“If we even mentioned there was a slight possibility that nuclear plants were dangerous, antinuclear advocates pushed for shutting every plant down,” he said. “So, we just kept on declaring the plants were safe.” – former actich chair of the Atomic Energy Commission
Safety vows forgotten, ‘safety myth’ created 15.06.2011 – NUCLEAR CRISIS: HOW IT HAPPENED – part 5 of Yomiuri series
Shunichi Tanaka, former acting chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, said people in the nuclear industry were always on guard.”If we even mentioned there was a slight possibility that nuclear plants were dangerous, antinuclear advocates pushed for shutting every plant down,” he said. “So, we just kept on declaring the plants were safe.”This combination of overconfidence and trapping themselves with their own words gradually built up the “safety myth” of nuclear power plants.”You can take all kinds of possible situations into consideration, but something ‘beyond imagination’ is bound to take place, like the March 11 tsunami,” said the former plant operator. “The possibility of a worst-case scenario should have been assumed, and there should have been a reliable system in place with proper training to keep damage to a minimum.”-snip-The “safety myth” of the nation’s nuclear plants lay behind this failure to fully implement preparations for severe accidents.Safety inspection guidelines the NSC revised in 1990 said, “We do not need to take into account the danger of a long-term power severance, as we could anticipate recovery of power transmission lines and emergency generators in a short period of time.”The first sentence of a TEPCO report from March 1994 on action to be taken in the event of a serious accident said, “Our country’s nuclear power plants have attained a high degree of safety from a global point of view.”The report emphasized, “It is inconceivable that a severe accident could actually occur.” The report seemed to imply that efforts to prevent an “inconceivable” accident would be a waste of time and energy.
Fukushima 