The regulatory impact of Japan’s Fukushima crisis extends far past the island nation’s shores, says a U.S. report issued on the disaster’s third anniversary.
More than a dozen other countries enacted safety reforms at nonmilitary atomic sites following the severe damage inflicted on Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant by the earthquake and tsunami of Mar. 11, 2011, according to the report by the Government Accountability Office. The failure of auxiliary power systems at the facility led to cooling-system failures and meltdowns in three of its six reactors, allowing radioactive material to escape into the air and neighboring sea.
Governments with established nuclear-energy programs have responded in part by conducting safety checks, including comprehensive “stress tests” that can scrutinize a facility’s ability to withstand an extremist assault, the assessment indicates.
The report’s authors said nuclear-safety planners are now “considering previously unimagined accident scenarios,” including disasters “that could involve multiple reactors at a single power plant.”
“In addition, new requirements for emergency equipment, such as backup electric generators, in case of the loss of off-site power, as occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, are an area of focus among the regulatory bodies in GAO’s review,” the auditors wrote.
The investigators said some areas are still in need of improvement, including an international “peer-review” framework to help scrutinize how well various states are complying with International Atomic Energy Agency safety guidelines. That system, auditors wrote, lacks a mechanism for following up on whether vetted governments follow through on recommendations.
GAO officials said the U.S. State Department and Nuclear Regulatory Commission should “encourage” the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency “to systematically track the status of recommendations made by IAEA peer review missions.”
The congressional report examined nuclear-policy responses to the Fukushima disaster in 16 countries, and identified new reforms in all of them: Argentina, Armenia, Belgium, Canada, China, France, Indonesia, Japan, Pakistan, Russia, South Korea, Sweden, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States and Vietnam.
What We're Following See More »
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.