Fukushima one year on

We are the Borg.
sparks
Posts: 17317
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by sparks »

Oh. The snorkeling of an asshat from The Cornfield.

How charming.
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

robinson wrote: Mon Dec 30, 2019 3:19 am
sparks wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:31 pm One more time and then I'm done with this fucking thread:
No, you will never be done with it. Just like Japan will never be done with the Fukushima disaster.
The Windscale reactor disaster of 10 October 1957 isn’t safe or cleaned up. And it was minor compared to all three of the ruined reactors at Fukushima, which had complete meltdowns, and explosions


Windscale was 63 years ago, and they don’t have even a plan to make it safe. It is of course still undergoing nuclear reactions, and of course far too dangerous to open up and do anything with the damaged fuel inside.

But the true believer will tell you it’s no big deal, nuclear is safer than anything, and the only reason you wouldn’t agree with them is ....


Hmmmm


What’s the reason again?
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

Three mile island is just sitting there, the basement so contaminated they don’t dare try to do anything with it.

Same with all the sites where they take the dangerous waste to store it, no plan to make any of it safe.
sparks
Posts: 17317
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by sparks »

More bullshit from The Cornfield.
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

sparks wrote: Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:31 pm One more time and then I'm done with this fucking thread:
sparks wrote: Sat Oct 17, 2020 12:29 am More bullshit from The Cornfield.
sparks
Posts: 17317
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by sparks »

You both may go fuck yourselves. :)
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

I think we hit a nerve
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

He should of said "go fuck each other", but oh well
sparks
Posts: 17317
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by sparks »

Abdul Alhazred wrote: Sat Oct 17, 2020 3:37 pm
sparks wrote: Sat Oct 17, 2020 2:05 pm You both may go fuck yourselves. :)
I don't know how to do that. Show me how. :cowbell:
I don't doubt that you do not know how to fuck off. Each of your tripe filled posts indicate this fact. However, I cannot bring you forth from your ignorance: Each must find his own way grasshopper. :D
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Witness »

sparks needs some state of mind modifying substances:

https://i.imgur.com/xYcmRGX.jpg

So I'll have one to his health right now. :)
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

The radioactive water problem is what really gets medical people to sound alarms

Well, ever since they banned atmospheric testing of course. Spreading really dangerous shit through the atmosphere is bad, but in reality it was also a water problem, since rain and snow were going to cause it to end up eventually on forest, pastures, farms, cities, lakes and the oceans.

Ice caps, glaciers and rivers, and of course playgrounds, parks and even rich peoples backyards.

Most don’t understand how dangerous the material created in a reactor core is. This is not by chance, and even if you prove it beyond all doubt, for some unexplainable reason it doesn’t change anything.

During WWII when the race to build the bomb was on, a big concern in England was the fuel material itself being used as a weapon, even before Hitlers scientists could makes bomb. The troop staging for the assault at Normandy in England were concentrated, and nuclear scientists calculated the risk from the Nazis using powdered core material as a weapon against them.

This is historical record now. One pound dispersed as fine powder from the air was calculated to kill or incapacitate 50,000 men.

Breathing in spent reactor fuel rod material is really really bad.

Dumping it into the ocean is a lot less dangerous, and that Japan is going to have to do it tells us just how fucked things are. Even with all the resources and technology and money you can’t take the dangerous shit dissolved in water and remove it and make the water safe.

If they could, they sure as shit wouldn’t be planning on polluting their fishing areas (and the rest of the worlds) with radioactive material that is going to bioaccumulate into everything, but especially tuna fish
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

Just for fun, do you know why they stop using fuel rods in a reactor?

You know, after a period of time they remove them and add new ones. The used ones are called spent fuel rods.

They are the dangerous ones, that have to be kept cool and safe for at least 10,000 years

Why don’t they keep using them? They certainly produce heat, even with no fissioning they are hot.


Since I know nobody reading this knows, I won’t waste your time waiting for an answer that will never arrive.
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

I knew nobody would respond,


Why do they stop using fuel rods if 95% of the energy in them is still in them?

Good luck finding out by Googling


The nuclear cheerleaders think it’s not that dangerous, which is not by chance. A lot of effort and time and money has been spent trying to get you to believe reactors and the spent fuel isn’t really that bad. Which is complete and utter bullshit

If the Nazis had used Plutonium as a weapon, a pound of it finely powdered and spread in the air could easily kill 2 million people

Because breathing it in is sure death

But it takes longer

Of course at the time they didn’t even know about using cobalt, which is the ultimate fuck you

Just one gram spread over a square kilo is enough to kill everything

And there is radiocesium, which because of it’s solubility and bioaccumulation in the pancreases, a pound of it is enough to kill everyone on the planet, and everything else along with us

Of course you would have to make sure everyone got their 50 billionths of a gram dose, which is not likely

But there are tons of radiocesium in a reactor core

And in spent fuel rods
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

The better question is why? Why are the accumulating so much contaminated water at Fukushima?
ceptimus
Posts: 1427
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 11:04 pm
Location: UK

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by ceptimus »

If they can't pour it down the drain (into the ocean) or evaporate it, what else can they do but accumulate it?

They can't just stop using the water - they need it to keep the dangerous radioactive materials covered and cooled. Plus some of the water is ground water that is contaminated and they are currently trying to stop that contaminated water reaching the sea.
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

Exactly

It’s the radiation leaking into the ground they have been collecting, to stop it from reaching the ocean


The irony is not lost
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

There are multiple reactors that have in effect breached containment, with the water soluble isotopes flowing into the environment

Which isn’t going to stop in anyone’s lifetime


Not surprising that Japan is now trying to make safe all of the other reactors

The problem is the same one every country has

There is no way to actually make it safe

But at least the reactors won’t be running when the next disaster happens
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

The two biggest fuck up involving reactors are becoming impossible to ignore

The first is obviously the spent fuel rods


The second is no design was ever actually tested to see if it would work to contain the fuel in a worst case scenario

(they didn’t)

Oh sure you can say the fuel is still inside the containment, but if it’s leaking radioactive elements of the fuel into the groundwater and ocean, is it really contained?

“Well most of its still somewhere inside, so there is that.”

Yeah, but there is also the next 250,000 years to worry about.
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Witness »

Japan puts off decision to release treated Fukushima water into sea

https://i.imgur.com/WzIfLci.jpg
Storage tanks for radioactive water are lined up at the tsunami-crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in Fukushima Prefecture in February.
Japan has put off a decision to release treated radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea, government sources have said, after reports of a formal decision later this month triggered strong opposition from fishermen.

Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Hiroshi Kajiyama told a news conference Friday the government has no plan to announce a decision on what to do with over 1.2 million tons of treated water as reported.

His remarks came after government sources said last week it would decide on the release of the water on Tuesday. Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga said last month, during a visit to the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant which suffered meltdowns following the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami, that the government wants “to make a decision as soon as possible” on how to deal with the water.

“We are not at a stage where we can announce the specific timing of a decision” on how to deal with the stored water, Kajiyama said, adding, “We want to proceed with the matter carefully.”

The water used to cool the damaged reactors has been treated using an advanced liquid processing system (ALPS) to remove all radioactive material apart from tritium and is stored in tanks on the plant’s premises.

The Fukushima complex is expected to run out of water storage capacity by the summer of 2022, with contaminated water increasing by about 170 tons per day.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/ ... ima-water/
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

One might ask why tritium is still being produced in such quantities
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Witness »

Fukushima nuclear debris removal delayed by virus

The removal of nuclear debris from Japan's crippled Fukushima power plant will be delayed by about a year, because the pandemic has set back development of specialised equipment, the plant's operator said Thursday.

The Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) had been scheduled to start removing melted fuel from deep inside one of the mangled reactors next year, a decade after the nation's worst ever nuclear crisis was triggered by a tsunami.

The process is considered the most difficult of the massive decommissioning programme, which is expected to take three to four decades to complete.

TEPCO had planned to develop a robot arm in Britain that would have arrived in Japan next year to start work -- but chief decommissioning officer Akira Ono told a news conference that a recent spike in Covid-19 infections in the UK had delayed this.

"It will now be difficult to transfer the system in January as scheduled," Ono said, adding he hoped the delay would be limited to a year.

The removal process is expected to take several years for the number two unit, which is estimated to contain some 237 tonnes of debris, Kyodo News said.

Altogether, three melted-down units are estimated to house around 880 tonnes of debris.
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/2 ... d-by-virus
sparks
Posts: 17317
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by sparks »

At least they have a choice:. Death from the 'rona bug or radiation.

In light of the virus, Fukutooshima looks like a cake walk.
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

Witness wrote: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:30 pm
Japan puts off decision to release treated Fukushima water into sea

https://i.imgur.com/WzIfLci.jpg
Storage tanks for radioactive water are lined up at the tsunami-crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in Fukushima Prefecture in February.
Japan has put off a decision to release treated radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea, government sources have said, after reports of a formal decision later this month triggered strong opposition from fishermen.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/ ... ima-water/
Dumping the tritium into the ocean isn't a worst case scenario, and obviously it will happen. Probably in some disastrous fashion, as it is the most common form of nuclear pollution. Rather than a trickle, allowing the carcinogenic radioactive water molecules to disperse and mix, there will be some huge dump and massive failure of the ever increasing storage tanks.

None of that is even a speed bump on the real disaster, which will not be cleaned up, not in your lifetime, and not in your grandchildren's lifetime. The windscale disaster, over 63 years ago, was a minor disaster compared to Fukushima. Just one small reactor, which sits in the midst of an advanced undamaged facility, with the entire resources of England to deal with the relatively small amount of melted or damaged fuel, still in the reactor, contained. Sealed up, not leaking into the ground water and ocean all the time. (like Fukushima is doing)

63 years it has been sitting there, and the "plan" to "clean it up" is theorized to take another 100 years. No, that is not a joke. Since 1984 they have been trying to remove the filter galleries, which prevented most of the radioactive material from blanketing north easter England, and of course Europe.

After that they will demolish the entire 125 metre tall ventilation chimney, a highly radioactive problem, which might take a while. It took 4 years to remove the first block of radioactive concrete, but in the following year they removed 9 metres, each metre creates 100 tons of radioactive concrete and steel to deal with, which means bagging it up and laying it nearby, where it must be protected, watched, guarded and kept safe for the next 140,000 years. Give or take a 50,000 years.

Plans on what to do with the melted fuel inside the reactor do not exist. Just as none exist for what to do about Fukushima. The Windscale reactor has an estimated 15 tonnes of fuel sealed inside of it. And sometime in the next 100 years they plan on doing something about it.

Fukushima has maybe 400 tons of melted fuel, not inside a reactor, and an estimated 10,000/30,000 tons of spent fuel rods next to the ruined reactors. These sort of facts are unpleasant for the nuclear cheerleaders, who live in a fantasy world where nuclear is both cheap and safe. It is not cheap, and it has never been safe.
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Witness »

Newly found Fukushima plant contamination may delay cleanup

A draft investigation report into the 2011 Fukushima nuclear meltdown, adopted by Japanese nuclear regulators Wednesday, says it has detected dangerously high levels of radioactive contamination at two of the three reactors, adding to concerns about decommissioning challenges.

The interim report said data collected by investigators showed that the sealing plugs sitting atop the No. 2 and 3 reactor containment vessels were as fatally contaminated as nuclear fuel debris that had melted and fell to the bottom of the reactors following the March 2011 tsunami and earthquake.

The experts said the bottom of the sealed plug, a triple-layered concrete disc-shaped lid 12 meters in diameter sitting atop the primary containment vessel, is coated with high levels of radioactive Cesium 137.

The No. 1 reactor lid was less contaminated, presumably because the plug was slightly knocked out of place and disfigured due to the impact of the hydrogen explosion, the report said.

The experts measured radiation levels at multiple locations inside the three reactor buildings, and examined how radioactive materials moved and safety equipment functioned during the accident. They also said venting attempt at Unit 2 to prevent reactor damage never worked, and that safety measures and equipment designs still need to be examined.

The lid contamination does not affect the environment as the containment vessels are enclosed inside the reactor buildings. The report did not give further details about if or how the lid contamination would affect the decommissioning progress.
http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14140809
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

On the positive side, we now know three completely different ways the Mark 3 reactor design is complete shit at working as designed

In essence, the design of the reactor and containment structure can fail in3 different ways

The downside is nothing can be done about the other existing Mark 3 reactors

Except to shut them down and start working on a plan to someday make the spent fuel safe

No failed reactor building, and all but one failed reactor, has ever been made safe


And none will in your lifetime
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

On another positive note, any country with reactors, especially the ones with 40 years of spent fuel stored next to them, has multiple doomsday devices sitting there

You don’t dare bomb them, and in fact you don’t even want to damage the infrastructure of the country

Because doing anything to damage a reactor means the end of civilization as we know it
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Witness »

Quake shifts 53 water tanks at Fukushima plant

The operator of the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says it has found that 53 tanks storing radioactive wastewater were shifted from their original locations by a powerful earthquake earlier this month. But it says there have been no leaks from the tanks.

Tokyo Electric Power Company inspected 1,074 tanks after a magnitude-7.3 quake struck off the coast of Fukushima Prefecture on February 13.

TEPCO discovered that 53 tanks had moved from their original locations by 3 to 19 centimeters.

TEPCO treats the water used to cool molten nuclear fuel at the damaged reactors before storing it in tanks. But the water still contains radioactive substances.

The company says it also found that five sections of piping connecting the tanks shifted more than the limit recommended by the manufacturer.

But it says it has so far found no cracks or other abnormalities in the piping. It plans to conduct further examinations.

TEPCO also laid out a plan to repair two seismometers at the No.3 reactor building next month.

It came to light on Monday that the devices went out of order partly because of heavy rain last July. As a result, they were unable to collect data when the quake struck.
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20210226_03/

I won't live long enough to see the end of that story. :|
Anaxagoras
Posts: 29489
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Anaxagoras »

Today is the 10 year anniversary of the earthquake and tsunami.
ed
Posts: 41228
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by ed »

If you have radioactive water (defined however you like) and you put it in a big cake pan and put it in the sun and evaporate it, what happens? Do you get some sort of radioactive dust in the pan? Is evaporated nuclear water fit to drink?
Greta------>
Answer me dammit.

And please think of Greta as you answer.
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

The tritium (radioactive water) just turns onto radioactive water vapor. Not a good idea. There is also the larger issue of the other isotopes in the water. It's all a goddamn nightmare.
ed
Posts: 41228
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by ed »

robinson wrote: Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:19 am The tritium (radioactive water) just turns onto radioactive water vapor. Not a good idea. There is also the larger issue of the other isotopes in the water. It's all a goddamn nightmare.
WHT is tritium? ok, an isotope of hydrogen. And it combines with oxygen?

And it is radioactive. Is it hot? Like is it room temperature or what?
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

Like most things that will give you cancer, or your kids cancer, or worse, Tritium is hotly contested, with the producers of it insisting it’s safe and the concerned scientists still trying to get the dangers recognized (after 60 years)
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

It’s not hot as in warm, but because it emits beta radiation and binds with every last thing in your body, as well as easily migrates everywhere, it’s very much a cancer causing isotope

(This fact will be hotly contested by idiots who have drunk the nuclear Kool aid, which is made with tritium lol)

https://www.ianfairlie.org/news/the-hazards-of-tritium/
ed
Posts: 41228
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by ed »

it stays radioactive? sounds dodgy
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

Half life of 12 years
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

There are good reasons not to dump tons of it into your fishing waters
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Witness »

Fukushima landscape.

https://i.imgur.com/M8CStEU.jpg

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/10/worl ... rsary.html (lots of pics)
robinson
Posts: 16000
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by robinson »

Doesn't make sense
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Witness »

Contents of 4,000 containers with radioactive waste at Fukushima plant unclear: TEPCO

FUKUSHIMA -- Of the 85,000 containers holding radioactive waste placed in the radiation-controlled area of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the contents of about 4,000 have not been identified, operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. (TEPCO) announced on April 5.

According to TEPCO, it began listing the contents of the containers after the meltdown in 2011, but about 4,000 of them remain unidentified. The company says it will formulate a survey plan and proceed to determine what they hold.

Last month, TEPCO confirmed that the contents of a container in the waste storage area at the nuclear plant were leaking due to corrosion at the bottom of it. When the Fukushima Prefectural Government inspected the site, it also found four containers that TEPCO did not know about. The maximum radiation level on the surface of the containers was 1.5 millisieverts per hour.
https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20 ... na/002000c
Witness
Posts: 35689
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm

Re: Fukushima one year on

Post by Witness »

Even with water release, nuclear plant needs more storage tanks

The plan to release treated radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant into the sea will likely not resolve the chronic problem of contaminated water accumulating there, Asahi Shimbun calculations show.

The maximum rate of water discharge allowed under the government’s basic plan would be less than the inflow of rainwater and groundwater at the nuclear power plant, meaning that additional water storage tanks would inevitably be needed at the site.

The government on April 13 approved the basic plan to release more than 1 million tons of treated water into the sea. The government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. hope to start discharging the water two years from now. Existing storage tanks at the site are expected to reach full capacity around the same time.

The Asahi Shimbun studied this plan based on documents and materials published by the government and TEPCO.

The plan addressed the fact that the ALPS multi-nuclide treatment system cannot remove radioactive tritium from the water. Under the plan, the amount of tritium released with the water should not exceed 22 trillion becquerels a year.

That is the same upper limit for the amount of tritium-containing water that used to be discharged from the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant before the triple meltdown in March 2011.

TEPCO figures show the water held in the storage tanks at the plant had a mean tritium concentration of 730,000 becquerels per liter as of March last year. That translates into 22 trillion becquerels of tritium in about 30,000 tons of treated water.

At the same time, rainwater and groundwater entering the reactor buildings of the nuclear plant generated an average of 140 tons of contaminated water a day, or 51,000 tons throughout the year.

If conditions remain the same, the quantity of the water held in the storage tanks would grow about 20,000 tons a year, although this estimate could change according to the amount of precipitation.
http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14332645