We also know that this collusion was irrelevant to the Fukushima accident. We also know that collusion with regulators wasn't the cause of the accident at Chernobyl either. So no, "learned nothing" is an empty assertion.
Your opinion differs from the official report which states the nuclear industry "managed to avoid absorbing the critical lessons learned from Three Mile Island and Chernobyl" so, yes, it's an accurate assertion. Organizational failures led to the accident in both cases.
Cited from the official report "NISA’s failure to demand action, and TEPCO’s failure to act, together constitute negligence which led to the accident.", that neglect.
The research that indicated this was a problem was done in 2001. Which was kind of irrelevant in that the plant was originally going to be decommissioned starting in 2011.
A claim that you have consistently made with no evidence to support it, expecially considering the fact that Unit four was off-line for maintenance and refueling. I've searched for evidence to support your claim and found none.
Seriously, step through this time line, nuclear power decision making is very conservative and deliberate, precisely because hasty, impromptu decision making is considered extremely negligent.
I did, it's a full quarter of the time the facility has existed. Taking 10 years to not make decisions that would protect the facility is the nonfeasance that constitutes the neglect the commission is referring to.
They just haven't been that bad.
I think the people who have been evacuated from their homes and communities that pre-dated the plant would disagree. Perhaps the destruction of these communities is meaningless in the pursuit of nuclear power, as long as no one diea, it's ok to ruin their communities.
I see you are finally accepting the seawall and backup generator issues though I note your original prediction that the cleanup would cost $10 billion at odds with the Japanese Ministry of Economy Trade and Industry estimate it will be around $200 billion, so far.
Personally, I'd be really sad if the beautiful place I live was decimated by an accident like that, maybe that's not something you can relate to.
keeping in mind that both they didn't have access to your amazing powers of hindsight
Your ad homs are meaningless, they show me you have no argument.
Considering my assertions are similar to the conclusions the official report made, nine months later after examining the evidence the word you are looking for is insight.
Like Chernobyl, TEPCO did something stupid and placed the backup generators where they would be vulnerable to flooding and then failed to improve the seawall protection when new conclusions about tsunami risk was assessed, they had the hindsight of many professionals to draw on, TEPCO just ignored them.
Even your own criteria of "don't do something stupid" was met to agree that Fukushima shows that the Nuclear Industry learned nothing from Chernobyl.
I'm happy to say that it looks like Fukushima has finally turned a corner with the removal of the spent fuel rods from the spent fuel cooling pool no longer threatening the northern hemisphere with the fall out from a plutonium fire. I am certain that a restart of the Japanese nuclear industry is being considered. Lets hope this is something you can tell me I was wrong about.
The primary conclusion has been:
It is simple to look through you previous posts how many conclusions you were wrong about on this matter because of the conclusions you don't accept. Dogmatically skeptical, you transpose your idealism of nuclear power onto reality with as much zealotry as a religious fanatic. Social proof isn't proof and your "arguments" haven't held up to facts that we have learned about Fukushima.
Fukushima shows that the Nuclear Industry learned nothing from Chernobyl.