This is true both for Japan and for each other. This question can not be decided purolator by refer

COMPANY NEWS SUBSCRIPTION referendum referendum will be held on January 27, 2013 Rise of Ineada Neither NPP nor Central Green filed an application for participation in the referendum GOP green and antinuclear BULGARIAN COALITION: We will not allow the destruction of STRANDJA AND BLACK SEA! Green: NO NUCLEAR ENERGY FUTURE! (VIDEO) TURKEY: not building NPP TO CUT YOUR preparing new protests against the construction of nuclear power plant in Turkey (video) "Green" Say 'No' to Nuclear Power Media Ombudsman to intervene! Think! NUCLEAR ENERGY NO FUTURE! Nuclear waste - HELL ON EARTH! CONTACT LINKS
(Promulgated, SG. 63 of 28.06.2002, amended. Amended and supplemented. No.. 120 of 29.12.2002, purolator No.. 70 of 10.08.2004, in force since 1.01.2005 amend. No.. 76 of 20.09.2005, effective 1.01.2007, SG. 88 of 4.11.2005, SG. 105 of 29.12.2005, effective from 1.01.2006 d . No.. 30 of 11.04.2006, effective from 12.07.2006, No.. 11 of 2.02.2007, amended. amended and supplemented. No.. 109 of 20.12.2007, in force since 1.01.2008, amended. No.. 36 of 4.04.2008, SG. 67 of 29.07.2008, amended. amended and supplemented. No.. 42 of 5.06.2009, purolator amended. No.. 74 of 15.09.2009, effective from 15.09.2009, amended. purolator amended and supplemented. No.. 80 of 12.10.2010, amended. No.. 87 of 5.11.2010, SG. 88 9.11.2010, effective 1.01.2011, SG. 97 of 10.12.2010, effective from 10.12.2010, No.. 26 of 29.03.2011, effective from 30.06.2012 , SG. 38 of 18.05.2012, effective 1.07.2012, SG. 82 of 26/10/2012, purolator effective 26/11/2012)
2. A permission under Article purolator 33 paragraph 1 item 1 if the proposed site for the construction of a nuclear purolator power plant and / or equipment for the management purolator and storage of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel has higher seismicity purolator of 7 th degree in European macroseismic scale (EMS-98), respectively from seventh grade on the scale of Medvedev-Karnik-Karnik (MIBK). 2. Art.33 In the text of paragraph 4 becomes point 1.C chl.33al.4 creates point 2 the following: 2. Chairman of the Agency shall not issue a permit under Article 33 al.t.1 when the proposed site nuclear power plant and / or equipment for the management and storage purolator of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel with seismicity higher than seventh degree in European macroseismic scale (EMS-98), respectively from 7th grade on the scale of Medvedev- Sponheuer-Karnik (MIBK). 2 In Art. 45 Paragraph 2 creates a new paragraph 5 the following: Paragraph 5. Minister of Economy, Energy and Tourism submit proposals under paragraph 2 only if the site offered the construction of a nuclear power plant is not a seismic higher than 7th degree in European macroseismic scale (EMS-98), respectively from 7th grade on the scale of Medvedev-Karnik-Karnik (MIBK).
3. Within one week after the entry into force of this Act, the President of the Agency revoke all licenses issued pursuant to Article 33 of the Safe Use of Nuclear Energy for selection of sites for the construction of nuclear purolator power plants and facilities management and storage nuclear waste and spent nuclear fuel in areas with seismic activity higher than seventh degree in European macroseismic scale (EMS-98), respectively from seventh grade on the scale of Medvedev-Karnik-Karnik purolator (MIBK).
Accidents at nuclear plant in Fukushima - Japan on 11 March 2011. showed that there is no safe nuclear energy, and even the Japanese nuclear power plants are not guaranteed against earthquakes. Environmental damage purolator and population of Japan that were caused due to radioactive contamination requested the addition of outrageous high financial purolator resources to deal with the problem. After this huge environmental purolator and financial disaster for Japan, the country was decided purolator to abandon the use of nuclear purolator energy in 2040 and switching to other energy sources. Currently businesses in Japan wants the decision to be reviewed, but the population remains clearly anti-nuclear position. The question is whether there is a right management of a country to take the risk associated with the risk of long term damage to the life and health and the future of humans and the environment and agriculture due to a potential failure in a nuclear power plant or facility for processing and / or storage of nuclear waste and spent nuclear fuel.
This is true both for Japan and for each other. This question can not be decided purolator by referendum and citizens because they could 51: 49% (or any other ratio) of the votes those who take the risk to put him and others who do not agree! Can never foresee all possible problems that could lead to a strong earthquake in the safety systems of a nuclear power plant or a repository for radioactive waste. This is the time when it was built unsinkable "Titanic" sank on its first voyage in 1912. in the Chernobyl accident in 1986.