7 ms·

But the evacuation wasn't an unrelated event. It was a direct result of the meltdown, so evacuation deaths can be attributed to it.

jvanderbot 4y ago
The tsunami caused the evacuation and the meltdown.
- taylorius 4y ago
  Indeed - and it has long been known that Japan is in an earthquake zone, and can suffer Tsunamis, so...
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    Yeah so they should just move the island.
- SyzygistSix 4y ago
  I would say the negligence of putting the backup generator in the basement was more the cause. That was amateur hour and easily preventable.
jchw 4y ago
Well, to be fair. There was also that whole thing that caused the meltdown as well. It's pretty much impossible to get an exact pulse on how many people died indirectly as a result of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster evacuation specifically who would've lived if it were not for that. Particularly because most of the deaths attributed to the disaster were elderly to begin with. Not trying to downplay the cost of human life, it's really terrible when preventable scenarios or mistakes lead to any cost. With that having been said, there are sometimes going to be events where evacuations are necessary, and some of them we can't prevent. No doubt there were many thousands of deaths unrelated to Fukushima Daiichi due to the massive earthquake and tsunami. I believe it is estimated that around 1,000-2,000 people died as part of the evacuation efforts, but I am not sure what a good source is, so take that with a grain of salt. If you want to go really deep, it'd be wise to consider the burden that it may have caused psychologically too, but that's even harder to exactly ascertain, especially since it is likely nothing compared to what happened as a result of the earthquake and tsunami. If the point of this is to compare safety though, factoring this in still would place nuclear fission power plants very low in terms of how much cost of human life they cause overall.
- taylorius 4y ago
  That's true - but it's not like the potential for such a natural disaster wasn't well known. The word we use for such devastating tidal waves kind of gives that game away.
  - jchw 4y ago
    Yes, sure. But let's not understate how unusually bad the disaster really was; a 9.0 earthquake and equally severe tsunami. That's not exactly a common event, and it probably won't be one even in a world with much more volatile weather conditions. And yet, despite that, it is in fact possible to make nuclear fission power plants survive this kind of disaster, and especially possible to prevent the meltdown that eventually occurred; Fukushima Daiichi is not the only fission plant in Japan, and not the closest to the epicenter of the disaster either. I think it's fair to say given the evidence that the problems that need to be solved with regards to Fukushima Daiichi are the systemic issues that led to the inadequate safety measures and the unfortunate decisions made leading up to the meltdown. Whether the issues be operational complacency, corruption, etc. It'd be nice to have a way to simply be robust to those issues, but in the end it's always going to be dangerous to human life if the people in charge of decisions that could endanger human life are not adequately responsible. That would still be the case in absence of nuclear power, natural disasters, evacuations, etc.
    - reef84_ 4y ago
      Why would weather have any effect on earthquakes?
      - yunwal 4y ago
        It likely wouldn’t. But natural disasters, like tsunamis, on a similar scale large enough to threaten well-engineered power plants may become more common.
    - donny2018 4y ago
      As I see it, this old-school PWR design has successfully passed a real life crash test under the most severe conditions possible… three times in a row.
jvanderbot 4y ago
Only if the decision to evacuate was necessary. I wonder, but don't know
- LightG 4y ago
  Many people here are talking like the government forced them to evacuate. Perhaps they did. But if your family was there, would you stick around? I'd be getting my family the flying f outta there. Not logically deducing outcomes and risk factors on HN. Hindsight is 20 20...
  - tomp 4y ago
    The government and media can also just lie to people to influence their actions. E.g. due to propaganda, people thought that Covid is 100x as deadly as it actually is (people estimated on average that infection fatality rate was 10%, when in reality it’s ~ 0.1%)
    - LightG 4y ago
      If true ... is that a lie, or the inability to know scientific fact before it's been studied? Applies both to Fukushima and Covid response.

jvanderbot 4y ago

The tsunami caused the evacuation and the meltdown.

taylorius 4y ago
Indeed - and it has long been known that Japan is in an earthquake zone, and can suffer Tsunamis, so...
- panick21_ 4y ago
  Yeah so they should just move the island.
SyzygistSix 4y ago
I would say the negligence of putting the backup generator in the basement was more the cause. That was amateur hour and easily preventable.

jchw 4y ago

Well, to be fair. There was also that whole thing that caused the meltdown as well. It's pretty much impossible to get an exact pulse on how many people died indirectly as a result of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster evacuation specifically who would've lived if it were not for that. Particularly because most of the deaths attributed to the disaster were elderly to begin with. Not trying to downplay the cost of human life, it's really terrible when preventable scenarios or mistakes lead to any cost. With that having been said, there are sometimes going to be events where evacuations are necessary, and some of them we can't prevent. No doubt there were many thousands of deaths unrelated to Fukushima Daiichi due to the massive earthquake and tsunami. I believe it is estimated that around 1,000-2,000 people died as part of the evacuation efforts, but I am not sure what a good source is, so take that with a grain of salt. If you want to go really deep, it'd be wise to consider the burden that it may have caused psychologically too, but that's even harder to exactly ascertain, especially since it is likely nothing compared to what happened as a result of the earthquake and tsunami. If the point of this is to compare safety though, factoring this in still would place nuclear fission power plants very low in terms of how much cost of human life they cause overall.

taylorius 4y ago
That's true - but it's not like the potential for such a natural disaster wasn't well known. The word we use for such devastating tidal waves kind of gives that game away.
- jchw 4y ago
  Yes, sure. But let's not understate how unusually bad the disaster really was; a 9.0 earthquake and equally severe tsunami. That's not exactly a common event, and it probably won't be one even in a world with much more volatile weather conditions. And yet, despite that, it is in fact possible to make nuclear fission power plants survive this kind of disaster, and especially possible to prevent the meltdown that eventually occurred; Fukushima Daiichi is not the only fission plant in Japan, and not the closest to the epicenter of the disaster either. I think it's fair to say given the evidence that the problems that need to be solved with regards to Fukushima Daiichi are the systemic issues that led to the inadequate safety measures and the unfortunate decisions made leading up to the meltdown. Whether the issues be operational complacency, corruption, etc. It'd be nice to have a way to simply be robust to those issues, but in the end it's always going to be dangerous to human life if the people in charge of decisions that could endanger human life are not adequately responsible. That would still be the case in absence of nuclear power, natural disasters, evacuations, etc.
  - reef84_ 4y ago
    Why would weather have any effect on earthquakes?
    - yunwal 4y ago
      It likely wouldn’t. But natural disasters, like tsunamis, on a similar scale large enough to threaten well-engineered power plants may become more common.
  - donny2018 4y ago
    As I see it, this old-school PWR design has successfully passed a real life crash test under the most severe conditions possible… three times in a row.

jvanderbot 4y ago

Only if the decision to evacuate was necessary. I wonder, but don't know

LightG 4y ago
Many people here are talking like the government forced them to evacuate. Perhaps they did. But if your family was there, would you stick around? I'd be getting my family the flying f outta there. Not logically deducing outcomes and risk factors on HN. Hindsight is 20 20...
- tomp 4y ago
  The government and media can also just lie to people to influence their actions. E.g. due to propaganda, people thought that Covid is 100x as deadly as it actually is (people estimated on average that infection fatality rate was 10%, when in reality it’s ~ 0.1%)
  - LightG 4y ago
    If true ... is that a lie, or the inability to know scientific fact before it's been studied? Applies both to Fukushima and Covid response.