The first "independent" review of the Fukushima nuclear disaster was published today and it does not make reassuring reading.
Japan is perhaps the most technologically advanced nation on Earth and yet, time after time, the report finds missing measures that I would have expected to already be in place. It highlights the fundamental inability for anyone to anticipate all future events and so deeply undermines the claims of the nuclear industry and its supporters that this time, with the new generation of reactors, things will be different.
I used quote marks on the word "independent" because the report comes from the International Atomic Energy Association (pdf) (IAEA) which, while independent of Japan, is far from independent from the nuclear industry it was founded to promote. But this conflict of interest only makes the findings of the IEAE's experts more startling.
So let's take a look at some of the 15 conclusions and 16 lessons (I've edited a bit for brevity).
There were insufficient defence-in-depth provisions for tsunami hazards. In particular, although tsunami hazards were considered 2002, the tsunami hazard was underestimated. Moreover, those additional protective measures were not reviewed and approved by the regulatory authority. Severe accident management provisions were not adequate to cope with multiple plant failures.So, they looked at the...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2011/jun/20/nuclearpower-nuclear-waste