Why are Radioactive Emissions Increasing at Fukushima Daiichi?
Fukushima Daiichi continues to contaminate the atmosphere with radionuclides. TEPCO acknowledged in July of 2012 that units 1 through 4 at the plant were emitting approximately 10,000,000 Bq per hour.[i]
It appears as if emission levels have increased since 2012. According to documents interpreted by Fukushima Diary, TEPCO asserted May 25, 2015 that ongoing emissions were estimated at a rate of 2,336,000,000 Bq per hour of noble gas and 960,000 Bq per hour of of Cs-134/137.[ii]
Fukushima Diary pointed out that Reactor 3 emissions increased over 2014. Reactor 4’s emissions were reported as 95,000 Bq/hour of Cesium134/137 despite TEPCO’s reported success in removing rods from unit 4.Why?
Why are atmospheric emissions rising and what does it mean for climate change? Please see discussion here: http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/strangely-missing-radionuclides-effects.html
[i] T. Sugimoto (24 July 2012) ‘After 500 Days, Fukushima No. 1 Plant Still Not Out of The Woods’, The Asahi Shimbun, http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201207240087, date accessed 24 July 2012.
[ii] Lori Mochizuki, “Still 960,000Bq Cs-134/137 and 2,336,000,000Bq noble gas discharged from reactors to the air every single hour,” Fukushima Diary (June 6, 2015), http://fukushima-diary.com/2015/06/still-960000bq-of-cs-134137-and-2336000000bq-of-noble-gas-discharged-from-reactors-to-the-air-every-single-hour/
TEPCO documents: http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/f1/smp/2015/images/additional_amount_150525-j.pdf http://www.tepco.co.jp/life/custom/faq/images/d150430_08-j.pdf.
Source: Majia’s Blog
http://majiasblog.blogspot.fr/2015/08/why-are-radioactive-emissions.html
Volcano issues unaddressed in nuclear plant restart
Japan has seen its first nuclear power reactor restart in more than two years despite persisting safety issues related to volcanic eruptions.
The No. 1 reactor at Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s Sendai nuclear power plant in Kagoshima Prefecture came back online on Tuesday.
But the utility has not designated a site for relocating nuclear fuel in the event of a massive volcanic eruption, claiming that warning signs would give Kepco enough time to prepare and transfer the fuel.
The utility and the Nuclear Regulation Authority have also decided there is little chance of a major volcanic eruption in the next several decades.
In the event of a major eruption, however, pyroclastic flows could reach the plant and disable cooling functions for its reactors and spent fuel, which could trigger massive radioactive emissions.
There are five major calderas around the Sendai plant, suggesting that massive eruptions have occurred there.
The plant currently stores 1,946 fuel assemblies in spent fuel pools. The sheer volume makes it hard to find a relocation site big enough to take them.
A panel of volcano experts advising the NRA has compiled a report indicating that there are currently no technologies that can precisely predict the timing and scale of a major eruption.
Toshitsugu Fujii, a member of the panel and chairman of the Meteorological Agency’s Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions, has said that the panel’s opinion is not necessarily consistent with that of the NRA.
According to experts, the commonly held view is that it is impossible to predict a major eruption from warning signs because such eruptions occur only once every 10,000 years in Japan, so the data are scant.
The panel has proposed launching an advisory organization to the NRA to help deal with volcanic eruption forecasting. Due to time constraints, however, the launch of the organization is expected to be in September at the earliest.
The panel has also pointed out that the NRA should set standards for judgments on whether an impending eruption would be huge, but the time-line for setting such criteria is undecided.
Evacuation-plan worries
Two hospitals and 15 welfare facilities for elderly people within 10 km of the Sendai plant should have evacuation plans in the event that a serious nuclear accident occurs. However, concerns remain.
The prefectural government initially asked welfare facilities within 30 km of the plant to draw up evacuation plans in line with a central government policy. But it later changed course. Kagoshima Gov. Yuichiro Ito insisted that it would be enough if evacuation plans within 10 km are in place and that those beyond that would be unworkable.
The Otama-san no Ie elderly group home, the welfare facility closest to the nuclear plant — about 1 km south of the plant’s main gate — included an evacuation destination beyond 30 km of the plant and four routes to it in its plans.
“This is supplementary to local governments’ evacuation plans,” said Keiji Miyauchi, general manager of the group home.
Under the group home’s evacuation plans, residents will be first taken to a nearby shelter built by the Satsumasendai city government. The shelter, equipped with a filtered venting system that can block radioactive materials, has four days’ worth of water and food.
But Miyauchi said: “The group home has only a staff of two during the night shift. It would be difficult to take 18 elderly residents, some of whom are in wheelchairs, to the shelter.”
Miyauchi is also concerned about the evacuation routes. “Roads would be congested because they are narrow,” he said. “Some roads may be destroyed and made inaccessible if an earthquake occurs.”
Broad evacuation plans are available but details cannot be fixed, said an official at another elderly facility within 10 km of the nuclear plant. “Needs among elderly people change depending on the season,” the official said.
The facility has an evacuation agreement in place for an elderly home located beyond 30 km from the nuclear plant to accept its residents. But how to care for these evacuees remains uncertain.
“A facility alone can’t determine what to do after evacuations, and this is a matter that needs to be decided by the central or prefectural government,” the official said.
Source: Japan Times
Trillions of becquerels of radioactive material still flowing into sea” at Fukushima
Officials: “Trillions of becquerels of radioactive material still flowing into sea” at Fukushima — Map shows nuclear waste coming up from bottom of ocean far offshore — Japan TV Journalist: “Contaminated seawater will circulate around globe… disaster like a huge cloth expanding everyday”
Interview with NHK journalist Morley Robertson, by the Center for Remembering 3.11, published Jun 30, 2012 (emphasis added): I begin with the radiation leakage. Radiation leakage exerts a long term effect on the environment. It contaminates our food chain, the groundwater and the ocean. And the contaminated seawater will circulate around the globe. We never know how much this will impact on the environment… We’ll never able to study such issues with empirical certainty… [Due to nuclear testing] we have already accumulated “hidden losses” of radiation damage… how much is the [Fukushima] cesium in relation to that?… I believe we should enjoy delicious food rather than worrying about the food. I enjoyed the town’s delicacy… I didn’t mind about how the beef was produced or where it came from. As long as it is tasty, it is no problem for me. With regard to radiation, I have become more optimistic. My hypothesis is that it’s no use worrying about radiation. For people in Fukushima, they have a lot to worry about their future, like damaged reputation… One reason why we have relied on nuclear plants is because we didn’t know about the facts… We need to face the facts… Rad-waste from the nuclear cycle is said to be unsolvable even after 2.5 million years.
Part II of Robertson’s Interview, published Jun 30, 2012: In 1974, then PM Tanaka declared, “Let ‘s go nuclear!”… we were issued credit cards to buy electric goods to consume the extra electricity… It is OK to say that everything was just a lie… and 3/11 happened. So we must study everything. It is no longer about what to do with Onagawa nuclear power plant, Miyagi or Tohoku. This is about what to do with Japan. This has been revealed by our vulnerability to the accident… So when we talk about “disaster“, it’s like a huge wrapping cloth expanding everyday.
- NHK: Morley is a journalist… working in the fields of television, radio, and lecture meetings… he studied at the University of Tokyo and Harvard University.
- Robertson’s Wikipedia entry (translated from Japanese by Microsoft): In 1968, because of father’s job moved to… Hiroshima [to work] on Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission [and] undertook study of atomic bomb patients.
TEPCO, updated Mar 10, 2015: Fukushima Daiichi Contaminated Water Issue FAQ — Q1 Please explain the impact of the leaked radioactive materials on the sea. [Answer:] TEPCO announced that underground water including radioactive materials had leaked into the port… It has been implied that trillions of becquerels of radioactive materials are still flowing into the sea; however, the concentration of radioactive materials in the sea is at a level that meets the Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, except for some areas…
TEPCO, Apr 28, 2015: Comprehensive risk review was implemented, considering all the possible risks that might have an impact outside the Fukushima Daiichi NPS site… The paths through which water could leak outside the site: …
- Sources of risk — Trenches… Pits… Tanks… Accumulated water inside reactor buildings… Contamination inside the port
- Leakage routes — Ground surface… Drainage channels… Underground (groundwater）
- Destination of the contaminated material… The Sea: Unit 1-4 water intake channel… Inside the port… Outside the port
Fukushima – Selling Out the Next Generation
Inside the Ikata Nuclear Power Plant’s station unit Number 3, which was idled after the 2011 disaster in Fukushima, in the Ehime prefecture of Japan, January 23, 2014.
Japan has restarted its first nuclear reactor to generate power since 2013.
And that’s really bad news.
Remember what happened in 2013? Why Japan closed all of its reactors abruptly and why we’re still tracing the spread of radioactive material across our Pacific Coast and into the atmosphere?
See more news and opinion from Thom Hartmann at Truthout here.
First there was an earthquake that did significant damage to that island country – and then a tsunami quickly followed.
And what happened next was the largest nuclear meltdown in the history of the world and the evacuation of 160,000 locals who lived in the area of the Fukushima power plant.
We know now that TEPCO – the owner of the Fukushima plant – had been warned years earlier about the dangers of an earthquake and a tsunami hitting the plant.
No one did anything about it then – but even if they had – do we have any reason to believe it would have been enough?
Because that’s the gamble that the Japanese nuclear industry is making with all of our futures right now.
The simple fact about nuclear power generation is that the risks and the costs dramatically outweigh any benefit.
We’ve seen some of the risks – in Chernobyl we saw how human error can cause a meltdown.
In the Three Mile Island incident we saw how the private corporations aren’t afraid to cut corners to pad their bottom line – even if that risks a partial nuclear meltdown.
And in Fukushima we saw what happens when corporate negligence meets a natural disaster.
Considering nuclear power’s track record and the staggering risks involved, it’s amazing that anyone will insure the projects. The simple fact is that without government backing, like the Price-Anderson Act here in the US, nuclear power would be impossible, because no private insurance company will cover it.
And to add insult to injury, nuclear power is actually NOT an “alternative energy” source – it’s an incredibly fossil-fuel-intensive process.
We can start with how much cement is required to contain and protect the reactors and other sensitive parts of the plants.
Cement and concrete are hugely greenhouse gas intensive to produce – and the only way we know how to protect our power plants is to use more concrete.
Beyond that, the size of the projects require tons of truckloads of materials being hauled in and away, adding to the toll of carbon costs.
Even if we just look at the material inputs used in nuclear power (it is carbon-intensive to mine uranium, and it is carbon intensive to enrich the uranium), we still don’t know what to do with the nuclear waste.
The reality is that there are economically viable and truly clean energy alternatives: geothermal, solar, wind and tidal wave power are all options for Japan, for example.
And they’re options that have none of the risks and none of the costs associated with enriched radioactive material.
And bringing those renewable options online isn’t nearly as costly in terms of carbon as it is to bring a nuclear power plant online.
The reality is – the only reason anyone wants to bring these power plants back online is that when for-profit companies like TEPCO run nuclear power with massive government subsidies and insurance, it can be hugely profitable.
Nuclear is not a bridge fuel – it is not a clean alternative – and it can’t be our future.
In the 1940s scientists marveled at the idea of using fission to safely create large amounts of energy indefinitely, and they were wrong.
The only reason we’re clinging to that fantasy today is that the for-profit nuclear owners – think Montgomery Burns from the Simpsons – don’t care about the costs of nuclear power to society.
They’ll happily sell the future of life on Earth – just to make a buck today.
Which is why both Japan and the United States should “just say no” to nuclear power.
Source: Truth out
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/32314-fukushima-selling-out-the-next-generation
Fukushima fishermen give nod to TEPCO’s plan to release treated water into sea
Fisherman operating in waters close to the stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant formally approved a plan by plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. to discharge radioactive groundwater into the ocean after decontamination treatment.
The Fukushima Prefectural Federation of Fisheries Cooperative Associations gave the green light to TEPCO’s “subdrain plan” at an extraordinary meeting on Aug. 11.
TEPCO is expected to start discharging treated water as early as next month.
It will pump contaminated groundwater accumulating in areas around reactors damaged by the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami disaster for processing and then release it into the sea.
The fishermen’s federation submitted a written request to the central government and TEPCO setting certain conditions for giving its approval to the subdrain plan. It warned the utility against discharging highly radioactive water inside the reactor buildings even after decontamination treatment and called for strict monitoring of standards for the release of water. It also insisted on compensation in the event the local fishing industry suffers losses as a result of groundless rumors.
Many fishermen initially opposed the TEPCO plan as processed radioactive water had never been discharged into the ocean.
TEPCO’s delay in disclosing the leakage of radioactive water into the sea each time it rained heavily also hampered its negotiations with local fishermen as it undermined their confidence in the company. The matter only came to light in February.
TEPCO then made an intensive effort to explain the subdrain plan would help reduce the flow of contaminated underground water into the ocean. This convinced the prefectural fishermen’s federation that the work could drastically decrease radiation levels in nearby waters, prompting it sign off on the plan.
Source: Asahi Shimbun
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201508110060
Amid protests, Kyushu Electric restarts Sendai nuclear plant in Kagoshima
SATSUMA-SENDAI, Kagoshima Prefecture–Kyushu Electric Power Co. activated the No. 1 reactor of the Sendai nuclear power plant here on Aug. 11, the first to be restarted in Japan under new safety regulations instituted after the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
The reactor is the first of 43 across the nation to be brought back online, ending a period with no nuclear power, which lasted for a year and 11 months.
As anti-nuclear protesters rallied around the Sendai plant, located in Satsuma-Sendai city, work to restart the No. 1 reactor began in the central control room at 10:30 a.m. on Aug. 11.
Kyushu Electric workers pulled a lever to remove the control rods that had curbed nuclear fission in the reactor.
The 32 control rods began to withdraw, reactivating the reactor.
The reactor is expected to reach criticality, in which nuclear fission is self-sustaining, at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 11. Steam produced from the heat generated by the nuclear fission will drive a turbine to produce electricity.
The generation and transmission of electricity is expected to begin on Aug. 14. The output will be raised gradually, reaching full power generation in late August and shifting to a commercial operation in early September.
In a statement, Kyushu Electric Power President Michiaki Uriu said, “The activation of the nuclear reactor is one of the important steps in the process for restart. We will continue to deal sincerely with the government’s inspections and proceed with the subsequent process by putting a top priority on safety.”
In September 2014, the Sendai nuclear power plant passed the new safety regulations for the first time in the nation. In March this year, the Nuclear Regulation Authority started the inspection process that is required before a nuclear reactor can be reactivated. In July, nuclear fuel was brought into the reactor.
As operations of the reactor had been suspended for about four years, Kyushu Electric proceeded cautiously with the preparations.
All nuclear reactors in Japan were taken offline soon after the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami triggered three meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. Though Kansai Electric Power Co. temporarily operated the No. 3 and No. 4 reactors of its Oi nuclear power plant in Fukui Prefecture to deal with an electricity shortage, it suspended operations again in September 2013.
The electric power industry is pushing for the restart of idled nuclear reactors. The Abe administration also regards nuclear power as vital to the nation’s power needs.
Kyushu Electric plans to restart the No. 2 reactor at its Sendai nuclear power plant in mid-October. Preparations for a restart are progressing at the No. 3 and the No. 4 reactors of Kansai Electric’s Takahama nuclear power plant in Fukui Prefecture and the No. 3 reactor of Shikoku Electric Power Co.’s Ikata nuclear power plant in Ehime Prefecture.
One stumbling block for the Takahama plant is a temporary injunction the Fukui District Court issued in April this year to prohibit the restart.
Meanwhile, anxieties remain among residents living near nuclear power plants over insufficient emergency measures in the event of a nuclear accident. For example, the formulation of evacuation plans has been delayed for some medical and welfare facilities that house many elderly people.
In the Kyushu region where the Sendai nuclear power plant is situated, volcanic activity poses a threat. Therefore, some opponents argue that it is necessary for nuclear power plants to take safety measures against major eruptions.
The spread of summer power-saving campaigns and solar power generation have reduced concerns over electricity shortages even when no nuclear reactors are operating. A stable electricity supply is continuing across the nation even amid a serious heat wave.
Opposition to the restart of nuclear plants remains strong among the public.
Source: Asahi Shimbun
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/social_affairs/AJ201508110066
Explosion in Tianjin, China – in warehouse supplying nuclear fuel?
Top Asian News at 11:00 pm GMT
TIANJIN, China (AP) — Huge explosions at a warehouse for … ore which could supply its nuclear weapons program or fuel nuclear reactors, …–
The blasts ripped through a warehouse storing “dangerous goods” in Tianjin’s Binhai New Area around 11:30 p.m. local time, China’s official Xinhua News Agency said. http://www.wsj.com/articles/huge-blast-rocks-chinese-city-1439403843
Japan restarting nuclear reactor – but what about Japan’s intractable problem of wastes?
Nuclear restart highlights government dilemma over lack of waste disposal sites, Japan Times BY KAYO MIMIZUKA KYODO AUG 11, 2015 With an unpopular return to nuclear power generation, Japan can no longer ignore the elephant in the room: where is the country’s highly radioactive nuclear waste going?
The reboot Tuesday of a reactor at Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s Sendai plant in Kagoshima Prefecture comes as the government struggles to find a final disposal site for high-level nuclear waste.
Currently, around 17,000 tons is sitting in temporary storage pools across the country, and the restart means the generation of even more.
Spent fuel pools at some nuclear plants will reach their capacity in as soon as three years.
A spokeswoman at Kyushu Electric said the Sendai plant’s storage pools “still have enough room,” suggesting the utility is not planning to immediately take further measures. But they are expected to become full in roughly 11 years, according to official data.
International concerns are also growing over the increase in Japan’s possession of plutonium due to its potential for falling into the wrong hands and being used to make nuclear weapons. As of the end of 2014, Japan had 47.8 tons of plutonium, up 0.7 tons from a year earlier.
Under Japan’s nuclear fuel recycle policy, plutonium extracted by reprocessing conventional uranium fuel is consumed by reactors in the form of plutonium-uranium mixed oxide fuel, known as MOX. But its feasibility remains uncertain, given public concerns after the Fukushima disaster.
Currently, the government plans to store nuclear waste at a final repository more than 300 meters underground. It would sit there for up to 100,000 years until radiation levels fall low enough and there is no harm to the environment……
In May, the Cabinet of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe introduced a scheme allowing the government to choose candidate sites based on scientific grounds, including resistance to earthquakes……
Hideyuki Ban, co-director of the Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center, said finding a location to build a disposal site in Japan is even more difficult than in other countries due to the public’s sensitivity to nuclear power given the Fukushima crisis.
“For now, there is no national consensus at all on what to do with nuclear power generation down the road,” Ban said. “As the majority of people oppose nuclear power, surely there will be a backlash” against the government’s plan.
Since May, the government has been briefing municipalities on how it selects candidate sites.
Such meetings have been held in all 47 prefectures except Fukushima, but officials from some communities refused to take part out of fear their attendance might be considered a sign of their intention to accept a disposal site.
Questions have also arisen over the transparency of the process……http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/08/11/national/nuclear-restart-highlights-government-dilemma-lack-waste-disposal-sites/#.VcrZ3LKqpHx
Total lifetime costs of Vogtle nuclear station estimated at $65 billion and rising
Vogtle: at $65 billion and counting, it’s a case study of nuclear power’s staggeringly awful economics, Green World, Michael Mariotte August 2, 2015 Georgia is one state that you would think would be wary of nuclear power economics. The first two reactors at Georgia Power’s Vogtle site, which came online in the late 1980s, were a record 800% over budget.
That is a number that is almost impossible to grasp. Nothing goes 800% over budget–in the real world, projects get cancelled well before reaching that point……
Sane people do not let projects get 800% over budget. Unless, perhaps, if someone else is putting up the money. And that’s exactly what happened with the first two Vogtle reactors–the overruns were pushed on to ratepayers; Georgia Power had to eat some small portion of them, but basically ratepayers were forced to pick up the tab.
And in a case of history repeating itself as predicted–as farce–that’s exactly what is happening with the two Vogtle reactors under construction now.
When the project was announced, and when the utilities building the project first applied for taxpayer loans to help finance the project, Southern Company (Georgia Power’s parent) said the two reactors would cost about $14 billion and would be online in 2016 and 2017.
That was back around 2008. Vogtle got its taxpayer loan promise in February 2010 and its construction permit in February 2012. Three and a half years later, Vogtle is more than three years behind schedule–39 months behind, in fact.
And the cost of building Vogtle has, not surprisingly, gone up. Way up. Right now, it’s somewhere around $16 billion and rising fast–the over-budget portion caused by the delays alone is $2 million per day. And as you can see from the photo at the top of the page, taken last Thursday, construction still has quite a long way to go.
Georgia Power already has run through half of its federal loan money, paid for by all U.S. taxpayers, not just Georgia ratepayers. Some of the rest of the taxpayer loan (the loans totaled more than $8 billion) was received later by the other partners, so perhaps they haven’t run through their share yet.
In any case, the supposed point of getting the loan, and of charging ratepayers for construction costs as they are incurred (a concept called Construction Work in Progress, barred in most states), and of building the reactors in the first place, was to save ratepayers money. That’s what Southern Company says anyway.
And they run off numbers and argue that building Vogtle, even with the overruns and delays, will save ratepayers $3 billion compared to building a gas-powered plant, which probably would already be operational, by the way, except that neither it nor Vogtle actually are needed.
But those numbers, despite the utility’s protestations, no longer add up……..
If one–or both–of the reactors gets cancelled before operation, then the negative benefits grow even more. Unless the cancellation occurs before too much more money is spent–then cancellation would turn into a net benefit for the ratepayers by avoiding the costs that have not yet been incurred. Sure, Georgia Power might take a hit and a lot of money that already has been spent would be wasted. But at least ratepayers could breathe easier……..
The economics of nuclear construction are just too staggeringly awful. But it gets worse. Because, as former PSC Commissioner Baker said, the total lifetime cost of Vogtle, including construction, is now estimated at $65 billion–a number too high for “staggering” to apply anymore……
the $65 billion number doesn’t include decommissioning and radioactive waste disposal costs, both of which will be added to ratepayers’ bills–and probably the rest of us taxpayers as well when the amount collected proves to be too small, as is the case with every other reactor in the country.
Meanwhile, utilities across the country, including Georgia Power, are buying solar power for 5 cents kilowatt/hour and less. And, unlike Vogtle, where the costs keep rising, solar’s price keeps falling…..http://safeenergy.org/2015/08/03/vogtle-at-65-billion-and-counting/
Seawater heating up causes partial shutdown for Pilgrim nuclear station
Rising seawater temperatures force Pilgrim to reduce power, Cape Cod Times, 11 Aug 15, Rising temperatures in bay force reduction in power
To cool its reactors, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station draws up to 500 million gallons of saltwater a day from Cape Cod Bay through an inlet created by two breakwaters. Merrily Cassidy/Cape Cod Times File By Christine Legere clegere@capecodonline.com
PLYMOUTH — The owner of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station had been planning to ask for a license adjustment that would allow the plant to draw warmer water from Cape Cod Bay than is currently allowed.But the request was not made soon enough.Pilgrim operators were forced to begin preparation for a shutdown late Sunday afternoon, when the temperature of the seawater used to cool the reactor edged above the 75-degree limit set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission…….
Millstone Nuclear Power Plant in Connecticut, which draws water from Long Island Sound, was the first in the Northeast to shut down because of rising water temperatures, which have become an issue in this region within the past five years. The plant has since secured a maximum intake temperature of 80 degrees on its operating license.“Pilgrim is still looking to increase the maximum saltwater temperature to a higher value, but the supporting analysis is not yet complete,” Lauren Burm, spokeswoman for Entergy Corp., the plant’s owner-operator, said.Last week’s hot spell likely contributed to the rise in the bay’s water temperature, but a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said the plant’s discharge of hot water into the bay also may have been a contributing factor.
“The ballpark estimate on water discharge temperatures at Pilgrim (Sunday) would be about 95 degrees Fahrenheit,” Neil Sheehan said in an email.Under its license, water discharged from the plant may be no hotter than 102 degrees, a level set by the Environmental Protection Agency as part of a water discharge permit…….
Pilgrim draws up to 500 million gallons of saltwater daily from Cape Cod Bay through an inlet created by two breakwaters. The water is circulated through the plant’s condenser via a network of thousands of tubes, cooling down the steam from the reactor and returning it to its water form, Sheehan said.“The higher water temperature affects the efficiency of the heat removal,” Sheehan said.http://www.capecodtimes.com/article/20150811/NEWS/150819916
Struggling nuclear industry battles on, but it’s a losing battle
Contrast the nuclear power industry’s troubles with the bright prospects for renewables and energy efficiency, and it’s clear that our future lies not with the unstable nuclear industry but with the rapidly growing clean energy sector.
Nuclear power is a losing proposition BY MICHAEL BRUNE, ANNIE LEONARD AND ERICH PICA http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article30434562.htmlfoe.org 12 Aug 15 Americans know the clean energy economy is here and they are embracing it. More than seven out of 10 of us want more emphasis on wind and solar energy, while only about a third favor more nuclear energy, according to the latest research from the Gallup poling organization. Gallup also found that support for nuclear power dropped by 11 percentage points in the United States in the last five years.
Meanwhile, the struggling nuclear industry is trying to pitch its product as a viable low-carbon alternative to clean energy, rather than the dangerous and expensive choice that it is.
As potential climate solutions go, though, nuclear power is a losing proposition that is only getting worse. Developing clean, affordable renewable energy sources and tapping our vast energy efficiency “reserves” is a much smarter bet for America’s future.
As things now stand, the nuclear power industry is facing dark days. All five nuclear reactors now under construction in the United States are behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget — a situation that is not unique to our nation. In fact, 75 percent of reactors currently under construction worldwide are delayed and over budget. Continue reading
Politics, Safety, Money – all factors working against Japan’s supposed nuclear power revival
Japan’s return to nuclear meets with fear and loathing, CNBC, Nyshka Chandran | @NyshkaC 11 Aug 15, “………..Tuesday’s restart has far-reaching consequences for Japan’s politics and economy. Here are the key issues:
The move is highly controversial among citizens, with regular opinion polls revealing that a clear majority of the population want Japan to end nuclear power………”This is absolutely the worst possible timing given public opinion is significantly moving away from Abe: There is already backlash against his security bills and last week’s Hiroshima commemoration didn’t go well for him either,” James Brown, assistant professor at Temple University in Tokyo, told CNBC, referring to new legislation that would end Japan’s pacifist constitution.
“If we start to see some connection between nuclear issues and the collective self-defense concept behind the security bills, i.e. a connection between civilian and military nuclear usage, that’s particularly dangerous for Abe’s popularity.”
Despite public disapproval, the government will be able to implement its nuclear policies due to the lack of a strong political opposition, Brown explained.
Safety
Kyushu’s Sendai reactor was commissioned around 30 years ago, raising doubts whether the unit may be too old to withstand future disasters, such as the large earthquakes common across Japan.
“They are on the edge, seeing as most reactors above 40 years of age are considered to be aging,” Daniel Aldrich, professor of political science and co-director of the Center for Resilience Studies at Northeastern University in Boston, told CNBC.
The country has embraced stricter guidelines and new technology for the entire nuclear industry since the 2011 tragedy, but according to Aldrich, “the question is, for Japan to extend the life and licensing of these aging reactors, can they convince the population that these reactors are safe?”
The Sendai reactor is also located near an active volcano……..
Money…….“In the longer term, Japan’s population will be in decline, they will be more efficient in energy usage, and overall gas demand should slow. The government is also going big on renewable energy, which should also lower demand.”………”Marginal operating expenses are low but the longer-term costs are incredibly high. Regulatory standards have increased, so nuclear operators need to install more equipment, which means higher costs,” Brown added.http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/10/japans-return-to-nuclear-meets-with-fear-and-loathing.html
A nuclear revival in Japan is by no means a sure thing
Japan restarts reactor – A nuclear revival? , DW, 11 Aug 15 “…….The government’s nuclear energy program, however, remains controversial in Japan……..PM Abe’s decision to ignore the prevailing public opinion can be explained by the huge amount of influence exercised by regional electricity lobbies on politicians, said Franz Waldenberger, Japan expert at the Tokyo-based German Institute for Japan Studies (DIJ).
“Major media outlets in the country have also been unable to escape this influence, making it extremely difficult for opponents to make themselves heard,” he told DW. Added to this is the lack of any real opposition for Abe either within or outside his Liberal Democratic Party, Waldenberger noted.
Clever tactics
Abe has also maneuvered skillfully in terms of his energy policy. At first, he promised to reduce Japan’s high-reliance on nuclear power as much as possible. This was followed by the PM’s announcement of making nuclear power part of the “main sources of electricity,” and ultimately by raising the intended share of nuclear power in the country’s energy mix from 20 to 22 percent……….
Sakurajima, one of Japan’s active volcanoes, is only 50 kilometers away. Several volcanologists have contradicted the inspectors who argue that the mountain poses no threat. TheAsahi newspaper criticized the ongoing “systemic vulnerability” of the nuclear reactors given that nothing had changed in terms of their classification into groups.
Other experts even think that restarting the reactors after such a long period of time is dangerous. According to the World Nuclear Association, the restart of 14 nuclear reactors around the world after four years of idleness led to emergency shutdowns and technical failures.
An unrealistic goal?
There is significant opposition in Japan to bringing the reactors back online
There are also big doubts about a renaissance of nuclear energy in the East Asian country. “There is just too much happening in terms of renewable energy sources which are becoming increasingly competitive in Japan,” said Waldenberger, adding that this is already being reflected in the country’s energy mix…….
Furthermore, operators will also have to deal with the consequences of the deregulation of the Japanese energy market, which will allow consumers to switch to “green energy” from 2016. And they will also have to face the fact that they are running out of storage space for used nuclear fuel elements. Japan doesn’t even have temporary storage facilities for this purpose. http://www.dw.com/en/japan-restarts-reactor-a-nuclear-revival/a-18640138
Most Japanese oppose nuclear power restart; support drops for PM Shinzo Abe
Japan PM Abe’s support slips, majority oppose nuclear restart http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3191885/Japan-PM-Abes-support-slips-majority-oppose-nuclear-restart.html By REUTERS, 10 August 2015 TOKYO, Support for Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has slipped to just over 30 percent and a majority oppose the planned restart of a nuclear reactor that went offline after the 2011 Fukushima disaster, a poll by the Mainichi newspaper showed on Monday.
The three-point decline to 32 percent – the lowest since Abe returned to office in December 2012 – comes as voters fret over a shift in security policy that would end a ban on the military fighting overseas to defend a friendly country. That could let Japan’s troops fight abroad for the first time since World War Two.
Abe’s ratings began dropping sharply after scholars told a parliamentary panel in June the legislation would violate Japan’s post-war, pacifist constitution. Abe says the change will boost deterrence and make war less likely but critics fear Japan could get embroiled in a U.S.-led conflict.
Fifty-seven percent of respondents to the weekend survey opposed Kyushu Electric Power Co’s restart of a reactor at its Sendai plant in southwest Japan, set for Tuesday. Thirty percent supported the reboot, the first in nearly two years, which will reopen the nuclear sector.
Opposition to Abe was higher among women than men. Only 26 percent of female voters backed his government compared to 40 percent of men.
Japan’s fragmented opposition parties, however, are not benefiting from Abe’s woes. Support for the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was flat at 28 percent but that of the main opposition Democratic Party was just 9 percent.
Nor has any LDP rival so far indicated a desire to challenge Abe in a party leadership election that must be held next month. (Reporting by Linda Sieg; Editing by Alan Raybould)
Japan’s govt pursuing nuclear power, while having no effective plan for wastes
It was bureaucrats who made the plan to demand each prefecture to build it. There has been no viable explanation why each prefecture has to be responsible for the solution.
This is a typical example of negative aspect of top-down style bureaucracy in Japan
No Exit for Radioactive Wastes http://hitaku7664.blogspot.com.au/2015/08/no-exit-for-radioactive-wastes.html While Government of Japan promotes nuclear policy of resuming some nuclear power plants, the people in the area suffered from radioactive materials emitted by broken First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant are still living with great amount of contaminated soil, grass or trees. Although the government decided that those contaminated wastes should be treated by each prefecture, programs to build processing facilities are deadlocked by firm opposition by the residents. The government is facing a necessity for changing their plan.
Ministry of Environment designated radioactive waste, caused by the accident in Fukushima, with 8,000 Becquerel per kilogram or more as necessary to be under control of public sector. Concerning firm opposition from Fukushima, if those waste would be concentrated to Fukushima, the ministry decided that the disseminated waste should be processed in each prefecture.
Among five prefectures around Fukushima in need of building processing facility, Miyagi and Tochigi have been seeing strong protest of the residents. In Tochigi, although the ministry determined the place for the facility in Shioya Town, the people there organized broad movement against the plan. They pointed out fundamental contradiction of Ministry of Environment that it was building environmentally harmful facility in the place close to a water source which the ministry had formerly registered as a pure water source to be protected.
Chiba has been regarded as the place where the facility would be build first. Tokyo Electric Power Company offered an unused land in Chiba city for the facility. But, residents started protesting activities, arguing that the reason of selecting the place was unclear or liquidation caused by great earthquake would be concerned. Two thousand metric tons of radioactive waste in Chiba has still no way to go.
Now, the question is whether the decision of Ministry of Environment to process radioactive waste in each prefecture was right or wrong. The lawmakers passed a law which determined that national government would deal with radioactive waste caused by Fukushima accident. But the law did not require each prefecture to build processing facility. It was bureaucrats who made the plan to demand each prefecture to build it. There has been no viable explanation why each prefecture has to be responsible for the solution.
This is a typical example of negative aspect of top-down style bureaucracy in Japan. The key is whether bureaucrats would admit their wrong decision and change the course to plan B.
1 This Month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
of the week–London Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (152)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 