切尔诺贝利和福岛之后的核裂变堆何去何从，海边、内陆、 ...

HOME     链接： 2004.5.23 星期天
   
  The Japan Times Printer Friendly Articles  


Japan's deadly game of nuclear roulette

By LEUREN MORET
Special to The Japan Times



    Of all the places in all the world where no one in their right mind would build scores of nuclear power plants, Japan would be pretty near the top of the list.
——An aerial view of the Hamaoka plant in Shizuoka Prefecture, "the most dangerous nuclear power plant in Japan"  ——
    The Japanese archipelago is located on the so-called Pacific Rim of Fire, a large active volcanic and tectonic zone ringing North and South America, Asia and island arcs in Southeast Asia. The major earthquakes and active volcanoes occurring there are caused by the westward movement of the Pacific tectonic plate and other plates leading to subduction under Asia.
    Japan sits on top of four tectonic plates, at the edge of the subduction zone, and is in one of the most tectonically active regions of the world. It was extreme pressures and temperatures, resulting from the violent plate movements beneath the seafloor, that created the beautiful islands and volcanoes of Japan.
    Nonetheless, like many countries around the world -- where General Electric and Westinghouse designs are used in 85 percent of all commercial reactors -- Japan has turned to nuclear power as a major energy source. In fact the three top nuclear-energy countries are the United States, where the existence of 118 reactors was acknowledged by the Department of Energy in 2000, France with 72 and Japan, where 52 active reactors were cited in a December 2003 Cabinet White Paper.
    The 52 reactors in Japan -- which generate a little over 30 percent of its electricity -- are located in an area the size of California, many within 150 km of each other and almost all built along the coast where seawater is available to cool them.
    However, many of those reactors have been negligently sited on active faults, particularly in the subduction zone along the Pacific coast, where major earthquakes of magnitude 7-8 or more on the Richter scale occur frequently. The periodicity of major earthquakes in Japan is less than 10 years. There is almost no geologic setting in the world more dangerous for nuclear power than Japan -- the third-ranked country in the world for nuclear reactors.
    "I think the situation right now is very scary," says Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismologist and professor at Kobe University. "It's like a kamikaze terrorist wrapped in bombs just waiting to explode."

    Last summer, I visited Hamaoka nuclear power plant in Shizuoka Prefecture, at the request of citizens concerned about the danger of a major earthquake. I spoke about my findings at press conferences afterward.
——A map of Japan annotated by the author, showing the tectonic plates, areas of high ("observed region") and very high ("specially observed") quake risk, and the sites of nuclear reactors  ——
    Because Hamaoka sits directly over the subduction zone near the junction of two plates, and is overdue for a major earthquake, it is considered to be the most dangerous nuclear power plant in Japan.
    Together with local citizens, I spent the day walking around the facility, collecting rocks, studying the soft sediments it sits on and tracing the nearly vertical faults through the area -- evidence of violent tectonic movements.
    The next day I was surprised to see so many reporters attending the two press conferences held at Kakegawa City Hall and Shizuoka Prefecture Hall. When I asked the reporters why they had come so far from Tokyo to hear an American geoscientist, I was told it was because no foreigner had ever come to tell them how dangerous Japan's nuclear power plants are.
    I told them that this is the power of gaiatsu (foreign pressure), and because citizens in the United States with similar concerns attract little media attention, we invite a Japanese to speak for us when we want media coverage -- someone like the famous seismologist Professor Ishibashi!
    When the geologic evidence was presented confirming the extreme danger at Hamaoka, the attending media were obviously shocked. The aerial map, filed by Chubu Electric Company along with its government application to build and operate the plant, showed major faults going through Hamaoka, and revealed that the company recognized the danger of an earthquake. They had carefully placed each reactor between major fault lines.
    "The structures of the nuclear plant are directly rooted in the rock bed and can tolerate a quake of magnitude 8.5 on the Richter scale," the utility claimed on its Web site.
    From my research and the investigation I conducted of the rocks in the area, I found that that the sedimentary beds underlying the plant were badly faulted. Some tiny faults I located were less than 1 cm apart.
    When I held up samples of the rocks the plant was sitting on, they crumbled like sugar in my fingers. "But the power company told us these were really solid rocks!" the reporters said. I asked, "Do you think these are really solid?' and they started laughing.

    On July 7 last year, the same day of my visit to Hamaoka, Ishibashi warned of the danger of an earthquake-induced nuclear disaster, not only to Japan but globally, at an International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics conference held in Sapporo. He said: "The seismic designs of nuclear facilities are based on standards that are too old from the viewpoint of modern seismology and are insufficient. The authorities must admit the possibility that an earthquake-nuclear disaster could happen and weigh the risks objectively."
    After the greatest nuclear power plant disaster in Japan's history at Tokai, Ibaraki Prefecture, in September 1999, large, expensive Emergency Response Centers were built near nuclear power plants to calm nearby residents.
    After visiting the center a few kilometers from Hamaoka, I realized that Japan has no real nuclear-disaster plan in the event that an earthquake damaged a reactor's water-cooling system and triggered a reactor meltdown.
    Additionally, but not even mentioned by ERC officials, there is an extreme danger of an earthquake causing a loss of water coolant in the pools where spent fuel rods are kept. As reported last year in the journal Science and Global Security, based on a 2001 study by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, if the heat-removing function of those pools is seriously compromised -- by, for example, the water in them draining out -- and the fuel rods heat up enough to combust, the radiation inside them will then be released into the atmosphere. This may create a nuclear disaster even greater than Chernobyl.
    If a nuclear disaster occurred, power-plant workers as well as emergency-response personnel in the Hamaoka ERC would immediately be exposed to lethal radiation. During my visit, ERC engineers showed us a tiny shower at the center, which they said would be used for "decontamination' of personnel. However, it would be useless for internally exposed emergency-response workers who inhaled radiation.
    When I asked ERC officials how they planned to evacuate millions of people from Shizuoka Prefecture and beyond after a Kobe-magnitude earthquake (Kobe is on the same subduction zone as Hamaoka) destroyed communication lines, roads, railroads, drinking-water supplies and sewage lines, they had no answer.
    Last year, James Lee Witt, former director of the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency, was hired by New York citizens to assess the U.S. government's emergency-response plan for a nuclear power plant disaster. Citizens were shocked to learn that there was no government plan adequate to respond to a disaster at the Indian Point nuclear reactor, just 80 km from New York City.
    The Japanese government is no better prepared, because there is no adequate response possible to contain or deal with such a disaster. Prevention is really the only effective measure to consider.
    In 1998, Kei Sugaoka, 51, a Japanese-American senior field engineer who worked for General Electric in the United States from 1980 until being dismissed in 1998 for whistle-blowing there, alerted Japanese nuclear regulators to a 1989 reactor inspection problem he claimed had been withheld by GE from their customer, Tokyo Electric Power Company. This led to nuclear-plant shutdowns and reforms of Japan's power industry.
    Later it was revealed from GE documents that they had in fact informed TEPCO -- but that company did not notify government regulators of the hazards.
    Yoichi Kikuchi, a Japanese nuclear engineer who also became a whistle-blower, has told me personally of many safety problems at Japan's nuclear power plants, such as cracks in pipes in the cooling system from vibrations in the reactor. He said the electric companies are "gambling in a dangerous game to increase profits and decrease government oversight."
    Sugaoka agreed, saying, "The scariest thing, on top of all the other problems, is that all nuclear power plants are aging, causing a deterioration of piping and joints which are always exposed to strong radiation and heat."
    Like most whistle-blowers, Sugaoka and Kikuchi are citizen heroes, but are now unemployed.

    The Radiation and Public Health Project, a group of independent U.S. scientists, has collected 4,000 baby teeth from children living around nuclear power plants. These teeth were then tested to determine their level of Strontium-90, a radioactive fission product that escapes in nuclear power plant emissions.
    Unborn children may be exposed to Strontium-90 through drinking water and the diet of the mother. Anyone living near nuclear power plants is internally exposed to chronically low levels of radiation contaminating food and drinking water. Increased rates of cancer, infant mortality and low birth weights leading to cognitive impairment have been linked to radiation exposure for decades.
    However, a recent independent report on low-level radiation by the European Committee on Radiation Risk, released for the European Parliament in January 2003, established that the ongoing U.S. Atomic and Hydrogen Bomb Studies conducted in Japan by the U.S. government since 1945 on Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors underestimated the risk of radiation exposure as much as 1,000 times.
    Additionally, on March 26 this year -- the eve of the 25th anniversary of the worst nuclear disaster in U.S. history, at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania -- the Radiation and Public Health Project released new data on the effects of that event. This showed rises in infant deaths up to 53 percent, and in thyroid cancer of more than 70 percent in downwind counties -- data which, like all that concerning both the short- and long-term health effects, has never been forthcoming from the U.S. government.

    It is not a question of whether or not a nuclear disaster will occur in Japan; it is a question of when it will occur.
    Like the former Soviet Union after Chernobyl, Japan will become a country suffering from radiation sickness destroying future generations, and widespread contamination of agricultural areas will ensure a public-health disaster. Its economy may never recover.
    Considering the extreme danger of major earthquakes, the many serious safety and waste-disposal issues, it is timely and urgent -- with about half its reactors currently shut down -- for Japan to convert nuclear power plants to fossil fuels such as natural gas. This process is less expensive than building new power plants and, with political and other hurdles overcome, natural gas from the huge Siberian reserves could be piped in at relatively low cost. Several U.S. nuclear plants have been converted to natural gas after citizen pressure forced energy companies to make changeovers.
    Commenting on this way out of the nuclear trap, Ernest Sternglass, a renowned U.S. scientist who helped to stop atmospheric testing in America, notes that, 'Most recently the Fort St. Vrain reactor in Colorado was converted to fossil fuel, actually natural gas, after repeated problems with the reactor. An earlier reactor was the Zimmer Power Plant in Cincinnati, which was originally designed as a nuclear plant but it was converted to natural gas before it began operating. This conversion can be done on any plant at a small fraction [20-30 percent] of the cost of building a new plant. Existing turbines, transmission facilities and land can be used."
    After converting to natural gas, the Fort St. Vrain plant produced twice as much electricity much more efficiently and cheaply than from nuclear energy -- with no nuclear hazard at all, of course.
    It is time to make the changeover from nuclear fuel to fossil fuels in order to save future generations and the economy of Japan.
  

Leuren Moret is a geoscientist who worked at the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory on the Yucca Mountain Project, and became a whistle-blower in 1991 by reporting science fraud on the project and at Livermore. She is an independent and international radiation specialist, and the Environmental Commissioner in the city of Berkeley, Calif. She has visited Japan four times to work with Japanese citizens, scientists and elected officials on radiation and peace issues. She can be contacted at leurenmoret@yahoo.com

The Japan Times: Sunday, May 23, 2004
(C) All rights reserved
Go back to The Japan Times Online  Close window  

　

HOME     链接： 2004.5.23 星期天
   
  The Japan Times Printer Friendly Articles  


Japan's deadly game of nuclear roulette

By LEUREN MORET
Special to The Japan Times



    Of all the places in all the world where no one in their right mind would build scores of nuclear power plants, Japan would be pretty near the top of the list.
——An aerial view of the Hamaoka plant in Shizuoka Prefecture, "the most dangerous nuclear power plant in Japan"  ——
    The Japanese archipelago is located on the so-called Pacific Rim of Fire, a large active volcanic and tectonic zone ringing North and South America, Asia and island arcs in Southeast Asia. The major earthquakes and active volcanoes occurring there are caused by the westward movement of the Pacific tectonic plate and other plates leading to subduction under Asia.
    Japan sits on top of four tectonic plates, at the edge of the subduction zone, and is in one of the most tectonically active regions of the world. It was extreme pressures and temperatures, resulting from the violent plate movements beneath the seafloor, that created the beautiful islands and volcanoes of Japan.
    Nonetheless, like many countries around the world -- where General Electric and Westinghouse designs are used in 85 percent of all commercial reactors -- Japan has turned to nuclear power as a major energy source. In fact the three top nuclear-energy countries are the United States, where the existence of 118 reactors was acknowledged by the Department of Energy in 2000, France with 72 and Japan, where 52 active reactors were cited in a December 2003 Cabinet White Paper.
    The 52 reactors in Japan -- which generate a little over 30 percent of its electricity -- are located in an area the size of California, many within 150 km of each other and almost all built along the coast where seawater is available to cool them.
    However, many of those reactors have been negligently sited on active faults, particularly in the subduction zone along the Pacific coast, where major earthquakes of magnitude 7-8 or more on the Richter scale occur frequently. The periodicity of major earthquakes in Japan is less than 10 years. There is almost no geologic setting in the world more dangerous for nuclear power than Japan -- the third-ranked country in the world for nuclear reactors.
    "I think the situation right now is very scary," says Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismologist and professor at Kobe University. "It's like a kamikaze terrorist wrapped in bombs just waiting to explode."

    Last summer, I visited Hamaoka nuclear power plant in Shizuoka Prefecture, at the request of citizens concerned about the danger of a major earthquake. I spoke about my findings at press conferences afterward.
——A map of Japan annotated by the author, showing the tectonic plates, areas of high ("observed region") and very high ("specially observed") quake risk, and the sites of nuclear reactors  ——
    Because Hamaoka sits directly over the subduction zone near the junction of two plates, and is overdue for a major earthquake, it is considered to be the most dangerous nuclear power plant in Japan.
    Together with local citizens, I spent the day walking around the facility, collecting rocks, studying the soft sediments it sits on and tracing the nearly vertical faults through the area -- evidence of violent tectonic movements.
    The next day I was surprised to see so many reporters attending the two press conferences held at Kakegawa City Hall and Shizuoka Prefecture Hall. When I asked the reporters why they had come so far from Tokyo to hear an American geoscientist, I was told it was because no foreigner had ever come to tell them how dangerous Japan's nuclear power plants are.
    I told them that this is the power of gaiatsu (foreign pressure), and because citizens in the United States with similar concerns attract little media attention, we invite a Japanese to speak for us when we want media coverage -- someone like the famous seismologist Professor Ishibashi!
    When the geologic evidence was presented confirming the extreme danger at Hamaoka, the attending media were obviously shocked. The aerial map, filed by Chubu Electric Company along with its government application to build and operate the plant, showed major faults going through Hamaoka, and revealed that the company recognized the danger of an earthquake. They had carefully placed each reactor between major fault lines.
    "The structures of the nuclear plant are directly rooted in the rock bed and can tolerate a quake of magnitude 8.5 on the Richter scale," the utility claimed on its Web site.
    From my research and the investigation I conducted of the rocks in the area, I found that that the sedimentary beds underlying the plant were badly faulted. Some tiny faults I located were less than 1 cm apart.
    When I held up samples of the rocks the plant was sitting on, they crumbled like sugar in my fingers. "But the power company told us these were really solid rocks!" the reporters said. I asked, "Do you think these are really solid?' and they started laughing.

    On July 7 last year, the same day of my visit to Hamaoka, Ishibashi warned of the danger of an earthquake-induced nuclear disaster, not only to Japan but globally, at an International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics conference held in Sapporo. He said: "The seismic designs of nuclear facilities are based on standards that are too old from the viewpoint of modern seismology and are insufficient. The authorities must admit the possibility that an earthquake-nuclear disaster could happen and weigh the risks objectively."
    After the greatest nuclear power plant disaster in Japan's history at Tokai, Ibaraki Prefecture, in September 1999, large, expensive Emergency Response Centers were built near nuclear power plants to calm nearby residents.
    After visiting the center a few kilometers from Hamaoka, I realized that Japan has no real nuclear-disaster plan in the event that an earthquake damaged a reactor's water-cooling system and triggered a reactor meltdown.
    Additionally, but not even mentioned by ERC officials, there is an extreme danger of an earthquake causing a loss of water coolant in the pools where spent fuel rods are kept. As reported last year in the journal Science and Global Security, based on a 2001 study by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, if the heat-removing function of those pools is seriously compromised -- by, for example, the water in them draining out -- and the fuel rods heat up enough to combust, the radiation inside them will then be released into the atmosphere. This may create a nuclear disaster even greater than Chernobyl.
    If a nuclear disaster occurred, power-plant workers as well as emergency-response personnel in the Hamaoka ERC would immediately be exposed to lethal radiation. During my visit, ERC engineers showed us a tiny shower at the center, which they said would be used for "decontamination' of personnel. However, it would be useless for internally exposed emergency-response workers who inhaled radiation.
    When I asked ERC officials how they planned to evacuate millions of people from Shizuoka Prefecture and beyond after a Kobe-magnitude earthquake (Kobe is on the same subduction zone as Hamaoka) destroyed communication lines, roads, railroads, drinking-water supplies and sewage lines, they had no answer.
    Last year, James Lee Witt, former director of the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency, was hired by New York citizens to assess the U.S. government's emergency-response plan for a nuclear power plant disaster. Citizens were shocked to learn that there was no government plan adequate to respond to a disaster at the Indian Point nuclear reactor, just 80 km from New York City.
    The Japanese government is no better prepared, because there is no adequate response possible to contain or deal with such a disaster. Prevention is really the only effective measure to consider.
    In 1998, Kei Sugaoka, 51, a Japanese-American senior field engineer who worked for General Electric in the United States from 1980 until being dismissed in 1998 for whistle-blowing there, alerted Japanese nuclear regulators to a 1989 reactor inspection problem he claimed had been withheld by GE from their customer, Tokyo Electric Power Company. This led to nuclear-plant shutdowns and reforms of Japan's power industry.
    Later it was revealed from GE documents that they had in fact informed TEPCO -- but that company did not notify government regulators of the hazards.
    Yoichi Kikuchi, a Japanese nuclear engineer who also became a whistle-blower, has told me personally of many safety problems at Japan's nuclear power plants, such as cracks in pipes in the cooling system from vibrations in the reactor. He said the electric companies are "gambling in a dangerous game to increase profits and decrease government oversight."
    Sugaoka agreed, saying, "The scariest thing, on top of all the other problems, is that all nuclear power plants are aging, causing a deterioration of piping and joints which are always exposed to strong radiation and heat."
    Like most whistle-blowers, Sugaoka and Kikuchi are citizen heroes, but are now unemployed.

    The Radiation and Public Health Project, a group of independent U.S. scientists, has collected 4,000 baby teeth from children living around nuclear power plants. These teeth were then tested to determine their level of Strontium-90, a radioactive fission product that escapes in nuclear power plant emissions.
    Unborn children may be exposed to Strontium-90 through drinking water and the diet of the mother. Anyone living near nuclear power plants is internally exposed to chronically low levels of radiation contaminating food and drinking water. Increased rates of cancer, infant mortality and low birth weights leading to cognitive impairment have been linked to radiation exposure for decades.
    However, a recent independent report on low-level radiation by the European Committee on Radiation Risk, released for the European Parliament in January 2003, established that the ongoing U.S. Atomic and Hydrogen Bomb Studies conducted in Japan by the U.S. government since 1945 on Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors underestimated the risk of radiation exposure as much as 1,000 times.
    Additionally, on March 26 this year -- the eve of the 25th anniversary of the worst nuclear disaster in U.S. history, at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania -- the Radiation and Public Health Project released new data on the effects of that event. This showed rises in infant deaths up to 53 percent, and in thyroid cancer of more than 70 percent in downwind counties -- data which, like all that concerning both the short- and long-term health effects, has never been forthcoming from the U.S. government.

    It is not a question of whether or not a nuclear disaster will occur in Japan; it is a question of when it will occur.
    Like the former Soviet Union after Chernobyl, Japan will become a country suffering from radiation sickness destroying future generations, and widespread contamination of agricultural areas will ensure a public-health disaster. Its economy may never recover.
    Considering the extreme danger of major earthquakes, the many serious safety and waste-disposal issues, it is timely and urgent -- with about half its reactors currently shut down -- for Japan to convert nuclear power plants to fossil fuels such as natural gas. This process is less expensive than building new power plants and, with political and other hurdles overcome, natural gas from the huge Siberian reserves could be piped in at relatively low cost. Several U.S. nuclear plants have been converted to natural gas after citizen pressure forced energy companies to make changeovers.
    Commenting on this way out of the nuclear trap, Ernest Sternglass, a renowned U.S. scientist who helped to stop atmospheric testing in America, notes that, 'Most recently the Fort St. Vrain reactor in Colorado was converted to fossil fuel, actually natural gas, after repeated problems with the reactor. An earlier reactor was the Zimmer Power Plant in Cincinnati, which was originally designed as a nuclear plant but it was converted to natural gas before it began operating. This conversion can be done on any plant at a small fraction [20-30 percent] of the cost of building a new plant. Existing turbines, transmission facilities and land can be used."
    After converting to natural gas, the Fort St. Vrain plant produced twice as much electricity much more efficiently and cheaply than from nuclear energy -- with no nuclear hazard at all, of course.
    It is time to make the changeover from nuclear fuel to fossil fuels in order to save future generations and the economy of Japan.
  

Leuren Moret is a geoscientist who worked at the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory on the Yucca Mountain Project, and became a whistle-blower in 1991 by reporting science fraud on the project and at Livermore. She is an independent and international radiation specialist, and the Environmental Commissioner in the city of Berkeley, Calif. She has visited Japan four times to work with Japanese citizens, scientists and elected officials on radiation and peace issues. She can be contacted at leurenmoret@yahoo.com

The Japan Times: Sunday, May 23, 2004
(C) All rights reserved
Go back to The Japan Times Online  Close window  

2004.5.23 星期天

《日本的核轮盘赌游戏》
　　　　　　　　——Leuren Moret 《日本时代》专稿



　　在全世界所有地点中，日本本该是任何正常思维的人都不愿意建立大量核电厂的最最前列所在。
　　（附图：日本最危险的核电站——静冈县滨冈工场）
　　日本列岛位于所谓的环太平洋火山带，一个环绕北美、南美、东亚和东南亚岛弧的巨大活火山地质带。这里由于太平洋地质板块相对其他板块的西向移动导致其向亚洲大陆下俯冲，而经常发生大地震和火山喷发。
　　日本坐落在这个下俯冲带边缘的4个地质板块上，是全球地质最活跃的地区之一。海床下剧烈的板块移动会导致极大的压力和温度，这创造了日本美丽的岛屿和火山。
　　尽管如此，日本象全球很多国家一样寻求核能作为主要能源供应——这个领域85％的商用堆由GE和西屋设计。事实上运用核能最多的三个国家是美国——能源部2000年确认有118座反应堆，法国——72座反应堆，和日本——2003年12月的一份政府白皮书提及为52座反应堆。
　　日本这共生产略超过30%全国电力供应的52座反应堆，位于加利福利亚这么大小的区域内，很多之间的距离在150公里以内并且几乎所有都沿着海岸修建以便能够引灌海水冷却。
　　但是，其中的很多反应堆都疏忽地位于活动断层，特别在太平洋西岸的下俯冲带，这里经常发生里氏强度7-8级甚至更高的大地震。日本出现大地震的周期小于10年。对于拥有全球第三多反应堆的日本，全世界没有任何其他地方的地质条件比这里的核电站更危险。
　　“我认为现在的状况是非常可怕的，”地震学家和神户大学教授石橋克彦说，“这就象一个身上绑着炸弹的自杀式恐怖主义分子，只等着爆炸。”

　　去年夏天，我应担忧发生大地震危险的当地居民之要求，访问了静冈县的滨冈核电厂。我在其后的新闻发布会上谈到了我的发现。
（一幅作者注释的日本地图，展示了地质构造板块，高地震风险区“观察区”和超高地震风险区“特别观察区”，以及核反应堆的地点）
　　因为滨冈直接位于两个板块连接处的下俯冲带上，而且经历过一次大地震，所以被认为是日本最危险的核电厂。
　　我花了一天与当地居民一起沿着该厂设施走，收集石头，研究它所在之处下面的软沉积层，并追踪到附近穿过该区域的垂直断层——这是剧烈地质结构运动的证据。
　　第二天我惊讶地看到掛川市役所和静冈县议政厅两场新闻发布会上如此多的参会者。当我问他们为何从东京那么远来听一位美国地质学家讲，他们告诉我以前从来没有外国人来告诉过他们日本核电厂有多危险。
　　我告诉他们这是一个外语发布会，并且因为美国有类似担忧的民众吸引不到媒体的多少注意，所以当我们需要媒体报道时我们邀请一位就像著名地震学家石桥教授这样的日本人为我们说话！
　　当展示的地质证据证实了滨冈的极度危险，关注的媒体显然被震惊了。中部电器公司和建设运营电厂的当地政府一起拍摄的鸟瞰图显示出穿过滨冈的大断裂层，并透露公司承认地震风险。他们当初很小心地把每座反应堆置于大断裂面之间。
　　该设施的网页上声称，“核电厂的地基打在岩层里，可以承受里氏8.5级的地震”。
　　从调查和研究中我对该地的一些岩石进行了试验，发现电厂下方的沉积岩层存在严重断裂，有的小断裂面相互距离不到1厘米。
　　当我拿起电厂所在岩层的采样，它们象食糖一样在我手指尖碎成粉末。与会者说：“可是电力公司告诉我们这里是非常坚实的岩层！”我说：“难道你认为这样是足够坚固的？”然后他们开始哗笑。

　　去年7月7日，我访问滨冈的同一天，石桥教授在札幌市举行的国际地测与地球物理联盟的一次会议上对不仅日本而且全世界提出了一种地震引发核灾难风险的警告。他说：“核设施的抗震设计是建立在对于现代地震学标准而言很老而且不足的标准之上。政府必须承认地震引发和灾难的可能性，并客观评估风险。”
　　在茨城县东海发生日本历史上最严重的核电厂事故之后，1999年在各核电站附近建立了庞大、代价昂贵的应急反应中心以安抚附近居民。
　　访问离滨冈几公里的中心之后，我意识到日本没有实际的核灾难计划应对一旦地震损毁了反应堆的水冷系统并触发堆芯熔化的状况。
　　另外，甚至ERC（应急反应中心）官员都没提到，可能存在一种极度危险，，地震引起乏燃料棒存放池中水冷却剂的流失。根据去年《科学和全球安全》杂志的报导，基于2001年美国核能管理委员会的研究，如果这些存放池因例如池水流干这样的原因导致散热功能严重丧失，(乏)燃料棒累计热量到足以燃烧，其中的放射性将会被释放到空气。这可能导致比切尔诺贝利更严重的核灾难。
　　如果发生了一场核灾难，电厂的工人跟滨冈ERC的应急反应人员会立刻暴露在致死剂量的核照射下。在我的访问中，ERC工程师给我们看了中心里的一个小喷头，他们说可以用来给人员“消洗”。可是这对吸入放射物的应急反应工人所受的内照射无济于事。
　　当我问ERC官员他们计划如何在一次神户级别的地震后（神户跟滨冈在同一条下俯冲带上），通讯线路、公路、铁路、饮用水供应和污水处理系遭毁坏的情况下，疏散撤离静冈县及周围的百万居民，他们没有答案。

　　去年，前美国联邦应急管理署主任James Lee Witt被纽约市民聘请来评估美国政府针对核电厂灾难的应急反应计划。得知政府根本没有足以响应离纽约城仅仅80公里远的印第安点核反应堆发生灾难的计划时，市民们被惊呆了。
　　日本政府没有任何更好的准备，因为根本没有足够反应能控制或处理这样一种灾难的可能性。预防是实际当中可以考虑的唯一有效措施。
　　1998年，从1980年就开始为美国GE服务直到1998年因举报被解雇的资深现场工程师Kei Sugaoka，一位51岁的日裔美国人，警告日本核能监管部门，他在1989反应堆检查中发现的问题被GE扣留而没有通知其客户——东京电力。这导致了核电厂的关闭和日本能源工业的改革。
　　后来GE文件显示他们实际上通知了TEPCO（东京电力）——但这家公司并没有告知政府监管者其风险。
　　一位也成为举报者的日本核能工程师菊地洋一私下告诉过我日本核电站的很多安全问题，比如冷却系统因为反应堆振动导致管道破裂。他说电力公司在“玩一场危险的赌博游戏，来提高利润，减少政府监督”。
　　Sugaoka同意这观点，他说:“在所有问题中最最可怕的事情，是核电厂超龄运转，引起一直暴露在强辐射和高温中的管道和接头老化，”　
　　象大多数举报者一样，Sugaoka和菊地是公民英雄，但现在都失业。

　　“辐射和公共卫生项目”是一组独立的美国科学家推行，他们从核电站附近的孩子收集了4000枚乳牙用以检测其中的锶-90水平，这是一种从核电站排放的放射性裂变产物。
　　未出生的孩子可能因为他们的母亲的饮水和食物而暴露在锶-90环境中。任何生活在核电站附近的人都会因长期低水平辐射污染的食物和饮水而暴露在内照射下。数十年来，增加的癌症发病率、婴儿死亡率和低出生体重导致的认知障碍被和辐射照射联系在一起。
　　然而，2003年1月的欧洲议会发表了一份欧洲辐射危险委员会近期关于低水平辐射的独立报告，认定美国政府自1945年以来仍在日本对广岛和长崎幸存者进行的“美国原子弹和氢弹研究”对辐射照射危险低估高达1000倍。
　　另外，这一年的3月26日——发生在宾州三里岛核电厂的美国历史上最严重的核灾难25周年前夕，“辐射和公共卫生项目”发表了那次事件影响后果的新数据。该数据显示处在下风口的县甲状腺癌上升了70%，而婴儿死亡率上升了53%——这些数据，包括短期和长期健康影响的，从未能从美国政府得到。

　　现在不是核灾难会不会在日本发生的问题，而是何时发生的问题。
　　就像切尔诺贝利事件之后的前苏联，日本会成为一个因未来几代人被放射病毁掉而受难的国家，广泛散布的农耕区污染肯定会带来公众灾难。它的经济将永难再复。
　　考虑到大地震的极端危险，以及这么多严重的安全问题和废物处置问题，现在对约半数反应堆目前关闭的日本迫在眉睫、当务之急的是将核电站改为化石燃料比如天然气。这个过程要比建新电厂代价小一些，而且克服政治及其他障碍的话，西伯利亚巨大储量的天然气可以通过相对低成本的管道输入。一些美国核电站已经转向天然气，因为能源公司在民众压力下被迫做出改变。
　　帮助美国停止大气层试验的美国著名科学家，Ernest Sternglass，在评价这条走出核陷阱之路时特别提到:“最近科罗拉多的圣弗兰堡反应堆在出现反复的反应堆问题之后，转用化石燃料，具体说就是天然气。再早一个反应堆是辛辛那提的齐默电厂，它当初设计是核电厂，但在开始运行之前就转向天然气。这种转型可以用在任何电厂，只需要花费新建一个电厂的成本的一小部分，20~30%。现有的轮机、传输设备和土地可以利用。”
　　在转向天然气之后，圣弗兰堡电厂生产2倍电力，比核能更加高效更加便宜，当然还完全没有核风险。
　　现在是时候从核燃料转向化石燃料了，这样才能挽救未来的几代人和日本经济。



——（Leuren Moret是从前在劳伦斯利弗莫尔核武器试验室尤卡山项目工作的地质学家，并且在1991年举报该项目和利弗莫尔的科学造假。她现在是独立的国际辐射专家、加州伯克利市环境专员。她已经4次访问日本并和日本市民、科学家及民选官员共同在辐射及和平问题上一起工作。她的联系方式是leurenmoret@yahoo.com）
　　　　　　
　　  　　　

2004.5.23 星期天

《日本的核轮盘赌游戏》
　　　　　　　　——Leuren Moret 《日本时代》专稿



　　在全世界所有地点中，日本本该是任何正常思维的人都不愿意建立大量核电厂的最最前列所在。
　　（附图：日本最危险的核电站——静冈县滨冈工场）
　　日本列岛位于所谓的环太平洋火山带，一个环绕北美、南美、东亚和东南亚岛弧的巨大活火山地质带。这里由于太平洋地质板块相对其他板块的西向移动导致其向亚洲大陆下俯冲，而经常发生大地震和火山喷发。
　　日本坐落在这个下俯冲带边缘的4个地质板块上，是全球地质最活跃的地区之一。海床下剧烈的板块移动会导致极大的压力和温度，这创造了日本美丽的岛屿和火山。
　　尽管如此，日本象全球很多国家一样寻求核能作为主要能源供应——这个领域85％的商用堆由GE和西屋设计。事实上运用核能最多的三个国家是美国——能源部2000年确认有118座反应堆，法国——72座反应堆，和日本——2003年12月的一份政府白皮书提及为52座反应堆。
　　日本这共生产略超过30%全国电力供应的52座反应堆，位于加利福利亚这么大小的区域内，很多之间的距离在150公里以内并且几乎所有都沿着海岸修建以便能够引灌海水冷却。
　　但是，其中的很多反应堆都疏忽地位于活动断层，特别在太平洋西岸的下俯冲带，这里经常发生里氏强度7-8级甚至更高的大地震。日本出现大地震的周期小于10年。对于拥有全球第三多反应堆的日本，全世界没有任何其他地方的地质条件比这里的核电站更危险。
　　“我认为现在的状况是非常可怕的，”地震学家和神户大学教授石橋克彦说，“这就象一个身上绑着炸弹的自杀式恐怖主义分子，只等着爆炸。”

　　去年夏天，我应担忧发生大地震危险的当地居民之要求，访问了静冈县的滨冈核电厂。我在其后的新闻发布会上谈到了我的发现。
（一幅作者注释的日本地图，展示了地质构造板块，高地震风险区“观察区”和超高地震风险区“特别观察区”，以及核反应堆的地点）
　　因为滨冈直接位于两个板块连接处的下俯冲带上，而且经历过一次大地震，所以被认为是日本最危险的核电厂。
　　我花了一天与当地居民一起沿着该厂设施走，收集石头，研究它所在之处下面的软沉积层，并追踪到附近穿过该区域的垂直断层——这是剧烈地质结构运动的证据。
　　第二天我惊讶地看到掛川市役所和静冈县议政厅两场新闻发布会上如此多的参会者。当我问他们为何从东京那么远来听一位美国地质学家讲，他们告诉我以前从来没有外国人来告诉过他们日本核电厂有多危险。
　　我告诉他们这是一个外语发布会，并且因为美国有类似担忧的民众吸引不到媒体的多少注意，所以当我们需要媒体报道时我们邀请一位就像著名地震学家石桥教授这样的日本人为我们说话！
　　当展示的地质证据证实了滨冈的极度危险，关注的媒体显然被震惊了。中部电器公司和建设运营电厂的当地政府一起拍摄的鸟瞰图显示出穿过滨冈的大断裂层，并透露公司承认地震风险。他们当初很小心地把每座反应堆置于大断裂面之间。
　　该设施的网页上声称，“核电厂的地基打在岩层里，可以承受里氏8.5级的地震”。
　　从调查和研究中我对该地的一些岩石进行了试验，发现电厂下方的沉积岩层存在严重断裂，有的小断裂面相互距离不到1厘米。
　　当我拿起电厂所在岩层的采样，它们象食糖一样在我手指尖碎成粉末。与会者说：“可是电力公司告诉我们这里是非常坚实的岩层！”我说：“难道你认为这样是足够坚固的？”然后他们开始哗笑。

　　去年7月7日，我访问滨冈的同一天，石桥教授在札幌市举行的国际地测与地球物理联盟的一次会议上对不仅日本而且全世界提出了一种地震引发核灾难风险的警告。他说：“核设施的抗震设计是建立在对于现代地震学标准而言很老而且不足的标准之上。政府必须承认地震引发和灾难的可能性，并客观评估风险。”
　　在茨城县东海发生日本历史上最严重的核电厂事故之后，1999年在各核电站附近建立了庞大、代价昂贵的应急反应中心以安抚附近居民。
　　访问离滨冈几公里的中心之后，我意识到日本没有实际的核灾难计划应对一旦地震损毁了反应堆的水冷系统并触发堆芯熔化的状况。
　　另外，甚至ERC（应急反应中心）官员都没提到，可能存在一种极度危险，，地震引起乏燃料棒存放池中水冷却剂的流失。根据去年《科学和全球安全》杂志的报导，基于2001年美国核能管理委员会的研究，如果这些存放池因例如池水流干这样的原因导致散热功能严重丧失，(乏)燃料棒累计热量到足以燃烧，其中的放射性将会被释放到空气。这可能导致比切尔诺贝利更严重的核灾难。
　　如果发生了一场核灾难，电厂的工人跟滨冈ERC的应急反应人员会立刻暴露在致死剂量的核照射下。在我的访问中，ERC工程师给我们看了中心里的一个小喷头，他们说可以用来给人员“消洗”。可是这对吸入放射物的应急反应工人所受的内照射无济于事。
　　当我问ERC官员他们计划如何在一次神户级别的地震后（神户跟滨冈在同一条下俯冲带上），通讯线路、公路、铁路、饮用水供应和污水处理系遭毁坏的情况下，疏散撤离静冈县及周围的百万居民，他们没有答案。

　　去年，前美国联邦应急管理署主任James Lee Witt被纽约市民聘请来评估美国政府针对核电厂灾难的应急反应计划。得知政府根本没有足以响应离纽约城仅仅80公里远的印第安点核反应堆发生灾难的计划时，市民们被惊呆了。
　　日本政府没有任何更好的准备，因为根本没有足够反应能控制或处理这样一种灾难的可能性。预防是实际当中可以考虑的唯一有效措施。
　　1998年，从1980年就开始为美国GE服务直到1998年因举报被解雇的资深现场工程师Kei Sugaoka，一位51岁的日裔美国人，警告日本核能监管部门，他在1989反应堆检查中发现的问题被GE扣留而没有通知其客户——东京电力。这导致了核电厂的关闭和日本能源工业的改革。
　　后来GE文件显示他们实际上通知了TEPCO（东京电力）——但这家公司并没有告知政府监管者其风险。
　　一位也成为举报者的日本核能工程师菊地洋一私下告诉过我日本核电站的很多安全问题，比如冷却系统因为反应堆振动导致管道破裂。他说电力公司在“玩一场危险的赌博游戏，来提高利润，减少政府监督”。
　　Sugaoka同意这观点，他说:“在所有问题中最最可怕的事情，是核电厂超龄运转，引起一直暴露在强辐射和高温中的管道和接头老化，”　
　　象大多数举报者一样，Sugaoka和菊地是公民英雄，但现在都失业。

　　“辐射和公共卫生项目”是一组独立的美国科学家推行，他们从核电站附近的孩子收集了4000枚乳牙用以检测其中的锶-90水平，这是一种从核电站排放的放射性裂变产物。
　　未出生的孩子可能因为他们的母亲的饮水和食物而暴露在锶-90环境中。任何生活在核电站附近的人都会因长期低水平辐射污染的食物和饮水而暴露在内照射下。数十年来，增加的癌症发病率、婴儿死亡率和低出生体重导致的认知障碍被和辐射照射联系在一起。
　　然而，2003年1月的欧洲议会发表了一份欧洲辐射危险委员会近期关于低水平辐射的独立报告，认定美国政府自1945年以来仍在日本对广岛和长崎幸存者进行的“美国原子弹和氢弹研究”对辐射照射危险低估高达1000倍。
　　另外，这一年的3月26日——发生在宾州三里岛核电厂的美国历史上最严重的核灾难25周年前夕，“辐射和公共卫生项目”发表了那次事件影响后果的新数据。该数据显示处在下风口的县甲状腺癌上升了70%，而婴儿死亡率上升了53%——这些数据，包括短期和长期健康影响的，从未能从美国政府得到。

　　现在不是核灾难会不会在日本发生的问题，而是何时发生的问题。
　　就像切尔诺贝利事件之后的前苏联，日本会成为一个因未来几代人被放射病毁掉而受难的国家，广泛散布的农耕区污染肯定会带来公众灾难。它的经济将永难再复。
　　考虑到大地震的极端危险，以及这么多严重的安全问题和废物处置问题，现在对约半数反应堆目前关闭的日本迫在眉睫、当务之急的是将核电站改为化石燃料比如天然气。这个过程要比建新电厂代价小一些，而且克服政治及其他障碍的话，西伯利亚巨大储量的天然气可以通过相对低成本的管道输入。一些美国核电站已经转向天然气，因为能源公司在民众压力下被迫做出改变。
　　帮助美国停止大气层试验的美国著名科学家，Ernest Sternglass，在评价这条走出核陷阱之路时特别提到:“最近科罗拉多的圣弗兰堡反应堆在出现反复的反应堆问题之后，转用化石燃料，具体说就是天然气。再早一个反应堆是辛辛那提的齐默电厂，它当初设计是核电厂，但在开始运行之前就转向天然气。这种转型可以用在任何电厂，只需要花费新建一个电厂的成本的一小部分，20~30%。现有的轮机、传输设备和土地可以利用。”
　　在转向天然气之后，圣弗兰堡电厂生产2倍电力，比核能更加高效更加便宜，当然还完全没有核风险。
　　现在是时候从核燃料转向化石燃料了，这样才能挽救未来的几代人和日本经济。



——（Leuren Moret是从前在劳伦斯利弗莫尔核武器试验室尤卡山项目工作的地质学家，并且在1991年举报该项目和利弗莫尔的科学造假。她现在是独立的国际辐射专家、加州伯克利市环境专员。她已经4次访问日本并和日本市民、科学家及民选官员共同在辐射及和平问题上一起工作。她的联系方式是leurenmoret@yahoo.com）
　　　　　　
　　  

　　
　　我当然没有足够证据，自然不能排除Leuren Moret有一点可能是美帝的无间道，故意“告密”从而放出去忽悠的；也不能排除Leuren Moret仅仅是地质学家而不是经济学家，可能她并不是很熟悉核能经济学和核能安全利用的最新一些成果和方向；同样也不能排除她作为能轻易获得一般化石燃料能源的美国公民，不能理解其他国家对能源获得的难度。
　　所有以上这些可能性，或许都存在。

　　只是她在日本说的这些，是否真的比较有道理，是否比较符合我们自己对真实世界中运行逻辑的一些理解。
　　我想这些关注，比有点缥缈地去关注那些如同海市蜃楼般美观但模糊的几大流氓台下交易幕后黑手和秘密消息什么的，可能要稍微有意义一点，稍微有真实收获一点。

　　个人建议，仅供参考，十年以上没有接触过任何文字翻译了，粗疏之处笑笑就好了，有理解不妥不当之关键处，切望指出。
　　
　　
　　另外，该作者还在美国发表类似的风险警示言论，网友dzhiqiong已贴过该网页链接，如下：http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/170325.html
　　
　　

　　
　　我当然没有足够证据，自然不能排除Leuren Moret有一点可能是美帝的无间道，故意“告密”从而放出去忽悠的；也不能排除Leuren Moret仅仅是地质学家而不是经济学家，可能她并不是很熟悉核能经济学和核能安全利用的最新一些成果和方向；同样也不能排除她作为能轻易获得一般化石燃料能源的美国公民，不能理解其他国家对能源获得的难度。
　　所有以上这些可能性，或许都存在。

　　只是她在日本说的这些，是否真的比较有道理，是否比较符合我们自己对真实世界中运行逻辑的一些理解。
　　我想这些关注，比有点缥缈地去关注那些如同海市蜃楼般美观但模糊的几大流氓台下交易幕后黑手和秘密消息什么的，可能要稍微有意义一点，稍微有真实收获一点。

　　个人建议，仅供参考，十年以上没有接触过任何文字翻译了，粗疏之处笑笑就好了，有理解不妥不当之关键处，切望指出。
　　
　　
　　另外，该作者还在美国发表类似的风险警示言论，网友dzhiqiong已贴过该网页链接，如下：http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/170325.html
　　

谢谢了，辛苦了

quietist 发表于 2011-3-18 14:39
翻译辛苦了，评论也很中肯。

希望我国的核电站都避开了断裂带。
而且核电站不能以利润导向的模式去运作。

duanyao 发表于 2011-3-18 15:30
　　别的贴有说过，５大地震带，基本避开了，只有福建的２建２筹有疑问，闽东－粤东北的东南地震带。

　　至于利润导向，恐怕免不了。。。这一点只能寄希望于国家的规划引导、和强力监管了，是否考虑当地居民对选建的否决权？参考厦门的ＰＸ高污项目。

　　
　　这种内容竟然没两人看、没两人讨论．．．大家究竟在关心什么．．．早知不需要就不翻译到凌晨四点了．．．自己回最后一次。

quietist 发表于 2011-3-18 16:24

福建的

译者辛苦，谢谢提供。可惜现在的人都被钱蒙住了眼睛。。。

这问题 本山知道 建在国外最安全

quietist 发表于 2011-3-19 17:30


    作者的观点有些许偏颇，但也算是中肯

没办法~~

是时候从核燃料转向化石燃料了……按理说从化石燃料转向核燃料是科技进步的表现，与其改变能源生产方式，不如改变高耗能的生活方式~~

其实类似的警告一定还有很多，但是总是吃亏以后人们才会反省，从现在看，人类确实很脆弱，一次火山爆发，一次钚泄露就能毁灭整个人类，可即便如此，在事情发生后，大家高兴地都是JP从此一蹶不振，衰败下去，很少有唇亡齿寒的感觉吗~~

水青习习 发表于 2011-3-19 18:34
　　一次钚泄漏毁灭整个人类只是个传说。。

回复 4# quietist


    记者最擅长耸人听闻了

还是造超级核潜艇放在海里比较安全。

小日本私心重，悄悄生产和武器，决策这部分花的精力也许太多，忽略了选址
其实他也没多少地方可选，都他妈的断裂带

liangkangping 发表于 2011-3-20 00:52
　　这篇文章不是记者的采访啊，是前美国武器实验室因举报而离职的某地质学家的专稿。

回复 19# quietist


  因为失意。。。。也有可能炒作的

回复 15# quietist


    能毁灭人类这种事，没被证明之前不都是传说吗~~^^

liangkangping 发表于 2011-3-20 04:34
　　什么标准的判断呢？

　　很多所谓的这种“举报者”，以当“公众英雄”为荣的，也未必就怎么失意，你没看她后来还是加州伯克利市的环境专员么。再说就算有点想出名的念头、恐怕也不会比很多所谓主流的业内专家更喜欢出名和炒作吧？

classical 发表于 2011-3-19 18:21


    并不是；
比如日本、韩国、俄罗斯等等邻国，说起来是别国，实际上离沿海、沿边经济带比许多国内边远地区都近。

水青习习 发表于 2011-3-19 18:34
目前所有的核电站运行时都会产生钚，切尔诺贝利事故也有钚泄露出来。
很多核武器都是用钚做装药的，而爆炸的时候钚是不会被完全耗尽，但是尽管人类做了那么多核试验，并未听说大面积生物灭绝。
所以钚并没有传说中那么可怕。

楼主辛苦，好资料

不知这个图是否准确？看起来东南沿海可以说是我国地震较少的地方，震级也不高，海啸威胁也不大，算是比较适合建核电站的地方了，比日本强得多。
福建地震确实相对多一些，但也在6级以下。当然能避开最好。
http://junshi.blog.china.com/201103/7889732.html



监管方面，不知能否参考军工企业的方式，派驻军方监督机构。因为一旦出大事，少不了要军人去拼命，因此军方应该有积极性。

至于当地居民对选建的否决权，我觉得不宜过于放开，否则最后的核电站选址，就不是看地质条件、经济条件这些因素，而是看哪里民风比较彪悍了，反而做不到选址最优化。
我有个想法，能否把核电站建到沿海的一些无人小岛上？这样估计当地居民的反对声音会弱一些。不过工程量估计要上升不少，要填海、修路什么的。

　　别的贴有说过，５大地震带，基本避开了，只有福建的２建２筹有疑问，闽东－粤东北的东南地震带。

　　至于利润导向，恐怕免不了。。。这一点只能寄希望于国家的规划引导、和强力监管了，是否考虑当地居民对选建的否决权？参考厦门的ＰＸ高污项目。
quietist 发表于 2011-3-18 16:24

不知这个图是否准确？看起来东南沿海可以说是我国地震较少的地方，震级也不高，海啸威胁也不大，算是比较适合建核电站的地方了，比日本强得多。
福建地震确实相对多一些，但也在6级以下。当然能避开最好。
http://junshi.blog.china.com/201103/7889732.html



监管方面，不知能否参考军工企业的方式，派驻军方监督机构。因为一旦出大事，少不了要军人去拼命，因此军方应该有积极性。

至于当地居民对选建的否决权，我觉得不宜过于放开，否则最后的核电站选址，就不是看地质条件、经济条件这些因素，而是看哪里民风比较彪悍了，反而做不到选址最优化。
我有个想法，能否把核电站建到沿海的一些无人小岛上？这样估计当地居民的反对声音会弱一些。不过工程量估计要上升不少，要填海、修路什么的。

找到一篇比较好的文章，全文不贴了，就贴两张图吧。我觉得中国建核电站，避开大地震是完全做得到，只要不出大的决策失误。

中国主要地震带及历史震中分布图(组图)
http://news.qq.com/a/20100113/002640.htm


图为中国主要地震带示意图 (图片来源：《中国国家地理》杂志2008年第6期)


图为中国历史地震震中分布图 (图片来源：《中国国家地理》杂志2008年第6期)

duanyao 发表于 2011-3-20 11:53 　　
　　东南沿海还是有一条地震带的，当然在五大地震带里算是最小最弱的。

　　真正不太受地震带威胁的是华中到中南的大片地区，不过可能有其他地质构造因素的潜在灾害影响，比如喀斯特啊山区的泥石流啊什么的。

　　另外现在核电站中的一大部分似乎倾向靠海修建，主要是海边比较平坦？引灌方便？还是特定情况下的排污影响小阿什么的　
　　

回复 28# quietist
主要还是东南沿海缺煤，水力资源也不丰富，除了核电，还真没什么好的选择。用海水冷却的便利也算一点优势吧，不过应该不是主要的，现在内陆也规划了不少核电站。
排污我觉得不算优势，污染海岸的代价不见得比污染陆地来的小，毕竟沿海经济发达人口密集。

东南沿海地震带我觉得问题有，但是不大，如果只是7级以下的地震，建筑标准高一些完全扛得住。

技术帖,内容中肯.

duanyao 发表于 2011-3-20 14:04
　　感觉差不多，不过为何不选择略微离开这条小地震带的地方，比如浙东南－闽东北，粤中部沿海及以西，可能有其他考量因素吧。

　　总的来说，中国的核电站布局远不如日本疯狂，按文中附的那张图看，阪神大地震附近的断裂带上应该确实是最危险的，也就是作者重点访问和关注的类似地区。而在太平洋西岸的本州东部和东北部，这次遭到的大地震＋海啸袭击，也是很恐怖的潜在危险。