|
¡@
Danger to nuclear power plant sparks war
of words
By Loa Iok-sin
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Sep 23, 2010, Page 3
¡§The job of scientists is to serve the people, but there are some people who
cover up their hearts to protect their interests.¡¨¡X Shiosaka Kunio, geologist
A Japanese geologist who said faultlines located near the Fourth Nuclear Power
Plant in Gongliao Township (°^¼d), Taipei County, would threaten the safety of the
plant in the event of an earthquake has urged Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) to base
its claims to the contrary on scientific evidence.
An experienced researcher on the effect of geological composition on building
safety, Shiosaka Kunio located a new fault along the Gongliao coast near the
Fourth Nuclear Power Plant during a three-day inspection last week.
Aside from the newly discovered fault, two other faults ¡X the Fangjiao Fault
(ªD¸}Â_¼h) and the Shanjiao Fault (¤s¸}Â_¼h) ¡X have been identified in the area where
the power station is located.
At a press conference at the legislature, Shiosaka said the faults could
threaten the safety of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant during an earthquake.
In response, Taipower asked how Shinosaka could locate a new fault in only three
days and said that the faults the nuclear power plant sits on are inactive.
In a press release, the energy company claimed that after discussions with them,
Shiosaka had agreed that one of the faults that runs through the grounds of the
power plant was a shear zone rather than a fault.
In a written statement, Shiosaka said he was able to locate the new fault in a
short time because he investigated the geological composition of the area with
the help of a remote sensing technique and satellite imagery.
¡§Professionals who are involved in relevant areas should challenge me only after
inspecting the area in person,¡¨ he said.
¡§As long as there¡¦s a fault, the impact of an earthquake would be amplified at
least 1.5 times more, whether it¡¦s an active fault or not,¡¨ Shiosaka said.
¡§It¡¦s meaningless to differentiate between active and inactive, because those
definitions are artificial,¡¨ he said.
In Japan, an ¡§inactive fault¡¨ is defined as a fault that has not been active for
1 million years. In Taiwan, the definition is limited to a period of 125,000
years.
¡§Taipower says the Fanjiang Fault is inactive because it hasn¡¦t been active for
37,000 years,¡¨ Shiosaka said. ¡§This is extremely unprofessional, as it¡¦s not
even in accordance with Taiwan¡¦s own definition of what an ¡¥inactive fault¡¦
means.¡¨
Turning to the recently discovered fault, which is located near the fishing
harbor in Aodi Village (¿D©³), Shiosaka said the fault had caused cracks on the
levee of the harbor.
¡§The levee was built no more than 30 or 50 years ago. Though I don¡¦t know the
exact year, it means the fault has moved in recent decades,¡¨ he said.
Shiosaka criticized Taipower for claiming he agreed that the ¡§fault¡¨ that ran
through the nuclear power plant grounds was not a fault.
¡§I strongly condemn Taipower for this fabricated statement,¡¨ he said.
¡§The job of scientists is to serve the people, but there are some people who
cover up their hearts to protect their interests,¡¨ Shiosaka said.
¡§Everyone makes mistakes, I make mistakes too, but scientists should always base
their remarks on scientific evidence. I hope one day we can have a discussion
based on hard facts to determine what¡¦s best for the public,¡¨ he said.
¡@
|
