[bamboozled]

Very naive comment. It’s still a lot of money.

Are you aware about the current economic and demographic situation in Japan ?

It’s not good here. That money could’ve went to a lot more useful things. Also remember this was a man made disaster. The plant was not upgraded (as recommended) to meet new safety guidelines, because, as if a mega tsunami would actually happen, right ? Then right after the event the operator was downplaying the extent of meltdown for too long. The PM had to step in and get a proper response team organised.

[exe34]

> The plant was not upgraded (as recommended) to meet new safety guidelines, because, as if a mega tsunami would actually happen, right ?

And others on this same thread are trying to use the same disaster to paint nuclear as expensive.

[natmaka]

The Onagawa nuclear plant, albeit more exposed, resisted thanks to a single man (Yanosuke Hirai), deciding in conscience, and the Big Complicated System of Central Authority "controlling everything" failed miserably at Fukushima.

Full story: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onagawa_Nuclear_Power_Plant#20...

What works is local and managed by a few people, any Big Thing is a colossus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onagawa_Nuclear_Power_Plant#20... feet of clay collapse is all the more painful. This state of affairs doesn't seem to benefit to nuclear (vs. 'renewable sources').

[bamboozled]

The upgrades weren't outrageously expensive, I bet they would've cost 1/100th of what the cleanup costs will be.

We're talking about moving backup generator to the roof level work:

https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2012/03/why-fukushima...