The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Report- Japans ongoing problems with the destroyed nuclear reactors in Fukushima


The molten fuel from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is unprecedented in the world and is not considered as usual radioactive waste.

26/11/2017 【Nikkei Newspaper】
The government has decided in the process chart that the “decommissioning furnace” of TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant will be completed in 30 to 40 years. However, even after six and a half years from the accident, it is uncertain evidence that they discussed the method and place of final disposal of molten fuel melted from the nuclear reactor. It is on the way to develop technologies to reliably process up to 880 tons just by emphasizing that it will take out molten fuel from 2021.

TEPCO is planning to collect molten fuel and store it on the ground first. Besides strong radiation, one of the risks is recriticality where uranium of molten fuel and others starts fission reaction again. Fear of new exposure (hibaku) comes out.

It is said that re-criticality occurs when the conditions of nuclear fission reactions are satisfied according to the positional relationship of nuclear fuels. For this reason, at Toshiba’s nuclear technology research institute, researches on storage methods using containers called “storage cans” have begun.

The storage can is a stainless steel container like a bucket whose surface shines in silver. The diameter is about 20 centimeters. Director Naoaki Okuzu, director of the International Decommissioning Research and Development Organization (IRID) Development Planning Division responsible for decommissioning technology, explains, “If it is this size the amount to enter the container will be limited, to avoid a criticality.”

It is not the end when you pack it in a storage can. If moisture remains in the molten fuel, hydrogen is generated by radiation, and the can may rupture. Devices for degassing are required. In addition to the difficulty of technological development, selection of temporary a storage place is expected to be difficult.

What is further worrying in the way of final disposal. Radioactive waste generated from nuclear power plants etc is determined for each pollution degree depth to be buried in the basement. The wastewater (nuclear waste) which has been reprocessed and spent nuclear fuel with the highest pollution level can be confined deeper underground 300 than 300 meters.

The molten fuel from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is unprecedented in the world and is not considered as usual radioactive waste.

The government and TEPCO are to consider how to dispose of it, but we have not sufficiently started the research on how to do the final disposal while preventing radiation. “Director has not appeared” including the final disposal site (person in charge of the Nuclear Regulatory Authority).

The government can not choose to think even of the final disposal site of the nuclear waste. It shows a region that can become a candidate site, and it is only beginning to be discussed by society on a nationwide basis.

In fact, it will be necessary to look for the disposal sites separately from nuclear waste for molten fuel.

Roughly translated from Japanese. Link to original source;

And for further information on how Japan is dodging the issues of nuclear waste disposal read this exclusive report by [Arclight2011]

Japans dodgy deep geological nuclear waste disposal hopes and fears 2016

The issue of definition

,,,,,,,,It would appear that the Japanese Government is trying to play down the adverse comments from the OECD/NEA report from May 2016. Awkwardly enough, The NUMO report came out in March 2016 and seemed to rely on earlier findings in an older OECD/NEA report.

Well, moving on, The main issue found was with the definition and clarity of the Japanese experts terminology in making points within the report. This issue was brought up in the earlier OECD/NEA report and the March 2016 NUMO report said that it had tackled the problem. This was not true as the May 2016 OECD/NEA report still mentions issues of clarity in definition.,,,,,,,,,

November 27, 2017 - Posted by | Uncategorized

1 Comment »

  1. This world is Satan’s world as we see it now. What we need to prepare for is what is to come. We will become despondent seeing what is happening now had we not think of what is to come for those that are like Jesus with Jesus working through us.

    Comment by artiewhitefox | November 27, 2017 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: