Comment by ChatGTP | Hacker News Reader

Comment by ChatGTP | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Is it just a political stunt then?

Like a knee jerk reactive move because energy prices have gone up, the government will turn on potentially old and dangerous reactors to make the populace happy?

What other steps have been taken since Fukushima (a long time ago) to ensure energy security a side from hoping old reactors are still safe?

Under the new policy, Japan will also develop and construct "next-generation innovative reactors" to replace about 20 reactors that are set to be decommissioned.

It sounds like too little too late, what's a next generation reactor? When will it be online? Sounds like things that should've been happening ten years ago?

Smells desperate considering Japan is still trying to workout how to dispose of waste water from the last mess.

I’m not Japanese nor have I lived here long enough to give good answers to your questions. But virtually all reactions in East Asia to Fukushima incident were short sighted knee jerk reactions. I was immensely frustrated that both Korea and Japan had shut down reactors and stopped new developments. Both countries are realising now that wasn’t such a good idea and yes it is too late.

I have followed it a bit, I agree, but it looks like protecting those responsible was more important than transparency and overhauling regulatory bodies to continue the safe use of the reactors.

Let's not forget the relatively simple mitigation steps that were recommended to have taken place to avoid the meltdown at Fukushima but weren't.

It's pretty unusual to go from having a lot of nuclear energy to none almost overnight.

If it was that dangerous and that foolish to have nuclear energy, why was it every commissioned in the first place? Did someone not think of this before Fukushima?

On the other hand, what has changed to make it all so safe ~ 10 years of having them offline now makes it ok to have them back online in a relatively short amount of time?

Quite scary.

Seems like the path of least effort was chosen and a lack of planning is responsible in all cases.

Edit: Down votes, why? Actually interested to hear others views because I personally think Nuclear energy done right is really important.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com