Reply #90: WSJ article

[divvy]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704608504576207912642629904.html?mod=djemalertNEWS

That's a bit shocking, but my background was where safety was always Priority #1, performance was #2 and cost was #3. I'm sure people will be doing post-mortems on this for a while, and I'm sure there will be valuable lessons learned for the industry. What jolts me is that you don't expect such mismanagement from Japan, where you can set your watch by the trains.

The differences in the emergency response that would occur in the US and what appears to have happened in Japan are too numerous to list here. To hear that Tepco wanted to walk away from the problem and hand it off to anyone, including their government, is shocking, if true. I am amazed... it is so out of character for the Japanese... look at how their people are responding! We haven't really heard much about the Japanese emergency response team, but the WSJ article is pretty disturbing. Hope it isn't true. Following a nuclear accident, there is no time for bickering or hesitation to implement emergency procedures. It is a race against time. (IF THIS REPORT IS NOT TRUE, IT IS SLANDER!) If it is true, Tepco should have to answer for it's misconduct once the crisis is over. If they are mishandling the situation, the Japanese version of the NRC should be looking over their shoulders. In the US, there would be a state regulator and NRC team all over the accident with real time input into the situation... but the utility is in operational command. I have been watching Rachel's coverage. It has been first rate IMHO. Her coverage from the oil spill in the gulf was outstanding, too