nonfarm businesses caused by the meltdowns at its power plant in Fukushima Prefecture, the utility said. The announcement made Tuesday follows the government's release last week of detailed compensation standards.
Tepco will pay ¥100,000 ($1,250) per month to each victim for psychological suffering.
Five years' worth of compensation, or ¥6 million ($75,000), will be paid to victims in the most contaminated of the three new evacuation zones around the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, where residents are barred from returning for at least five years.
Residents from the less-contaminated zone, which is likely to be off limits for two years, will get ¥2.4 million ($30,000) each, while those from the least polluted zone, where radiation doses have fallen far enough for residents to return in the near future, will get ¥1.2 million ($15,000).
------------------------------
As expected, GE, AREVA, Siemens, Hitachi and Toshiba, the architects of this disaster, will pay ZERO!
Home Repair
Home Repair Compensation Damages, mandated by the Japanese Government
Tepco will begin accepting applications from residents for compensation to cover housing repairs Tuesday. Victims can choose to receive compensation in a lump sum or in installments. Payments are expected to start about three weeks after the claims are submitted. Tepco limits home repair compensation to ¥14,000 per sq. meter ($20 sq ft) and ¥10 million ($125,000) per home.
Home values are also determined based mainly on tax assessments. But victims can also use other methods, such as the use of average prices for new homes. Homes and land in the most contaminated zone will be fully compensated for at precrisis value by Tepco. In principle, compensation will be halved for the less contaminated zone, and cut to one-third for the least polluted zone.
It is a START!
------------------------------
Perhaps, GE, AREVA, Siemens, Hitachi and Toshiba, the architects of this disaster, should pay SOMETHING!
purveyors of death
Perhaps
Perhaps, GE, AREVA, Siemens, Hitachi and Toshiba, the purveyors of death, destruction, disease, disability and disaster, should pay SOMETHING!
Something
Revise and Extend
Omitted
Did we leave out DECEPTION & DESPAIR ... ?
Perhaps
Perhaps, GE, AREVA, Siemens, Hitachi and Toshiba, the purveyors of death, deception, destruction, disease, disability, disaster, depression, deformity, disparagement and despair; should pay SOMETHING!
Preferably, something SUBSTANTIAL ...
SOMETHING
Clearly TEPCO's fault
The deficiencies at Fukushima were clearly TEPCO's fault.
The main deficiency at Fukushima was locating the backup generators and their fuel supply in areas vulnerable to a tsunami. The diesel fuel tanks were above ground at dockside as opposed to buried like service station tanks as the NRC mandates in the USA. The backup diesel generators were located in non-watertight basement areas, and could be flooded out by a tsunami.
That's not the responsibility of the reactor vendor; that's the responsibility of the utility, the general contractor, and the Japanese regulators.
However, we have the idiot anti-nukes with their mindless / brainless hate for the reactor vendors, and big corporations in general, that they will call for the corporations to be punished when they aren't culpable in the slightest degree.
I've always wondered where this mindless hate comes from. Probably because these types have nothing of value in terms of productivity to offer a corporation; they never get hired.
That and they are still mourning the demise of the Soviet Union which was the grand experiment in their favorite form of government; communism.
Engineering Design Failure
Hah,
The Engineering Deficiencies of the General Electric Mark I containment DESIGN have been public information for DECADES.
The failure modes at Fukushima-I and Fukushima-II were fully detailed in congressional testimony in the 1970s by GE Engineering Managers.
NOT a gawdamn commie in the bunch!
YOU lying, propagandizing, bombastic prickk.
Fukushima-III demonstrated the power of MOX recycling by the atomic detonation.
Kah Ahhh BOOOM!
More MISINFORMATION from the anti-nukes.
Yes there were deficiencies in the original design of the Mark I containment pointed out in the 1970s. The US NRC addressed those deficiencies and mandated changes; like the hardened vent stack for hydrogen release.
Unfortunately, the Japanese didn't retrofit venting into their plants, as mandated by the NRC for US plants.
Instead of making vacuous statements about Unit 3 being a nuclear explosion due to MOX, which is contrary to all the science that has been presented here; why don't you give us some evidence of why it WAS a nuclear explosion.
BTW - kabooms and mushroom clouds are not hallmarks of nuclear explosions alone. You get a mushroom cloud from any explosion. My high school chemistry teacher demonstrated a small mushroom cloud from a small explosion on the front lab table.
Or here is an explosion of a rocket fuel factory in Henderson Nevada, that's even more impressive than the Unit 3 explosion. You probably would have called it a nuclear explosion if you were shown the video and not told it was a rocket fuel factory:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7pRtgisV9s
So just saying it "looks" like a nuclear explosion due to the mushroom cloud is insufficient.
Fukushima Venting FAILED
Pure gawdam lies
Fukushima Mark-1 systems WERE fitted with the vents, and the vents failed.
Three for Three ... FAIL
TOTAL design failure
Kah Ahh BOOM
MOX fueled Nuclear Explosion in Fukushima-III
End ... Nuclear Renaissance
IDIOT anti-nuke doesn't know his nuclear power plant history
The ORIGINAL vent design on the Mark I was one of the design deficiencies highlighted back in the 1970s. The acknowledged design deficiency of the 1970s was that the hydrogen vents as originally designed would fail.
The NRC made US plants use a NEW vent design that addressed the failure problems.
The Japanese, as pointed out above, didn't retrofit their plants with the new vents. The Japanese kept the ORIGINAL vents, and as advertised; they FAILED.
Evidently our idiot anti-nuke friend didn't realize that there were TWO vent designs, the original and the new design.
So when our idiot anti-nuke points out that the Fukushima vents failed; that is correct because they were the ORIGINAL design which was known to be faulty in the 1970s; and the NRC mandated a NEW design:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0933/sec3/1...
Containment Pressure Relief Capability (Venting): Venting of the containment is currently included in BWR emergency operating procedures. The vent path external to existing containment penetrations typically consists of a ductwork system which has a low design pressure of only a few pounds per square inch gauge (psig). Venting under high pressure severe accident conditions would fail the ductwork, release the containment atmosphere into the reactor building, and potentially contaminate or damage equipment needed for accident recovery. In addition, with the existing hardware and procedures at some plants, it may not be possible to open or close the vent valves for some severe accident scenarios.
Fukushima had the OLD "low pressure" ductwork that the NRC identified as a potential problem since it would fail at high pressures.
The little moron anti-nuke didn't know that Fukushima had the low pressure ductwork that the NRC points out as being deficient above.
US plants have the better design as detailed above.
Hey PINHEAD; it's obvious to the most casual reader that I know a LOT more about nuclear power, nuclear weapons, and nuclear technology in general. Why don't you spare yourself some more embarrassment and throw in the towel.
( I, of course, know that the pinhead is too stupid to do the intelligent thing. )
Rude Dog - Rapscallion Robot
Rude Dog the Idiot Savant
Run along. You have not completed your earlier assignment to study up on nuclear explosion Energy Phase and Power Phase physics. Your idiot savant behavior and obfuscation are not needed here.
Rude Dog the Rapscallion Robot adds heat, but no light to these discussions.
Run Along Rude Dog
Venting the radioactive filth
Venting the radioactive filth out the stack is not 'containment'.
GE's BWR Mark 1 design is defective,
the 'containment' is too small and does not 'contain'.
In a loss-of-cooling accident the GE BWR Mark 1 needs to vent the reactor vessel itself
or else the core will meltdown,
either way it does not 'contain'.
Roger That, PISSPOOR performance
Hello GE Guy,
The GE Mark-I & GE Mark-II so-called, 'containment vessels' are NOT designed, built, rated OR tested, for the pressures, temperatures and/or volumes encountered in a meltdown event.
The GE Mark-1 GE Mark-II are proven design FAILURES, as are the Vent Systems.
GE - Great \Promises and Propaganda & Politics, PISSPOOR performance.