TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

SeanW
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:44 am

TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by SeanW » Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:17 am

The website of the Tokyo Electric Power Company has been rated down quite severely, I would imagine recently due to the events at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in the wake of Japans recent devastating 8.9 Earthquake and 10-15 meter Sendai tsunami.

I believe that this is due to a dislike of nuclear energy and an irrational overreaction to the unfortunate events at the Daiichi plant.
As (circumstantial) evidence of this, I point to the fact that most of the red comments are in German, likely from Germany, a nation which would rather go on a coal burning spree than continue to use nuclear energy.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,472786,00.html

It's circumstantial evidence I know, and I know some of you out there may also oppose nuclear energy but I would ask everyone to rationally analyse what rating TEPCO should have.

For reference, TEPCO's website is www.tepco.co.jp

c۞g
Posts: 21225
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:02 am

RE: TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by c۞g » Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:43 am

If there were no earthquake, there would be no power plant problems; reading some of those comments it sounds like plant failure was planned - ridiculous. I remember [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident t=_self]3-mile island[/url] incident here in the US, and that was not from any "natural" event; mechanical failure from flawed design.

Rated

Guest

RE: TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by Guest » Sat Apr 16, 2011 4:13 pm

If there were no earthquake, there would be no power plant problems

You can even take it further: if there were no power plants, we wouldn't be using the internet in the first place and we wouldn't have the myWOT website to rate anything.

charrox
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 12:05 pm

RE: TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by charrox » Sun Apr 17, 2011 1:12 pm

Even though I am not going to down rate the site or "nuclear energy" (actually I am for it), the way in which false reports flooded into the media about radiation levels reported by TEPCO, I am not going to trust them. Clearly, as a responsible corporate organization it is their responsibility to give out clear and true results.

I am not blaming them. It may have been a mistake( which is not expected from a nuclear energy provider )., but they should have been more vigilant about these sensitive matters.

About the site, I am not going to rate it and it seems to me to be unethical to not disclose the true facts. Anyway regarding the site it is clean and harmless.

Guest

Echo

Post by Guest » Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:25 pm

@ charrox,

Agree 100% to every line.

Kraftwerk
Posts: 7981
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:30 pm

RE: TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by Kraftwerk » Sun Apr 17, 2011 7:19 pm

I´m not sure if the earthquake is the reason for most of the ratings. Maybe it´s the behaviour of this company? It´s well known for hiding problems (nuclear problems which are faaaaar worse than normal problems) and trying to avoid improvements. Just a guess ;)

Oh, concerning guess
a nation which would rather go on a coal burning spree than continue to use nuclear energy.
seems you don´t know much about the energy policy, movement and motivation of Germany ;).Maybe you should change your comment to more facts than to post "oh, they are from Germany, that explains everything";)

Jazspeak
Posts: 7295
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:20 pm

RE: TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by Jazspeak » Sun Apr 17, 2011 10:53 pm

"You can even take it further: if there were no power plants..."

Oh come on, Umbrella Corp. You seem to be going too far with that statement. There all sorts of power plants that could be used, and they don't need to be nuclear or coal fuelled. Need I remind you that water-wheels provided power for hundreds of years, and continue to do so albeit on a small scale compared to the energy requirements of today's world. Regarding powering the Internet, most electronic equipment, including computers and servers, only requires 12 volts or less which can easily be provided by wind, wave, and/or solar energy, and it is only things such as washing machines, dishwashers, heavy manufacturing machinery, and so on, that needs the sorts of power outputs of nuclear, oil, and coal. The Internet could easily continue to exist on globally generated solar power if the world could bring an end to the petty geopolitical divisions that prevent 24-hour solar power generation.

Regardless of the debate about the history and future of power generation, I really can't see any reason to down-rate the OP website. To equate the dangers of nuclear power generation with the safety and trustworthiness of the website is just a nonsense.

Jazspeak
Posts: 7295
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:20 pm

RE: TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by Jazspeak » Sun Apr 17, 2011 11:03 pm

@ charrox

"it seems to me to be unethical to not disclose the true facts"

I certainly agree with your sentiment but I do think that the failure to disclose the true facts would also need to take into account any political pressure being put on the company by the Japanese government. It is already clear that the Japanese government initially wanted to suppress the enormity of the problem, perhaps to avoid public panic, or perhaps for some other political purpose, and it is quite likely that the company was pressured into suppressing the facts. With the nuclear industry around the world being so closely tied to governments it would be a mistake to jump to the conclusion that the company is to blame for suppressing truth.

Guest

RE: TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by Guest » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:29 am

@ Kraftwerk,

I'm not from Germany nor am I familiar with the country's energy policy, but I did think the statement "a nation which would rather go on a coal burning spree than continue to use nuclear energy." in the OP (whether true or not) was a little inflammatory and an editorial that was not really necessary.

Kraftwerk
Posts: 7981
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:30 pm

RE: TEPCO (tepco.co.jp)

Post by Kraftwerk » Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:16 am

What me bothers is it´s incorrect. If it was correct it was perfectly fine to post it, even if its´inflammatory (might be questionable to post it though, maybe).

But if he really believe that´s it, well, he should keep it

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests