44 year old Mihama nuclear station, with waste disposal problem may be allowed to restart
|
Town assembly gives nod to start 44-year-old nuclear reactor, http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14031578 THE ASAHI SHIMBUN, December 18, 2020 MIHAMA, Fukui Prefecture–The town assembly here gave the green light Dec. 18 to resume operations at a nuclear power plant that has already passed its initial 40-year life span. The No. 3 reactor at the Mihama nuclear plant operated by Kansai Electric Power Co. first went online 44 years ago. The town assembly’s decision came a day after the Federation of Electric Power Companies (FEPC) of Japan submitted a proposal to the economy minister about a new initiative for joint use of an intermediate storage facility for spent nuclear fuel in Mutsu, Aomori Prefecture. Kansai Electric is keen to resume operations at the No. 3 reactor of the Mihama plant in January. The reactor has been offline for about a decade following the 2011 triple meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. Key local officials will also have to sign off on the plan, and no further decisions are anticipated before the year-end. The Takahama town assembly in November also OK’d a resumption of operations at the Takahama plant’s No. 1 and No. 2 reactors. In response to questions from The Asahi Shimbun, Takahama Mayor Yutaka Nose said he would not make a decision before year-end. Mihama Mayor Hideki Toshima also said it would be difficult to reach a decision this month. Moreover, once the mayors give their approval, the Fukui prefectural assembly and Fukui Governor Tatsuji Sugimoto must also give their consent. Only then can operations resume. Sugimoto indicated earlier that he would only give his consent if Kansai Electric submitted a plan for an intermediate storage facility for spent nuclear fuel outside of the prefecture. The FEPC proposal submitted on Dec. 17 would allow Kansai Electric to use the Mutsu facility, but it is still not certain whether the local authorities in Aomori Prefecture will agree to that idea. Joint use of the Mutsu facility would help lower hurdles facing Sugimoto in reaching a decision on the Mihama reactor, according to a source in the Fukui prefectural government. Sugimoto is not expected to announce his decision until next year. In 2016, the Nuclear Regulation Authority gave the nod to operating the Mihama reactor beyond the legally set limit of 40 years after the facility passed rigorous safety screening procedures. The only other reactor older than 40 years to be given such approval besides the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at the Takahama plant is the No. 2 Tokai plant operated by Japan Atomic Power Co. in Ibaraki Prefecture. The No. 3 reactor at the Mihama plant began operations in December 1976. Five plant workers were killed and six injured during a steam explosion at the reactor in 2004. (This article was written by Hideki Muroya and Tsunetaka Sato.) |
|
Mutsu Mayor Soichiro Miyashita made it clear that spent nuclear fuel facility will not go ahead.
|
Mayor again stands in way of plan for spent nuclear fuel, THE ASAHI SHIMBUN, December 18, 2020, Utilities have revived plans to expand the use of an intermediate storage facility for spent nuclear fuel, but immediately objections were voiced by the same mayor who quashed a similar proposal two years ago.The Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan (FEPC) on Dec. 17 formally announced that it would push forward with the plan to allow all utilities that operate nuclear power plants to use the intermediate storage facility in Mutsu, Aomori Prefecture.
Kazuhiro Ikebe, head of FEPC, met the same day with economy minister Hiroshi Kajiyama, who oversees the nuclear power industry, and presented the proposal. Kajiyama pledged his cooperation to realize the plan. However, also on Dec. 17, Mutsu Mayor Soichiro Miyashita made clear that he would never allow all utilities to use the facility, which will be operated by Recyclable-Fuel Storage Co. (RFS) starting in fiscal 2021. RFS was jointly established by Tokyo Electric Power Co. and Japan Atomic Power Co. Under the original plan, spent nuclear fuel from only those two companies will be stored at the Mutsu facility in the northern prefecture. But in 2018, Kansai Electric Power Co. indicated that it also wanted to store its spent nuclear fuel at the Mutsu facility. Kansai Electric operates nuclear power plants in Fukui, a central Japan prefecture that faces the Sea of Japan. Fukui prefectural government officials asked the utility to find a storage facility for spent nuclear fuel outside of the prefecture. When word reached Miyashita about the Kansai Electric plan, he immediately opposed, and the utility was forced to retract the proposal. Under the latest FEPC proposal, other utilities besides TEPCO and Japan Atomic Power would be able to use the Mutsu facility as long as they paid storage fees. But the real, near-term beneficiary would still be Kansai Electric……. http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14031110 |
|
Investigation of mass alterations of data on nuclear safety by Japanese company
 Japanese nuclear power firm inspected following mass data alterations https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20201214/p2a/00m/0na/012000c December 14, 2020 (Mainichi Japan) TOKYO — Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) launched an on-site inspection at the Japan Atomic Power Co.’s head office in Tokyo on Dec. 14 after it was learned earlier this year that the firm rewrote data related to safety reviews necessary to restart its Tsuruga Power Station Unit 2 in central Japan.
The nuclear watchdog will check related documents and interview Japan Atomic Power employees, based on the nuclear regulation law, through Dec. 15. It is rare for the NRA to make an on-site inspection of a company over issues related to safety reviews. At around 9:30 a.m. on Dec. 14, workers of the Secretariat of the Nuclear Regulation Authority entered the building in the capital’s Taito Ward housing the Japan Atomic Power head office. The NRA apparently plans to also conduct an inspection on the trouble-ridden power station’s No. 2 unit located in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture, depending on how the probe at the head office develops. NRA Chairman Toyoshi Fuketa has said, “We hope to clarify the Japan Atomic Power’s vision through the inspection.” Regarding Tsuruga Power Station Unit 2, it has been pointed out that there lies an active fault directly beneath the reactor building, which Japan Atomic Power has argued against, claiming that it’s not an active fault line. If it is determined that an active fault runs beneath the building, the firm will not be able to restart the power station. The NRA had temporarily halted its safety review of the Tsuruga plant’s No. 2 unit after finding 80 data alterations and deletions in documents related to the power plant’s geological condition. (Japanese original by Hisashi Tsukamoto, Science and Environment News Department) |
|
Japanese govt trying to entice people by money grants, to come and live in Fukushima
 Japan government planning grants for those willing to reside in Fukushima Prefecture, https://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0006996690, December 13, 2020
The Yomiuri ShimbunGovernment grants of up to ¥2 million will be provided next fiscal year to people who move to one of 12 municipalities surrounding the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, where meltdowns occurred following the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, according to sources. The 12 municipalities — all in Fukushima Prefecture — are Futaba, Okuma, Tomioka, Namie, Iitate, Kawamata, Minami-Soma, Katsurao, Naraha, Kawauchi, Tamura and Hirono. Next March will mark 10 years since the nuclear accident at the plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, Inc., but the population of these municipalities still hovers around 20% of the number in the basic resident register. Evacuation orders were issued at the time of the accident but have since been gradually lifted. The government aims to promote the reconstruction and revitalization of the area by not only encouraging evacuees to return, but also by getting people from outside the area to move in. The grants will be offered, likely next summer or later, to people who did not live in the 12 municipalities at the time of the 2011 accident. A family moving in from outside Fukushima Prefecture will receive ¥2 million, and a family from within the prefecture will be offered ¥1.2 million. For a single-person household, the grant will be ¥1.2 million for a newcomer to the prefecture and ¥800,000 for someone from Fukushima Prefecture. Recipients would be required to live in the region for at least five years and to have a job. People who live in the 12 municipalities and telework for firms outside the region will also be eligible for a grant. Those who start businesses within five years of moving to one of the municipalities will also receive three-quarters of the necessary expenses, with a maximum limit set at ¥4 million. The grants will be paid from resources including subsidies to accelerate the revitalization of Fukushima Prefecture, provided to the Fukushima prefectural government and the 12 local governments by the Reconstruction Agency. |
|
For safety the 40 year limit on nuclear reactor’s life should be kept
Limiting life of nuclear plants to 40 years should be continued, http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13964250?fbclid=IwAR1_ti6_xxCiBWrXIU94MSDTh6c6mKSygmlV4FVvNORcpuAJU4Cn_QCn708 November 26, 2020 Following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, new nuclear safety regulations were created to impose a 40-year limit on the operational lifespan of nuclear reactors in Japan.The rule was designed to ensure decommissioning of aging reactors that are more vulnerable to accidents and make Japanese society less dependent on nuclear power.
But a provision that allows one extension of the legal lifespan by up to 20 years in exceptional cases, introduced in response to concerns about a power shortage, has been widely exploited to gain permission to extend operations years or even decades beyond the 40-year cap.
This troubling trend should not be ignored. The original principle should be maintained.
The municipal assembly of Takahama, Fukui Prefecture, on Nov. 25 approved the restarts of the No. 1 and No. 2 reactors at Kansai Electric Power Co.’s (KEPCO) Takahama nuclear plant, which first went into service in the 1970s.
The move came four years after the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), a government agency to ensure the safety of nuclear power plants, gave the green light to plans to extend operations of these aging reactors, which went offline in 2011 following the triple meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
While the consent of the Takahama mayor, the Fukui prefectural assembly and the Fukui governor is still needed to bring the reactors back on stream, the municipal assembly’s approval is a first step toward operating a reactor that is more than 40 years old for the first time in Japan.
Behind the town assembly’s decision is the fact that the nuclear power plant has been supporting the local economy. But the move has raised the question of whether the assembly has given sufficient consideration to issues concerning the safety of local residents.
In a meeting to explain the plans to residents in Takahama held at the end of October, some attendees voiced concerns about the risk of multiple natural disasters disrupting traffic on the prefectural road designated to be used as part of the evacuation route in the event of serious accidents at the plant. There remain serious safety concerns as to the planned operations of the reactors.
Even more questionable is the government’s stance toward the issue.
Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga’s administration has vowed to reduce Japan’s reliance on nuclear power generation as much as possible by making all-out efforts to promote energy conservation and use of renewable energy sources.
But the Suga administration’s stance toward nuclear power generation is showing no notable difference from the policy of the previous government led by his predecessor, former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
The Abe administration left decisions concerning reactor restarts to the NRA and the local governments involved and didn’t hesitate to bring reactors back online once the procedures for the step were completed.
In a sign that casts doubt on the administration’s commitment to reducing nuclear power generation, a senior official at the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, an industry ministry body, has repeatedly visited the local governments of the host communities in Takahama to seek their consent for the plans.
In Fukui Prefecture, another aging reactor, the No. 3 unit of KEPCO’s Mihama nuclear power plant in Mihama, located along the coast of the Wakasa Bay, has been cleared by the NRA for operation beyond the 40-year legal lifespan. The Mihama town assembly is expected to decide on the restart in December.
KEPCO, which has been operating 11 reactors in Fukui Prefecture, including those at its Oi nuclear plant in the town of Oi, has decided to decommission four reactors at the Mihama and Oi plants. But it will still have seven reactors in service in the prefecture if the lives of three reactors are extended beyond the 40-year limit.
This means the local communities will continue being threatened by the safety risks posed by a concentration of reactors, which were underscored in a graphic way by the Fukushima calamity.
The government should demonstrate a clear commitment to scrapping aging reactors while supporting private-sector investment in renewable energy sources. It also should work with the local administrations in areas that have been dependent on nuclear plants for their economic well-being to carve out futures not dependent on atomic energy and provide policy support to their efforts to achieve the visions.
It is time for KEPCO to change its business strategy.
The utility is still halfway to its goal of regaining the public confidence that has been deeply undermined by a series of scandals including one in which company executives received gifts from a former top official at the Takahama municipal government.
The utility has promised the prefectural government to find a location outside the prefecture for an interim storage facility for spent nuclear fuel at its nuclear plants in Fukui Prefecture. But the outlook of this mission remains murky.
A responsible utility would pull the plug on the operations of aging reactors whose viability is in doubt economically as well as technologically and reinvent its business strategy accordingly.
Nuclear power industry stunned by Osaka District Court canceling central government approval for reactor restarts.
Japan Times 9th Dec 2020, A ruling Friday by the Osaka District Court canceling central government
approval for the operation of two reactors at the Oi nuclear plant run by
Kansai Electric Power Co. (Kepco), saying its calculations for standards
involving earthquake safety were flawed, has stunned the nuclear power
industry. The decision, which is the first of its kind, is likely to be
appealed and could still be overturned. But the result has resurrected
fundamental questions about nuclear power safety and the future role of the
energy source.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/12/09/national/oi-restart-ruling/
For the first time ever, a Japanese court rules against a government approval on nuclear safety
Japan court nixes approval of post-Fukushima nuclear safety steps, KYODO NEWS – Dec 4, 2020 ,
A Japanese court on Friday, for the first time, revoked the government’s approval of operating a nuclear plant under new safety regulations developed in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.
The Osaka District Court ruled in favor of about 130 plaintiffs who claimed that the Nos. 3 and 4 reactors of Kansai Electric Power Co.’s Oi nuclear plant in Fukui Prefecture are vulnerable to a major earthquake.
A Japanese court on Friday, for the first time, revoked the government’s approval of operating a nuclear plant under new safety regulations developed in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.
The Osaka District Court ruled in favor of about 130 plaintiffs who claimed that the Nos. 3 and 4 reactors of Kansai Electric Power Co.’s Oi nuclear plant in Fukui Prefecture are vulnerable to a major earthquake.
In the ruling, Presiding Judge Hajime Morikagi said the Nuclear Regulation Authority’s safety screening “has errors and flaws that should not be overlooked” as its estimates needed to factor in a potentially much larger earthquake around the plant…..
It is the first time a Japanese court has withdrawn government approval granted to a power company to operate a nuclear plant under the safety standards set in 2013 following the meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant triggered by a major earthquake and ensuing tsunami.
While the two reactors in Oi in the central Japan prefecture have been idle due to regular inspections since earlier this year, the ruling will not take effect if the NRA appeals the decision.
But the ruling may have an impact on the operations of not only the nuclear plant on the Sea of Japan coast but also other reactors in the country that went back online under the new rules…….
The utility, meanwhile, has decided to decommission the aging Nos. 1 and 2 reactors at the Oi plant. https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/12/8c717cf8568d-urgent-japan-court-nullifies-approval-of-oi-nuclear-reactor-safety-steps.html
Court ruling doubts the credibility of nuclear safetysassessments by Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority
Ruling calls for review of NRA’s nuclear reactor safety screening, http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13991979, A court ruling cast serious doubt over the credibility of safety assessments by the Nuclear Regulation Authority with regard to the operations of nuclear reactors.
The ruling called into question the safety of reactors restarted with NRA approval after being shut down in the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.
It also underscored an urgent need for a sweeping review of the nuclear regulation system as a whole.
The Osaka District Court on Dec. 3 struck down the NRA’s endorsement of safety measures for the No. 3 and No. 4 reactors at the Oi nuclear power plant in Fukui Prefecture.
It invalidated the green light the nuclear safety watchdog gave in 2017 to Kansai Electric Power Co.’s plan to restart the two reactors.
The court said the NRA’s safety assessment was not fully in accordance with new tougher nuclear safety standards introduced after the catastrophic accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant and screening guidelines based on those standards.
The ruling labeled the NRA’s decision as “unreasonable,” asserting there were “errors and deficiencies that cannot be overlooked” in the process of examining and approving anti-earthquake measures the electric utility adopted for the reactors.
In designing measures to protect a reactor against major earthquakes, the operator estimates the maximum possible ground motion generated by an earthquake around the reactor, called “reference ground motion.” It develops steps to ensure the safety of the reactor based on this estimate and requests for NRA approval for restarting the reactor.
The NRA examines the plan and determines whether the estimate is appropriate and the proposed safety measures are sufficient. It grants approval and authorization if it decides the plan meets the new safety standards.
Kansai Electric Power determined the reference ground motion by calculating the magnitude of the maximum credible earthquake based on its own assumptions concerning the length and width of faults around the reactors.
But residents of Fukui and six other prefectures filed a lawsuit to question the utility’s estimate of the reference ground motion. They argued that the utility’s estimate only represents an “average” for the spectrum of possible quakes, meaning that the safety measures are not based on the maximum strength of a possible earthquake in the area.
They cited a newly included provision in the NRA’s screening guidelines that says consideration should be given for the “variability” that arises due to the calculation methods used.
The plaintiffs claimed the NRA’s approval of the anti-quake measures was illegal because it was based on the utility’s questionable reference ground motion figure.
The government countered this argument by saying the utility’s calculation has a sufficient margin of error that makes it unnecessary to consider variability. But the court sided with the plaintiffs.
The ruling puts weight on the reasons for the NRA’s own decision to introduce the “variability” provision into the guidelines and demands that the screening process strictly follow strictly the established procedures.
The NRA should respond to the ruling by first reviewing the process of the safety screening of the two reactors at the Oi plant. It is possible that the screening of other reactors was similarly flawed. The ruling is likely to arouse anxiety among residents living in the vicinity of reactors that have been brought back online. The NRA should make a sincere and convincing response to the court decision.
The No. 3 and No. 4 reactors at the Oi plant are currently offline for regular maintenance. Debate is unnecessary in stating that the utility must not rush to restart the reactors.
Even without the triple meltdown at the Fukushima plant, it is amply obvious that this nation could be hit by unexpectedly severe natural disasters, such as earthquakes, tsunami and volcanic eruptions, at any time.
That makes it all the more important to establish nuclear power standards based on the principle of erring on the side of safety and ensure that safety screening and regulation are strictly based on the standards.
The government, which seems to be bent on restarting reactors, should take this imperative to heart.
Hokkaido’s ski areas could lose popularity, due to plans to house nuclear wastes
|
The towns of Suttsu and Kamoenai have both applied for preliminary feasibility surveys to be considered for a site that will store waste from the nation’s nuclear power plants. The cash-starved towns struggling with declining populations are poised to each pocket 2 billion yen ($19 million) promised by the government for taking part in the studies alone. Although whole selection process takes 20 years, the applications have touched off an outpouring of opposition from locals as well as from across the country, including from Hokkaido Gov. Naomichi Suzuki, who assailed the central government for “slapping the face with money.” The concern is especially palpable in the resort towns of Niseko and Kutchan, which are part of the Niseko resort area. “To outsiders, it might as well be Niseko that is undergoing a survey,” said Shinichi Maeda, an owner of a restaurant in Kutchan. “It’s possible that foreign investors who had previously valued Niseko will pull out one by one.” Suttsu is located about 40 km west of the town of Niseko, which will see no economic benefit from the study but will surely be hit by the anxiety the plan will generate………… the possibility of hosting a nuclear waste site, however remote, is enough to rail up opposition. The owner of a tourism business in Kutchan believes in local production and consumption, and uses seafood from Shiribeshi. But that may have to change. “Foreign customers are sensitive,” said the owner. “If the nuclear waste issue gains prominence, it’ll become hard to use” locally made seafood. In Japan, there is still no final repository for nuclear waste — it is stored in interim locations. After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster raised public awareness, countries across the globe have struggled to find permanent places to store the waste. When Kamoenai announced it would apply for an initial survey in October, The Associated Press reported the story with the headline “2 remote Japan towns seek to host nuclear waste storage site.” The article was carried by news outlets all over the world. Last month, five citizens groups presented the Hokkaido governor with a petition signed by 450,000 people opposing the feasibility survey for the two towns. The signatures were collected nationwide. The preliminary studies underway in the two towns are becoming an issue that could undermine tourism throughout Hokkaido……….. |
|
Court retracts NRA approval of safety measures at nuclear plan
Court retracts NRA approval of safety measures at nuclear plant, Asahi Shimbun, By TAKASHI ENDO/ Staff Writer, December 4, 2020 OSAKA--A district court struck down central government approval of safety measures at the Oi nuclear power plant in Fukui Prefecture, effectively rejecting tougher safety screening guidelines used by the Nuclear Regulation Authority.
The Osaka District Court on Dec. 4 sided with plaintiffs who argued that the safety guidelines underestimated the maximum possible movement generated by an earthquake around the No. 3 and No. 4 reactors at the plant, operated by Kansai Electric Power Co.
However, the lawsuit filed by about 130 residents who live in Fukui and six neighboring prefectures did not seek a temporary injunction, so the two reactors can continue operating until the ruling is finalized.
The tougher safety standards were adopted after the Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami caused the triple meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in 2011.
The lawsuit revolved around whether the basic earthquake ground motion figure used by Kansai Electric in its safety measures was appropriate.
Electric power companies that operate nuclear plants set their own basic earthquake ground motion figures. The NRA uses its screening guidelines to determine if the calculated figures are appropriate……..
The plaintiffs argued that this calculation method only produces an “average” for the quake scale, meaning that the safety measures are not based on the maximum strength of a possible earthquake in the area. …….
The court, however, accepted the plaintiffs’ case and ordered a retraction of the approval of the Oi plant’s safety measures.
The ruling was the fourth victory for resident plaintiffs seeking a temporary injunction or retraction of government approval. http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13989665
Japanese local governments depend on “nuclear money”
|
Japanese town’s approval of nuclear reactor restart reflects subsidy dependence , https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20201129/p2a/00m/0na/001000c 29 Nov 20, TOKYO — Japanese local governments’ dependence on “nuclear plant money” distributed by the national government was starkly highlighted recently when one town granted their approval for a reactor restart at one power plant badly damaged in the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami.
TOKYO — Japanese local governments’ dependence on “nuclear plant money” distributed by the national government was starkly highlighted recently when one town granted their approval for a reactor restart at one power plant badly damaged in the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami.
However, the Japanese government has taken measures such as changing both the subsidies’ name and their governing mechanisms after the 2011 disaster, so that local governments can still get the money even when the power plant in their jurisdiction has been off-line for long periods. At least some 115 billion yen (around $1.11 billion) has been distributed as subsides and aid from the national government to local hosts of nuclear power plants this fiscal year alone. According to the town of Onagawa, it received about 530 million yen (approximately $5.1 million) in subsidies based on the Three Power Source Development Laws in fiscal 2010, the year before the Great East Japan Earthquake. That has increased following the disaster, with subsidies reaching over 1.4 billion yen (roughly $13.5 million) in fiscal 2017 and 2018. This included payments totaling 1.08 billion yen (roughly $10.4 million) connected to two reactors at the plant in service for more than 30 years.
Onagawa’s total fiscal 2019 spending stood at 34 billion yen (roughly $327.4 million). If the fixed property taxes paid for the nuclear power plant (about 2.7 billion yen, or roughly $26 million) are added to the subsidies stemming from the Three Power Source Development Laws, money derived from the nuclear plant accounts for over 10% of the town’s annual revenue. “We are being greatly helped in terms of finance,” a municipal government official commented. Of the monies based on the Three Power Source Development Laws, Onagawa reaped about 350 million yen (about $3.37 million) more than previously in one subsidy for enhancing the area around the plants — a category designed to gain cooperation from communities hosting the plants. In fiscal 2019, the subsidies were put toward the salaries of seven local social welfare council employees (about 28 million yen, or roughly $270,000), updating a hospital’s electronic medical record system (about 77 million yen, or some $742,000), and renovating a gymnasium, tennis court and baseball field (about 240 million yen, or roughly $2.31 million), among other purposes. Such subsidies can be used for various purposes under the name of enhancing public services. According to municipal project guidelines, although there were many cases where local tax revenue accounted for around 10-20% of expenses, renovation costs for the athletic facilities were covered entirely by the subsidies. Onagawa’s situation is hardly unique. Local governments hosting nuclear power plants generally rely heavily on the large subsidies. National government policies contribute greatly to the increasing subsidies handed out even as nuclear power stations remain shuttered. The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry reviewed regulations following the nuclear disaster such that the plants would be deemed as “in operation” to a certain extent even while their reactors were off-line. Takeo Kikkawa, professor at International University of Japan, suggested that the national government “may have been distributing generous subsidies even when the plants were suspended to make it easier for local governments to approve reactor restarts.” According to the Onagawa government, reforms that allowed local bodies to receive more funding based on the years a power station has been in service was also one of the factors behind the town’s increased subsidy take. Central government figures have raised concerns over this particular change to the subsidy system, including that the economy minsitry is doing it “for its own convenience.” Furthermore, public relations and research-related subsidies received by Onagawa to cover nuclear power plant tours, information circulars and other costs, among other purposes, recovered to the same level as before the 2011 disaster (around 10 million yen annually, or roughly $96,300) since fiscal 2015. A senior official at a major electric power company commented, “Thorough PR activities are indispensable for getting reactors restarted.” It was revealed in the town’s project assessment report that a large majority of the contracts to enhance public services and conduct PR-related activities were negotiated without any competition. Once the No. 2 unit at the Onagawa nuclear station is back on-line, the town is also set to receive subsidies from the nuclear fuel tax, collected from the power company based on the nuclear plant’s performance. The community also reaps further benefits when employees of power companies, including subcontractors, frequent local eateries and other businesses during regular inspections. Hideaki Tanaka, a tax law professor at Meiji University, commented, “This nuclear plant money is an extreme example of the government’s subsidy and aid regime.” And so the town of Onagawa’s approval of the restart at their local nuclear plant could be considered inevitable, so dependent on nuclear money have host municipalities become. (Japanese original by Yuki Takahashi, Business News Department)
|
|
Fukushima nuclear reactor no.1 – debris prevented from falling into fuel storage pool
Tokyo Electric Power Company on Thursday released footage showing precautions it had taken to keep a broken crane from falling into the pool.
The crane, weighing 161 tons, has been hanging over the pool since a hydrogen explosion hit the building in March 2011. The pool is still holding nuclear fuel.
The video shows a platform being moved on rails to a spot directly under the broken part of the crane. A bag on the platform is then filled with mortar and fixed to the crane to hold it in place.
The entire process was done remotely due to high levels of radiation in the reactor building.
TEPCO plans to install a cover over the whole building before starting the removal of fuel from the pool as early as fiscal 2027.
Survey finds that most Fukushima evacuees do not intend to return
65% of Fukushima evacuees have no intention of returning home: survey https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2020/11/675982b84707-65-of-fukushima-evacuees-have-no-intention-of-returning-home-survey.html
KYODO NEWS Osaka, Sixty-five percent of the people who evacuated from Fukushima Prefecture after the March 2011 nuclear disaster have no intention of returning, according to a recent survey conducted by a Japanese university.
While the survey, conducted by a research facility at Kwansei Gakuin University, only received responses from 522 of 4,876 people to whom questionnaires were sent, it provided a rare insight into how former residents see the reconstruction of their former home.
The government of the northeastern prefecture has not carried out such surveys in recent years. There were over 36,900 evacuees within and outside the prefecture as of October, according to the prefectural government.
Among the 522 respondents who resided in the prefecture at the time of the nuclear meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant triggered by the massive quake and ensuing tsunamis, 341 people said they do not intend to return.
According to the survey conducted between July and September, 138 people said they plan to go back and 43 people did not answer or offer a valid response.
In response to a multiple-choice question asking why they have not returned to their homes, 46.1 percent said they still fear contamination of the environment, followed by 44.8 percent who said they have settled down in places they currently live.
Destructive potential of over a million tons of radioactive water into the Pacific
Almost Unnoticed Nuclear Pandemic Is Spreading in Japan, https://indepthnews.net/index.php/the-world/asia-pacific/3967-almost-unnoticed-nuclear-pandemic-is-spreading-in-japanBy Manlio Dinucci, MONTREAL (IDN) 4 Nov 20, – It was not Covid-19, therefore the news went almost unnoticed: Japan will release over a million tons of radioactive water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant into the sea. The catastrophic incident in Fukushima was triggered by the Tsunami that struck the north-eastern coast of Japan on March 11, 2011, submerging the power plant and causing the core of three nuclear reactors to melt.The power plant was built on the coast just 4 meters above sea level with five-meter-high breakwater dams, in a tsunami-prone area with waves 10-15 meters high. Furthermore, there had been serious failures by the private company TEPCO (the Tokyo Electric Power Company) managing the plant, in the control of the nuclear plant: the safety devices did not come into operation at the time of the Tsunami.
Water has been pumped through the reactors for years to cool the molten fuel. The water became radioactive and was stored inside the plant in over a thousand large tanks, accumulating 1.23 million tons of radioactive water. TEPCO is building other tanks, but they will also be full by mid-2022.
TEPCO must continue pumping water into the melted reactors and has decided to discharge, in agreement with the government, the water accumulated so far into the sea after filtering it to make it less radioactive (however, to what extent it is not known) with a process which will last 30 years. There is also radioactive sludge accumulated in the decontamination filters of the plant, stored in thousands of containers, and huge quantities of soil and other radioactive materials.
As TEPCO admitted, the melting in reactor 3 is particularly serious because the reactor was loaded with Mox, a much more unstable and radioactive mix of uranium oxides and plutonium.
The Mox for this reactor and other Japanese ones was produced in France, using nuclear waste sent from Japan. Greenpeace has denounced the danger deriving from the transport of this plutonium fuel for ten thousand kilometres.
Greenpeace also denounced that Mox favours the proliferation of nuclear weapons, since plutonium can be extracted more easily and, in the cycle of uranium exploitation, there is no clear dividing line between civilian and military use of fissile material.
Up to now, around 240 tons of plutonium for direct military use and 2,400 tons for civil use (nuclear weapons can however be produced with them), were accumulated in the world (according to 2015 estimates), plus about 1,400 tons of highly enriched uranium for military use. A few hundred kilograms of plutonium would be enough to cause lung cancer to 7.7 billion inhabitants of the planet, and plutonium remains lethal for a period corresponding to almost ten-thousand human generations.
A destructive potential has thus accumulated, for the first time in history, capable of making the human species disappear from the face of Earth. The nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; the more than 2,000 experimental nuclear explosions in the atmosphere, at sea and underground; the manufacture of nuclear warheads with a power equivalent to over one million Hiroshima bombs; the numerous accidents involving nuclear weapons and those involving civilian and military nuclear plants, all this has caused radioactive contamination that has affected hundreds of millions of people.
A portion of approximately 10 million annual cancer deaths worldwide – documented by WHO – is attributable to the long-term effects of radiation. In ten months, again according to the World Health Organization data, Covid-19 caused about 1.2 million deaths worldwide.
This danger should not be underestimated, but it does not justify the fact that mass media, especially television, did not inform that over one million tons of radioactive water will be discharged into the sea from the Fukushima nuclear power plant, with the result that it will further increase cancer deaths upon entering in the food chain.
Resident against Japanese nuclear reactor OK’d for restart says safe evacuation impossible
Former fisherman Yukitoshi Watanabe maintains that resuming operation of Tohoku Electric Power Co.’s Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant would be dangerous. In the Yoriisohama district of Ishinomaki, Miyagi Prefecture, as seen in this photo taken on Oct. 21, 2020, many signs protesting nuclear power have been set up by groups comprising youth in the community.
November 12, 2020
ISHINOMAKI, Miyagi — While the governor of Miyagi Prefecture, where the Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant is located, gave “local consent” on Nov. 11 to the restart of a reactor at the plant, those who live in the area remain anxious as local municipalities’ evacuation plans in the case of a major incident are said to be insufficient by residents and local assemblies alike.
The go-ahead to resume the operation of a reactor at Tohoku Electric Power Co.’s Onagawa nuclear power station came after Miyagi Gov. Yoshihiro Murai attended a meeting with the mayors of the Miyagi prefectural town of Onagawa and city of Ishinomaki, which the plant straddles.
About 1 kilometer away from the Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant is Ishinomaki’s Yoriisohama district, where residences surround a fishing harbor. Three aging signs that are set up alongside the one road that links the district to the outside world declare objections to nuclear power. They were put up by an organization of youth and others in the district.
Yukitoshi Watanabe, 80, is a former local fisherman who participated in an anti-nuclear demonstration by boat more than 40 years ago when the community wavered between hosting a nuclear power plant or not.
“Despite the incident at Daiichi Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, in 10 years we’re back to where we were. The evacuation plan is absolutely unrealistic, and escaping safely is impossible,” Watanabe said angrily.
In August of this year, the Miyagi Prefectural Government invited officials from the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), the Cabinet Office, and Tohoku Electric Power Co., and held sessions for residents to inform them of safety measures and evacuation plans that would be put into place. During the question-and-answer session, Watanabe raised his hand and asked, “Are you able to keep your head held high and tell your children and grandchildren (about restarting a nuclear reactor)?”
Including his great-grandchild, who is about to turn a year old, Watanabe lives in a family of 10 people spanning four generations. Living in the Yoriisohama district, which sticks out further east into the Pacific Ocean than the nuclear power plant, there’s no way to evacuate on land except by heading in the direction of the plant. It is unclear whether the national or prefectural government will build and maintain a highly safe evacuation route, and Watanabe says, “(An evacuation) route should be a prerequisite for deciding whether to restart the nuclear plant, and it shouldn’t have to be the local community’s responsibility to build one.”
Watanabe is considering a possible evacuation by boat, if such a measure is needed. He knows the dangers of the ocean, but he is more scared of his children and grandchildren being exposed to radiation.
“If something happens, we will have to leave this land, where our family has lived for generations, and fishing, and our home, throwing our hands up in despair. We must not leave any fears or anxieties to the future.”
(Japanese original by Nobuyuki Hyakutake, Ishinomaki Local Bureau)
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 (114)
- 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 