HOME

Professor Ishibashi's counterargument

Isn't it strange? The explication of Chubu Electric Power

"The Great Hanshin Earthquake was what shows how the present age city was weak to the big earthquake, and proves danger when a big earthquake occurs near the nuclear power plant indirectly. However, the seismologist did not point it out clearly including me. I am reflecting on that deeply. "

Professor Ishibashi of Kobe University who talks like this is the proposal person of the Tokai earthquake brewed public discussion by having declared in July, 2003 "The nuclear power plants of Hamaoka is dangerous" at the international society. Chubu Electric Power is also bringing forth a counterargument to the utterance. However, the "counterargument" of this company only repeats the conventional opinion, and has not answered concretely at all to Professor Ishibashi's questions.

Professors Ishibashi's "strong questions" over the opinion of Chubu Electric Power are introduced here. (Separate volume of Takarajima "the nuclear power plant disaster which will happen from now on".) You yourself need to judge to see which opinion persuasive you more.

INDEX [1] Problem of the earthquake model of Japanese government The foundation of basic data is fundamentally wrong.

[2] "Multiplex focus" where M7.5 class earthquakes fire

[3] Which will hit a nuclear power plant directly if it is on a "branch dislocation!

[4] The problem of upheaval 　 There is no guarantee to which upheaval takes place uniformly.

[5] The Sagara layer of soft rock is a brittle base rock.

[6] Is the rank of a nuclear power plant's part right?

[7] Fear of a "nuclear power plant earthquake disaster"

---

[1] Problem of the earthquake model of Japanese government
The foundation of basic data is fundamentally wrong.

According to "government or the electric power company, the earthquake-proof safety of a nuclear power plant is for the "earthquake-proof design examination indicator about a power reactor institution" (following, "indicator") upon which it was decided in 1978 (a part will be reformed in 81) to have guaranteed the safety of the nuclear power plants, and to say that a big earthquake will not affect to the plants absolutely.
According to "indicator" it is decided that "the shake of the [strongest earthquake for a design] which is strongest earthquake which may happen in the future" is presented as S1, and the shake of the one which is not likely to happen actually, [marginal earthquake for design]" as S2, and it is determined that the earthquake-proof design of a nuclear power plant is carried out based on them

However, the foundation of decision of S1 and S2 is fundamentally wrong with the common sense of present age seismology. Moreover, from my viewpoint, I can consider the nuclear power plants of Japan dare be built in the dangerous place to a big earthquake.
I will state at first about the danger of the Tokai big earthquake that a nuclear power plant promotion side will also be anxious about. The nuclear power plants of Hamaoka are just in the anticipation source region of this earthquake.
According to the applications for the Hamaoka No. 3 furnace installation that Chubu Electric Power issued, the shake by the earthquake of magnitude (the following, M) 8.5 was also assumed as S2, which is the shake by the marginal earthquake that is not likely to happen actually and, therefore, they say it is absolutely called safety.

However, it must be said that the calculation model of the shake is too simple and widely different from how in which an actual earthquake happens.
It is thought that the huge Tokai earthquake of M8 class could happen sinking and being crowded in the bottom of the Japanese Islands, whose focus tomographic layer is at the border plane of a base rock called the Philippine Sea Plate which presses land continuously and the land plate on it.
The earthquake can be defined as the rock destruction that takes place by gap of this focus tomographic layer. Although the calculation model of Chubu Electric Power says that the gap destruction of this "focus tomographic layer" begins from one place and it uniformly advances, actually the strength of pressure is very distinct in each part and what is supposed to happen can be more complicated."

Chubu Electric Power
The strongest earthquake for a design (S1), and the marginal earthquake for a design (S2)

[2] "Multiplex focus" where M7.5 class earthquakes fire

"The thing that I am especially anxious with is to became the "multiplex focus" in which the chain reaction of rock destruction occurs at intervals by every place of a focus tomographic layer. The land will be destroyed from a certain place and destruction progresses will be sifted on a focus tomographic-layer top in violent speed.

Then, the parts with strong pressure and the other parts with weak pressure will push each other irregularly, which cause some large destructions here and there, and they carry out a chain one after another just like a compound fracture.
It is like that is, the big earthquake of M7.5 class firing more than one in succession. If it becomes so, the shake of a violent earthquake will come repeatedly.

Moreover, in the earthquake of such the multiplex focus, the seismic wave of a short cycle is generated very strongly. On the other hand, this short cycle seismic wave greatly influences a structure like a nuclear power plant. Although not only a short cycle seismic wave have a severe influence on piping"

[3] Which will hit a nuclear power plant directly if it is on a "branch dislocation!

"There is another thing very anxious about the Tokai big earthquake. Besides of the destruction at the plate border plane in the side of the ocean and the land like I mentioned before, "branch dislocation" is derived and made into the base rock by the side of land, shift also there, and destruction arises.

If right above that place is a nuclear power plant, it will surely become the local earthquake that hits a nuclear power plant directly. Although it is said in seismology it happens almost certainly, in the model which the electric power company created, it is not taken into consideration at all."

In short, the Tokai earthquake of M8 class is that the ocean type earthquake called earthquake between plates and a inland type local earthquake happen simultaneously. In this case, it is no match for the point of seismic intensity 7 which took out serious damage with the Hyogo southern part earthquake (Great Hanshin Earthquake). A shake must be more complicated, should attain to a long time, and should become far intense.

I am not necessarily building any talks from the position of an anti-nuclear power plant by force. Even if it sees the history of an earthquake, the Ansei Tokai earthquake in 1854 (M8.4 is presumed) has happened by the method of the same generating in the same place.

150 years pass in since that earthquake. The energy has been conserved between plates, there is a large possibility that the Tokai big earthquake will happen in the near future and will happen like I described now. "


[4] The problem of upheaval 　
There is no guarantee to which upheaval takes place uniformly.

The problem of upheaval by the earthquake is another worry. The energy in the plates has stored for a long time and is released suddenly at the moment. The land side plate which was sedimenting little by little for more than 100 years leaps up and a cape upheaves or a coast area pushes out to a sea side. The coastline around Hamaoka upheaved 1m or more in case of the last Ansei Tokai earthquake.

If upheaval takes place uniformly, it will only happen that the whole nuclear power plant will be raised. But the upheaved foundation can break and the possibility of the uneven of upheaval at surface of the earth is also considered.

In this case, if the plant which has a nuclear reactor inside will be raised by the way of 1m and a turbine building, of 70cm, can we say there is no possibility of a nuclear power plant disaster caused by the damage of piping with which both are connected?

Probably, on a design, although the difference in a way of shaking is taken into consideration by a certain grade, I think it cannot cover the modification of the foundation.

- Explanation of Chubu Electricity Power about upheaval
http://www.chuden.co.jp/torikumi/atom/library/jishin10_01qa.html#07
- In the explanation of Chubu Electricity Power, the possibility of happening upheaval unevenly is not touched on at all.

[5] The Sagara layer of soft rock is a brittle base rock.

"We are anxious also about the base rock of a nuclear power plant location. Although the government and the electric power company say, "this nuclear power plant is safe since it has made on the base rock", in fact, that isn't so.

Although many dams are built on the very hard base rock made at the ancient times about 100 million or more ago, the base rock of Hamaoka nuclear power plants is soft one mixing with mud made at the left bank of that area only 4 million years ago.

The "branch dislocation" previously stated is concentrating at the bottom of such a brittle base rock. And construction work of No. 1 and No. 2 plant is started before my Tokai earthquake theory, and it is not taking into consideration at all. If the Tokai big earthquake occurs, I cannot think at all that four sets of the nuclear reactors in Hamaoka are safe"

- Explanation about the Sagara layer of Chubu Electric Power
http://www.chuden.co.jp/torikumi/atom/library/jishin10_01qa.html#04

[6] Is the rank of a nuclear power plant's part right?

As the foundations of the "indicator" of the government, which I have mentioned, "the classification of the importance" of the institution on an earthquake-proof design is considered.
With it, as the maximum important institution, a nuclear reactor container, a control rod, etc. are considered as "As" class, and the reactor core-cooling system for emergencies etc. is considered as "A" class.

They think that "the most important things" are these three functions, which are "stopping" the reactors, "cooling" the collapse heat which continues coming out even if the division reaction stops and "shutting up" the radioactive materials not to leak of a nuclear reactor when a big earthquake happens and "As"-equipment should bear at "shake S2: the marginal earthquake for a design", and "A"-equipment should bear at "shake S1: the strongest earthquake for a design"

On the other hand, the waste processing equipment etc. is classified into "B" class, which is 1.5 times of the earthquake power as the Building Standard Law and a turbine building etc. is classified into "C" class, which is the same as the usual building and apparatus.

However, you can see very easily they are carrying out the strength classification to the one collected system, a nuclear power generation, with differences of importance itself, and it is a very strange story. Even if equipment of "C" class is damaged, it is clear that system-wide soundness is not maintained.

Furthermore, the very dangerous thing for a nuclear power plant with a big earthquake is that many apparatus and piping may be damaged simultaneously multiplex safeguards can be out of order all at once.
If the specialists of nuclear engineering say such of my opinions as "the amateur of a nuclear power plant", I will want to tell them that the knowledge of seismology is missing because the "indicator" upon which it was decided 20 years ago is too old to carry out with the present-day knowledge of seismology.

[7] Fear of a "nuclear power plant earthquake disaster"

When a big earthquake hits a nuclear power plant directly, what I fear is that the large calamity which should be called [nuclear power plant earthquake disaster] which the usual earthquake disaster and the calamity by the nuclear power plant compounded may happen.

It may become impossible for the Self-Defense Forces and a volunteer to go to a stricken area to give relief by radioactivity, and if a disaster victim is only a nuclear power plant one the people may be able to take refuge somehow, but they cannot escape because of the large damage by the earthquake.

Consequently, there is a possibility that the earthquake disaster ground may be abandoned and many people will die. Moreover, besides of the difficulty of the restoration from an earthquake disaster, the residents in the wide range could continue being frightened of radioactivity or genetic effects over numbers of generations.

The phrase "it will be able to tolerate to the Great Hanshin Earthquake's class one " is used as the pronoun of safety after that earthquake. However, I want to emphasize that the Hyogo southern part earthquake which caused the Great Hanshin Earthquake was very ordinary as an earthquake of M7 class.

In other words, a big earthquake of this level may happen anywhere in Japan. The nuclear power plants of Japan, which looked at this situation very indulgently, is scattered uniformly all over the country. "