Secrecy in proceedings of Japan nuclear regulator about Kansai Electric’s three nuclear power plants
Japan nuclear regulator effectively made safety measure decision behind closed doors, https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20200104/p2a/00m/0na/013000c, January 4, 2020 (Mainichi Japan) TOKYO — Decisions were effectively made at a closed-door pre-meeting hearing about Kansai Electric Power Co. at the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), prompting experts to argue that closed-door pre-meeting hearings have effectively become the body’s decision-making organ, and that the NRA’s actions violate the Public Records and Archives Management Act.
In December 2018, at a preliminary hearing of a meeting in which the NRA was to decide on countermeasures against volcanic ash that it would require from Kansai Electric Power Co. (KEPCO) for its nuclear power plants, the NRA slashed one of two proposals that had come up. The organization, however, did not create minutes of the preliminary hearing in which this occurred, and collected and disposed of documents distributed to the participants.
At a public meeting held six days later, the NRA presented the remaining proposal and approved it — as if the other proposal had never existed. Meanwhile, the NRA claims that all decision-making is done at committee meetings.
In December 2018, at a preliminary hearing of a meeting in which the NRA was to decide on countermeasures against volcanic ash that it would require from Kansai Electric Power Co. (KEPCO) for its nuclear power plants, the NRA slashed one of two proposals that had come up. The organization, however, did not create minutes of the preliminary hearing in which this occurred, and collected and disposed of documents distributed to the participants.
At a public meeting held six days later, the NRA presented the remaining proposal and approved it — as if the other proposal had never existed. Meanwhile, the NRA claims that all decision-making is done at committee meetings.
Kansai Electric’s three nuclear power plants — Takahama, Oi, and Mihama — had obtained authorization for its nuclear reactors according to new standards instituted in response to the March 2011 meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear station. Some researchers, however, had pointed out that the amount of volcanic ash that would be generated in the event of an eruption at Mount Daisen in Tottori Prefecture, western Japan, had been underestimated. At an open meeting on Nov. 21, 2018, the NRA agreed, and was deliberating how to handle the authorization it had already given Kansai Electric.
The Mainichi Shimbun obtained a document that had been distributed to participants of the pre-meeting hearing in December 2018 titled “Procedures for using the new findings to have (KEPCO) apply for authorization of nuclear reactors (proposals)” from a source connected to the case. “Notes for discussion” was printed at the top right-hand side of the sheet of paper, along with a chart showing possible procedures for two proposals: 1. Swiftly prompt an application through written instruction, and 2. Order a re-evaluation of estimated volcanic ash volume. According to the source, the discussion in the pre-meeting hearing was based on this document, and participants made the decision to go with proposal 2.
Both proposals 1 and 2 ultimately seek that the utility apply for authorization. But the document says that while proposal 1 means that the NRA has determined that the nuclear reactors would fail to meet standards, proposal 2 means that the NRA will have not gone so far as to make a decision until it accepted KEPCO’s re-evaluation. If the NRA determined that a reactor did not meet standards, it was possible that calls for a stop to the project may have spread.
According to the NRA Secretariat’s public relations department, the pre-meeting hearings are called “chairman lectures,” in which the NRA Secretariat’s administrative staff explain the contents of documents to the NRA chairman. A total of 11 people, including Chairman Toyoshi Fuketa; Akira Ishiwatari, who is in charge of volcanic ash issues; then secretary-general Masaya Yasui; and then deputy secretary-general and current secretary-general, Toru Ogino, participated in a pre-meeting hearing held on Dec. 6, 2018.
As for the reason that no minutes of the meeting were taken, an NRA Secretariat PR representative explained, “It was a brainstorming session in which participants spoke freely about the issues and their views, and in which no conclusion was drawn. The session does not correspond to a decision-making process as defined in the Public Records and Archives Management Act.”
At the public meeting held Dec. 12, only proposal 2 was presented, and all five commissioners agreed to it. In March 2019, Kansai Electric submitted a report that raised the maximum estimated amount of volcanic ash to about twice that of the original volume. However, because the utility showed no intention of applying for authorization, the NRA ordered an application that June.
(Japanese original by Kosuke Hino, Tokyo Bureau, and Ryuji Tanaka, Special Reports Department)
Fukushima Reactor Cleanup Delayed by Five Years as Japanese Public Demands End to Nuclear Energy
The removal of the spent fuel was planned to begin in 2023, but the process was bumped back to 2024 at the earliest for the plant’s No. 1 reactor and 2027 or later for the No. 2 reactor.
According to the Japan Times, the government claims this aspect of the clean-up is being delayed due to safety concerns and that it plans to construct barriers around the reactors to prevent the spread of radioactive dust.
Reporting on the delay comes days after the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry proposed releasing contaminated water from the plant into the ocean or allowing it to evaporate, and weeks after the ministry said the water contained higher levels of radioactive material than previously thought.
The most recent news about the cleanup process—which is under a 30-40 year plan following the 2011 earthquake and tsunami which forced more than 100,000 residents to evacuate the rural Fukushima region to avoid nuclear contamination from the plant—raised alarm among critics of nuclear power.
The Japanese public has reportedly grown increasingly anti-nuclear power since the Fukushima disaster, according to an Al Jazeera report earlier this month.
“Japanese people’s sentiment changed after Fukushima Daiichi and it is continuing until now,” Hajime Matsukubo, secretary-general of the Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center, told Al Jazeera. “They say no.”
In a 2015 poll by the Japan Atomic Energy Relations Organization, only 10 percent of Japanese respondents said the country should maintain its use of nuclear energy.
Further delay in removal of spent nuclear fuel at Fukushima No. 1
  Removal of spent nuclear fuel at Fukushima No. 1 delayed up to five years https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/12/27/national/spent-nuclear-fuel-fukushima-daiichi-delay/#.XgZtU0czbIU KYODO, DEC 27, 2019
The government decided Friday to delay the removal of spent fuel from the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant’s Nos. 1 and 2 reactors by up to five years, casting doubt on whether it can stick to its time frame for dismantling the crippled complex.
The process of removing the spent fuel from the units’ pools had previously been scheduled to begin in fiscal 2023. In its latest decommissioning plan, the government said the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc., will not begin the roughly two-year process at the No. 1 unit at least until fiscal 2027 and may wait until fiscal 2028. Work at the No. 2 unit is now slated to start between fiscal 2024 and fiscal 2026, it said. The delay is necessary to take further safety precautions, such as the construction of an enclosure around the No. 1 unit to prevent the spread of radioactive dust and the decontamination of the No. 2 unit, the government said. It is the fourth time it has revised its schedule for removing the spent fuel rods. It’s a very difficult process and it’s hard to know what to expect. The most important thing is the safety of the workers and the surrounding area,” industry minister Hiroshi Kajiyama told a news conference. The government set a new goal of finishing the removal of the 4,741 spent fuel rods across all six of the plant’s reactors by fiscal 2031. Tepco has started the process at the No. 3 unit and already finished at the No. 4 unit, which was off-line for regular maintenance at the time of the disaster. A schedule has yet to be set for the Nos. 5 and 6 reactors. While the government maintained its overarching time frame of finishing the decommissioning of the plant 30 to 40 years from the 2011 crisis triggered by a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami, there may be further delays. The government said it will begin removing fuel debris in fiscal 2021 from the three reactors that experienced core meltdowns, starting with the No. 2 unit. The process, considered the most difficult part of the decommissioning plan, will involve using a robot arm to initially remove small amounts of debris, and later take out larger amounts. The government also said it will aim to reduce the pace at which contaminated water at the plant increases. Water for cooling the melted cores, mixed with underground water, amounts to around 170 tons per day. That number will be reduced to 100 tons by 2025, it said. The water is being treated to remove the most radioactive materials and stored in tanks on the plant’s grounds, but already more than 1 million tons have been collected and space is expected to run out by the summer of 2022. |
|
No to nuclear: Japan wants reactors phased out, post-Fukushima
Japan is less reliant on atomic energy, but concerns are growing about its return to climate-damaging fossil fuels.
Japan’s anti-nuclear movement grew rapidly after the Fukushima disaster. Experts doubt that the country’s nuclear plants will ever generate the same levels of energy as they once did.
December 20, 2019
Tokyo, Japan – At the end of a decade in which northeastern Japan was devastated by a tsunami that triggered a nuclear disaster at Fukushima, atomic energy looks unlikely to make a comeback.
In the nearly nine years following the world’s worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl, the country’s reliance on atomic power for electricity generation has plummeted to between 3 and 5 percent from about 30 percent before the disaster, according to the Tokyo-based Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center.
And despite a period of uncertainty in the immediate aftermath of the meltdowns triggered when Fukushima’s cooling systems were overwhelmed by the tsunami created by the magnitude 9.0 undersea earthquake, the world’s third-largest economy has shown it can function with radically less nuclear power.
The public mood turned dramatically after Fukushima and the national trauma that ensued and combined with the increasing costs from aligning ageing plants with stringent post-disaster safety requirements, it is unlikely the nuclear industry will return to previous levels, according to experts, even as the government envisions nuclear power accounting for about 20-22 percent of electricity generation in 2030.
“It is obvious that it is very difficult to meet this target,” said Hajime Matsukubo, secretary-general of the Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center.
And while experts say while the anti-nuclear movement may seem to have quietened down, anti-nuclear feeling is firmly entrenched.
‘They say no’
“Japanese people’s sentiment (has) changed after Fukushima Daiichi and it is continuing until now,” said Matsukubo, whose non-profit organisation was established in 1975 by concerned atomic scientists to gather and publicise nuclear information and raise public awareness on the industry.
He said that even if people appear not as focused, if they are asked pointedly if they agree with nuclear power: “They say no.”
The Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant avoided the disaster at Fukushima, two-and-a-half hours’ drive south, and the government has said its No 2 reactor could be up-and-running by late next year
Before Fukushima, Japan had 54 operational reactors and for a brief time in the accident’s aftermath, not a single one was in operation. So far, nine have been restarted and authorities are considering the cases of a dozen more, according to Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry figures. A further 24 are either under decommissioning or lined up for it.
Late last month, regulators gave initial approval for the restart of a reactor at the facility closest to the epicentre of the March 2011 quake. The No 2 reactor at the Onagawa nuclear plant could be running again late next year if further conditions are met. Onagawa was damaged in the double disaster, where the tsunami wave rose as high as 13 metres, but avoided Fukushima’s catastrophic meltdowns.
Japan imports nearly all its crude oil and natural gas. Underscoring such dependency, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told a nationally televised news conference in 2016 that the nation could not “do without” nuclear power.
But Shinjiro Koizumi, minister for the environment and nuclear issues and the son of anti-nuclear former prime minister Junichiro Koizumi, said after his appointment in September that the country needed to wean itself off the atom.
“We will be doomed if we let nuclear accidents recur,” he said, according to Kyodo News.
Safety costs
Japan’s mass-circulation newspaper Mainichi Shimbun in an editorial after the Onagawa decision cited the newspaper’s own research that found 11 top power suppliers had spent in excess of 5 trillion yen ($45.7bn) on nuclear safety since Fukushima.
“As costs balloon, it is becoming increasingly difficult, even absurd, for the government and power companies to maintain the argument that nuclear power is ‘cheap’,” the editorial said.
“The more thoroughly safe the plants become, the more time and money is needed,” it continued. “We must ask, then: is it realistic to press on with the safety upgrade and reactor restart policy? We cannot dispel our suspicions that the answer is, in fact, ‘no’.”
Japan has clearly shown it can function on less nuclear-generated power, but the shift has come at a cost: an increasing reliance on fossil-fuel alternatives such as coal, oil and natural gas. And with concerns over climate change intensifying, that is drawing international attention.
“I’m very much aware of the challenges of Fukushima to the Japanese electrical sector,” said Paul Simpson, CEO of London-based non-profit CDP, which runs a global disclosure system that aids investors, companies and local governments in managing their environmental footprint.
Simpson, speaking at a forum on decarbonisation in Tokyo last month, stressed that coal was simply no longer an option and countries still using it must search for alternatives, citing Germany’s plan for no new coal use by 2040.
Alternative energies
“Japan needs to find a transition pathway from this, and I know this is challenging,” he said. “But coal is socially unacceptable … from a climate-risk perspective but also from an air pollution perspective.”
Customers browse in a Tokyo shop that specialises in products from Fukushima
According to Matsukubo, about 30 percent of Japan’s electricity generation comes from coal and 43 percent from natural gas. And the country has moved to build new coal-fired power plants since Fukushima.
“It’s disastrous,” Matsukobo said, stressing that Japan needs to move to renewable sources of energy; an area in which Simpson also pointed out Japan is lagging, even though the government has promised to increase the country’s use of renewables by 2030.
There was always some ambivalence about atomic energy in Japan – the only country to suffer a nuclear weapon attack when the United States dropped bombs on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the closing days of World War II.
Pope Francis, visiting Japan in November, surprised no one when he condemned nuclear weapons. But the pontiff, the first to venture to the country since 1981, went so far as to suggest that nuclear energy itself was a problem.
“I have a personal opinion: I wouldn’t use nuclear energy until it is totally safe to use,” the leader of the world’s 1.3 billion Roman Catholics said in comments to reporters during his flight back to Rome from Tokyo, Kyodo reported.
Ramping down
Alexander Brown, who has studied the anti-nuclear protest movement in Japan, said that because Japan had supported atomic power for so long, there was a sense of inertia despite post-Fukushima opposition, ageing infrastructure and the remote chance of new reactors getting the green light.
“There’s a sort of built-in time limit to how long the industry as a whole can continue,” said Brown, currently a Japan Society for the Promotion of Science international research fellow at Japan Women’s University.
He also emphasised, however, that Japan’s turn against nuclear energy had also coincided with a key change in its domestic economy; less industrially robust and therefore not as hungry for energy as before.
“Why have the lights stayed on,” Brown asked rhetorically. “One is, yes, increased fossil fuel use, but another is there’s just less demand than there was in the peak time of manufacturing onshore in Japan.”
Brown calls that an “uncomfortable truth” for much of Japan’s ruling establishment – including the prime minister and his eponymous “Abenomics” economic revitalisation programme – which clings to a belief in a model of vigorous growth.
“And I think one of the amazing things when I look at the anti-nuclear movement, to me, was it was full of people looking at what are other ways that we can live,” he said.
“How can we embrace other values other than high consumption, high pollution, extreme overwork and look at things like de-growth economics.”
Toshiba warns it may not continue as ‘going concern‘
Tepco (once again) saying they will put a giant cover over Fukushima No.1 reactor
|
Fukushima Daiichi No.1 reactor to be covered, https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20191220_12/ The operator of the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant says it will install a giant cover over one of the reactors that underwent a nuclear meltdown as part of its dismantling process.Tokyo Electric Power Company announced the decision on Thursday regarding the No.1 reactor building, which was affected by the 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
The covering will measure 65 meters high, 65 meters long and 50 meters wide. Its ceiling will have cranes that can be used to remove debris. The reactor’s fuel storage pool still holds 392 nuclear fuel units. As part of their removal process, TEPCO is clearing scattered debris from the building. TEPCO says that by installing the cover, it aims to lower the risks of radioactive dust spreading outside during the debris removal process. It added that the device will also prevent rainwater from getting into the reactor building, thereby helping to reduce the volume of newly contaminated water. TEPCO says it cannot tell when the device will be completed, as it is still in the process of making a detailed construction plan. |
|
The Japanese want to phase out nuclear power
|
No to nuclear: Japan wants reactors phased out, post-Fukushima
Japan is less reliant on atomic energy, but concerns are growing about its return to climate-damaging fossil fuels. Aljazeera, by Kelly Olsen -20 Dec 19, Tokyo, Japan – At the end of a decade in which northeastern Japan was devastated by a tsunami that triggered a nuclear disaster at Fukushima, atomic energy looks unlikely to make a comeback. In the nearly nine years following the world’s worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl, the country’s reliance on atomic power for electricity generation has plummeted to between 3 and 5 percent from about 30 percent before the disaster, according to the Tokyo-based Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center. And despite a period of uncertainty in the immediate aftermath of the meltdowns triggered when Fukushima’s cooling systems were overwhelmed by the tsunami created by the magnitude 9.0 undersea earthquake, the world’s third-largest economy has shown it can function with radically less nuclear power. The public mood turned dramatically after Fukushima and the national trauma that ensued and combined with the increasing costs from aligning ageing plants with stringent post-disaster safety requirements, it is unlikely the nuclear industry will return to previous levels, according to experts, even as the government envisions nuclear power accounting for about 20-22 percent of electricity generation in 2030. “It is obvious that it is very difficult to meet this target,” said Hajime Matsukubo, secretary-general of the Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center. And while experts say while the anti-nuclear movement may seem to have quietened down, anti-nuclear feeling is firmly entrenched. ‘They say no’“Japanese people’s sentiment (has) changed after Fukushima Daiichi and it is continuing until now,” said Matsukubo, whose non-profit organisation was established in 1975 by concerned atomic scientists to gather and publicise nuclear information and raise public awareness on the industry. He said that even if people appear not as focused, if they are asked pointedly if they agree with nuclear power: “They say no.” Before Fukushima, Japan had 54 operational reactors and for a brief time in the accident’s aftermath, not a single one was in operation. So far, nine have been restarted and authorities are considering the cases of a dozen more, according to Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry figures. A further 24 are either under decommissioning or lined up for it….. Safety costsJapan’s mass-circulation newspaper Mainichi Shimbun in an editorial after the Onagawa decision cited the newspaper’s own research that found 11 top power suppliers had spent in excess of 5 trillion yen ($45.7bn) on nuclear safety since Fukushima. “As costs balloon, it is becoming increasingly difficult, even absurd, for the government and power companies to maintain the argument that nuclear power is ‘cheap’,” the editorial said…….. “There’s a sort of built-in time limit to how long the industry as a whole can continue,” said Alexander Brown, currently a Japan Society for the Promotion of Science international research fellow at Japan Women’s University. He also emphasised, however, that Japan’s turn against nuclear energy had also coincided with a key change in its domestic economy; less industrially robust and therefore not as hungry for energy as before. “Why have the lights stayed on,” Brown asked rhetorically. “One is, yes, increased fossil fuel use, but another is there’s just less demand than there was in the peak time of manufacturing onshore in Japan.” Brown calls that an “uncomfortable truth” for much of Japan’s ruling establishment – including the prime minister and his eponymous “Abenomics” economic revitalisation programme – which clings to a belief in a model of vigorous growth. “And I think one of the amazing things when I look at the anti-nuclear movement, to me, was it was full of people looking at what are other ways that we can live,” he said. “How can we embrace other values other than high consumption, high pollution, extreme overwork and look at things like de-growth economics.” https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/japanese-turn-nuclear-decade-wrought-fukushima-191220000003532.html |
|
Safety costs increase for Tokai No. 2 nuclear plant
Contractors want 70 billion yen more for safety at nuclear plant http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201912170067.html By TAKASHI ICHIDA/ Senior Staff Writer, December 17, 2019 TOKAI, Ibaraki Prefecture–-Costs to safeguard the Tokai No. 2 nuclear plant here will run at least 70 billion yen ($642 million) more than the plant operator’s estimate, raising the likelihood that consumers will get stuck covering the difference through their power bills.Japan Atomic Power Co. (JAPC) is seeking to restart the plant, idled since the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, as soon as possible to secure much-needed revenue by selling power from it to electric utilities.
The plant operator has been negotiating with leading general contractors over the cost of work to increase safety at the single-reactor plant along the coast of Ibaraki Prefecture. It aims to ink contracts for the work by March 2020. But the difference over the cost between the two sides has rarely narrowed.
Construction of a 20-meter-tall seawall and an emergency facility to protect the plant from possible tsunami and other natural disasters are among the protective measures scheduled.
In October 2018, the Nuclear Regulation Authority approved the plan to implement the measures under more stringent regulations that went into force in July 2013 after the triple meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant.
JAPC estimated that the project would cost 174 billion yen, according to officials at some construction companies.
Six major general contractors–Kajima Corp., Taisei Corp., Obayashi Corp., Shimizu Corp., Hazama Ando Corp. and Penta-Ocean Construction Co.–were asked to give quotes for each portion of the project. Only one company will be chosen for each portion.
Their quotes, all submitted by around November 2018, pegged the overall cost at least 250 billion yen more than JAPC envisaged.
The plant operator is also required to build a facility to respond to a possible terror attack, estimated at costing 61 billion yen, bringing the overall cost to protect the plant to more than 300 billion yen.
The ballooning price tag is blamed on a spike in the cost of civil engineering materials, machine tools and workers, according to officials familiar with the matter.
The plant operator urged contractors to rethink their estimates, but they refused, maintaining that the higher price was inevitable in order to complete the project on time.
With JAPC’s self-imposed March deadline to conclude contracts fast approaching, industry analysts say the operator will likely give in to the contractors’ demands.
In October, five regional electric utilities, including Tokyo Electric Power Co. and Tohoku Electric Power Co., which used to purchase electricity from JAPC, announced they would increase financial support to the company to 350 billion yen from the 300 billion yen they pledged in March.
The rise is attributed to a surge in the costs for the seawall and emergency facility.
JAPC and the six contractors declined to comment when asked by The Asahi Shimbun to provide more details of specific cost overruns.
Japan’s major electric power companies usually directly select individual contractors for projects and do not open contracts for bidding.
Under such contracts, disparities between estimates and final costs rarely emerge.
An official at one of the power companies who is familiar with the matter called the 70 billion yen cost overrun “extremely unusual.”
JAPC maintains that its initial 174 billion yen estimate is more than adequate for contractors to complete the work.
But an official at one of the construction companies accused the power company of low-balling the amount needed for the project.
An official close to a utility financially supporting JAPC said the operator should have contractors compete for each project segment and require them to submit estimates.
The Tokai No. 2 nuclear plant started operations in 1978. The Nuclear Regulation Authority authorized a 20-year extension on the reactor’s life in November 2018.
Fukushima Unit 3 Spent Fuel Damage Identified
Fukushima Unit 3 Spent Fuel Damage Identified, Simply Info [excellent photos], December 16, 2019
TEPCO has identified twelve fuel assemblies with damaged lifting handles. Further damage can not be identified at this point as the assemblies are still in the fuel racks in the spent fuel pool. The location of the newer 6 damaged assemblies are from the location where the fuel handling crane and a concrete hatch fell into the pool…. http://www.simplyinfo.org/?p=17842
Tohoku reactor restart: What is the state of Japan’s nuclear policy?
Their contempt for the Japanese’ public’s will and the health and well being of people, animals, plants, oceans, rivers, lakes, genetic pools and the economies of the northern hemisphere is appalling. Abe, LDP, nuke industry, anyone that’s pro-nuke.’
Members of the government’s expert panel inspect Tohoku Electric Power Co.’s Onagawa nuclear power plant in Miyagi Prefecture in April.
Dec 9, 2019
OSAKA – In late November, the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) gave the green light for restarting the No. 2 reactor at Tohoku Electric Power Co.’s Onagawa plant in Miyagi Prefecture, which had been damaged in the March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami. The announcement once again put the spotlight on the country’s nuclear power policy, not only in Tohoku but nationwide.
Why did the Onagawa restart attract so much attention?
While the Onagawa plant is actually the second damaged on 3/11, after the Tokai No. 2 power station in Ibaraki Prefecture, to pass the NRA’s new safety regulations for nuclear power plants prepared after the disaster, it happens to be the nuclear plant closest to the epicenter of the magnitude 9 quake that struck off the Tohoku coast that day.
The Onagawa facility is located near Ishinomaki, which received extensive damage and much domestic and international media attention after the tsunami claimed the lives of 74 Okawa Elementary School students.
In addition, the Onagawa reactor, which was flooded on 3/11, is the first boiling water reactor to have its restart application approved by the NRA.
There are three kinds of nuclear reactors in operation in Japan: 14 pressured water reactors (PWRs), four advanced boiling water reactors (ABWRs) and 13 boiling water reactors (BWRs), which are the same kind as those at the Fukushima No. 1 plant destroyed by the 3/11 quake and tsunami. The PWRs are considered more technologically stable than the other kinds, and have a better ability to contain radiation.
Now that the NRA has greenlighted Onagawa’s restart, does that mean it will happen anytime soon?
That depends on a number of factors. The Onagawa plant is not ready to be fired up tomorrow. It must first complete the installation of various anti-disaster measures, including a 29-meter-high, 800-meter-long seawall along the Pacific coast to guard against tsunami as high as 23.1 meters. That will not be completed until sometime in fiscal 2020, which begins April 1.
Furthermore, various local governments, including Ishinomaki and Miyagi Prefecture, will have to give their consent to the restart. That could involve long, drawn out negotiations between the utility and local residents and politicians. It’s also probable that lawyers and local citizens opposed to a restart will seek a court injunction to halt the move based on safety concerns. If a court approves an injunction, that will create further delays.
How many other nuclear power plants are there and what are their statuses?
As of this month, there are nine reactors officially in operation. Four belong to Kansai Electric Power Co. (Kepco), which provides electricity mainly to Kyoto, Osaka, Nara, Hyogo, Shiga and Wakayama prefectures. Another four belong to Kyushu Electric Power Co. One of Shikoku Electric Power Co.’s reactors at its Ikata plant is also operating.
Another six reactors have made improvements to meet the new, post-3/11 quake safety standards and have received NRA approval to restart. These include two reactors at Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings’ Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in Niigata Prefecture, two of the four reactors at Kepco’s Takahama plant (the other two are in operation) in Fukui Prefecture, one reactor at Kepco’s Mihama plant (the other two have been decommissioned), also in Fukui Prefecture, and one reactor at Japan Atomic Power Co.’s Tokai No. 2 plant in Ibaraki Prefecture. The other reactor at the facility has been decommissioned.
Nearly a dozen reactors are now in the process of undergoing safety reviews and will have to upgrade their facilities to meet tougher NRA standards for disaster preparedness, and then, if they receive approval to restart, will go through the process of obtaining local consent.
These include reactors in Hokkaido, Aomori, Shizuoka, Ishikawa, Fukui and Shimane prefectures.
Finally, another nine reactors have not applied to be restarted under the new regulations, and 24 reactors, including all six Fukushima No. 1 plant reactors and all four Fukushima No. 2 plant reactors, as well as four of Kepco’s 11 reactors in Fukui Prefecture, are being decommissioned.
How much electricity does nuclear power provide?
Figures vary, sometimes greatly, depending on how many plants in operation were shut down for inspection during a particular year. The latest figures from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry’s Agency for Natural Resources show that in 2017, nuclear power provided 3.1 percent of Japan’s electricity. The Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies, a nonprofit research institute, estimates that based on its own surveys of utilities, nuclear provided 4.7 percent of Japan’s electricity last year.
What about the future for nuclear power in Japan?
The government’s long-term energy policy for 2030 calls for nuclear power to make up around 20 to 22 percent of the nation’s energy mix, and it is pushing hard for the restart of as many idled reactors as possible. By then, the plan calls for renewable energy to account for 22 to 24 percent of the mix, LNG to make up 27 percent, coal 26 percent and oil 3 percent.
But the obstacles to restarting, or continuing to operate, nuclear plants in the coming years are vast. In addition to local opposition that could delay restarts for months or years, costing the utilities money, they include such issues as the economics of running reactors past 40 years, for which the utilities must first spend money to upgrade their facilities in order to meet new NRA standards regarding reactors older than four decades.
While Kepco has secured permission to operate three reactors already over 40 years old for another two decades at the most, other utilities with reactors currently more than 30 years old — such as Tepco’s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa No. 1 reactor (34 years old) — will have to decide within a few years whether it’s worth the investment of money and time to apply for a two-decade extension or whether it’s cheaper to decommission.
A second problem has to do with spent nuclear fuel generated by the restarted reactors.
Tokyo is making efforts to find local governments able and willing to have a midterm spent fuel storage facility built in their backyard, and has agreed to offer financial incentives for anyone willing to accept a facility. No luck so far. Meanwhile, in Fukui Prefecture, which has the largest concentration of reactors (13 commercial reactors plus the Monju experimental fast-breeder reactor) in the nation, Gov. Tatsuji Sugimoto is insisting that such storage facilities be built outside the prefecture. His position could lead to other prefectures hosting nuclear power plants to take a firmer stance with utilities and the central government over what to do with spent nuclear fuel when they come seeking local consent for their own restart plans.
Analysis of decontamination of irradiated soil of Fukushima area
Fukushima: Lessons learned from an extraordinary case of soil decontamination https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/12/191212081926.htm
- Source:
- European Geosciences Union
- Summary:
- Following the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in March 2011, the Japanese authorities decided to carry out major decontamination works in the affected area, which covers more than 9,000 km2. On Dec. 12, 2019, with most of this work having been completed, researchers provided an overview of the decontamination strategies used and their effectiveness.
- On December 12, 2019, with most of this work having been completed, the scientific journal SOIL of the European Geosciences Union (EGU) is publishing a synthesis of approximately sixty scientific publications that together provide an overview of the decontamination strategies used and their effectiveness, with a focus on radiocesium. This work is the result of an international collaboration led by Olivier Evrard, researcher at the Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement [Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences] (LSCE — CEA/CNRS/UVSQ, Université Paris Saclay).
Soil decontamination, which began in 2013 following the accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, has now been nearly completed in the priority areas identified1. Indeed, areas that are difficult to access have not yet been decontaminated, such as the municipalities located in the immediate vicinity of the nuclear power plant. Olivier Evrard, a researcher at the Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences and coordinator of the study (CEA/CNRS/UVSQ), in collaboration with Patrick Laceby of Alberta Environment and Parks (Canada) and Atsushi Nakao of Kyoto Prefecture University (Japan), compiled the results of approximately sixty scientific studies published on the topic.
This synthesis focuses mainly on the fate of radioactive cesium in the environment because this radioisotope was emitted in large quantities during the accident, contaminating an area of more than 9,000 km2. In addition, since one of the cesium isotopes (137Cs) has a half-life of 30 years, it constitutes the highest risk to the local population in the medium and long term, as it can be estimated that in the absence of decontamination it will remain in the environment for around three centuries.
“The feedback on decontamination processes following the Fukushima nuclear accident is unprecedented,” according to Olivier Evrard, “because it is the first time that such a major clean-up effort has been made following a nuclear accident. The Fukushima accident gives us valuable insights into the effectiveness of decontamination techniques, particularly for removing cesium from the environment.”
- This analysis provides new scientific lessons on decontamination strategies and techniques implemented in the municipalities affected by the radioactive fallout from the Fukushima accident. This synthesis indicates that removing the surface layer of the soil to a thickness of 5 cm, the main method used by the Japanese authorities to clean up cultivated land, has reduced cesium concentrations by about 80% in treated areas. Nevertheless, the removal of the uppermost part of the topsoil, which has proved effective in treating cultivated land, has cost the Japanese state about €24 billion. This technique generates a significant amount of waste, which is difficult to treat, to transport and to store for several decades in the vicinity of the power plant, a step that is necessary before it is shipped to final disposal sites located outside Fukushima prefecture by 2050. By early 2019, Fukushima’s decontamination efforts had generated about 20 million cubic metres of waste.
Decontamination activities have mainly targeted agricultural landscapes and residential areas. The review points out that the forests have not been cleaned up — because of the difficulty and very high costs that these operations2 would represent — as they cover 75% of the surface area located within the radioactive fallout zone. These forests constitute a potential long-term reservoir of radiocesium, which can be redistributed across landscapes as a result of soil erosion, landslides and floods, particularly during typhoons that can affect the region between July and October. Atsushi Nakao, co-author of the publication, stresses the importance of continuing to monitor the transfer of radioactive contamination at the scale of coastal watersheds that drain the most contaminated part of the radioactive fallout zone. This monitoring will help scientists understand the fate of residual radiocesium in the environment in order to detect possible recontamination of the remediated areas due to flooding or intense erosion events in the forests.
The analysis recommends further research on:
- the issues associated with the recultivation of decontaminated agricultural land3,
- the monitoring of the contribution of radioactive contamination from forests to the rivers that flow across the region,
- and the return of inhabitants and their reappropriation of the territory after evacuation and decontamination.
This research will be the subject of a Franco-Japanese and multidisciplinary international research project, MITATE (Irradiation Measurement Human Tolerance viA Environmental Tolerance), led by the CNRS in collaboration with various French (including the CEA) and Japanese organizations, which will start on January 1, 2020 for an initial period of 5 years.
Complementary approaches
This research is complementary to the project to develop bio- and eco-technological methods for the rational remediation of effluents and soils, in support of a post-accident agricultural rehabilitation strategy (DEMETERRES), led by the CEA, and conducted in partnership with INRA and CIRAD Montpellier.
Decontamination techniques
- In cultivated areas within the special decontamination zone, the surface layer of the soil was removed to a depth of 5 cm and replaced with a new “soil” made of crushed granite available locally. In areas further from the plant, substances known to fix or substitute for radiocesium (potassium fertilizers, zeolite powders) have been applied to the soil.
- As far as woodland areas are concerned, only those that were within 20 metres of the houses were treated (cutting branches and collecting litter).
- Residential areas were also cleaned (ditch cleaning, roof and gutter cleaning, etc.), and (vegetable) gardens were treated as cultivated areas.
1 In Fukushima prefecture and the surrounding prefectures, the decision to decontaminate the landscapes affected by the radioactive fallout was made in November 2011 for 11 districts that were evacuated after the accident (special decontamination zone — SDZ — 1,117 km2) and for 40 districts affected by lower, but still significant levels of radioactivity and that had not been evacuated in 2011 (areas of intensive monitoring of the contamination — ICA, 7836 km2). 2 128 billion euros according to one of the studies appearing in the review to be published on 12 December 2019 in SOIL. 3 Relating to soil fertility and the transfer of radiocesium from the soil to plants, for example.
The study was conducted by Olivier Evrard (Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l’Environnement (LSCE/IPSL), Unité Mixte de Recherche 8212 (CEA/CNRS/UVSQ), Université Paris-Saclay), J. Patrick Laceby (Environmental Monitoring and Science Division (EMSD), Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP)), and Atsushi Nakao (Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Kyoto Prefectural University).
Spent mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel to be removed from Ikata nuclear reactor
|
Shikoku Electric to remove fuel from Ikata nuclear reactor, a first since MOX work began in 1997, HTTPS://WWW.JAPANTIMES.CO.JP/NEWS/2019/12/13/NATIONAL/SHIKOKU-ELECTRIC-REMOVE-MOX-FUEL-FROM-IKATA-REACTOR/#.XFPOTUGZBIU , EHIME PREF. – Shikoku Electric Power Co. said Thursday that it will suspend operations of the No. 3 reactor at its Ikata nuclear power plant on Dec. 26 for routine checkups and remove spent mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel from the reactor.This will mark the first removal of used MOX fuel, a blend of plutonium extracted from spent nuclear fuel and uranium, from any commercial nuclear power plant in Japan since an initiative on plu-thermal power generation using the mixed fuel was announced in 1997, according to the Shikoku utility.
The government and power firms are promoting plu-thermal power generation as part of the nuclear fuel cycle featuring the extraction of plutonium from spent nuclear fuel for reuse. In 2010, Shikoku Electric started plu-thermal power generation using 16 MOX fuel assemblies at the No. 3 reactor at the Ikata plant in Ehime Prefecture. The company plans to remove all of them during the reactor checkups through April 27 and will consider reusing the spent MOX fuel, which will likely be stored at the power plant for a while due to the lack of reprocessing facilities. |
|
|
Fukushima Prefecture has over 9 million bags of nuclear waste
|
Over 9 million bags of nuclear cleanup waste piled up across Fukushima Pref. https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20151210/p2a/00m/0na/020000c?fbclid=IwAR0UFZrUByjuHKdFb8dE7o4p_WjADFuYZBGw-5NUrbUklXe_8buwbOifmaA The number of bags of waste from decontamination efforts around the stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant reached a little under 9.16 million as of the end of September according to Fukushima Prefecture and the Environment Ministry. The 1-cubic-meter bags are found at some 114,700 interim storage or decontamination sites across the prefecture. In the town of Tomioka — covered by a nuclear disaster evacuation order — mounds of bags have grown so tall that they obscure the power shovels used to move and stack the waste, the black balls covering every sliver of landscape. The bags of waste are typically stacked four layer high, with a fifth layer of uncontaminated soil laid on top to block radiation. Waterproof sheets are also used to stop rainwater from getting into the bags and becoming contaminated. Negotiations with the towns of Okuma and Futaba — both under evacuation orders — to establish mid-term waste storage facilities there have been hard-going, and the start of construction is nowhere in sight.December 10, 2015 (Mainichi Japan) |
2 nuclear reactors in Fukui Prefecture to be shut down
Kansai Electric Power Co. will spend ¥118.7 billion to dismantle the Nos. 1 and 2 units at the Oi nuclear power plant, with work expected to wrap up in the fiscal year ending March 2049.
The units, which each have an output capacity of more than 1 million kilowatts, are the most powerful reactors to be approved for decommissioning by the Nuclear Regulation Authority since a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami caused a meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 plant in March 2011.
Following the disaster, the government placed a 40-year limit on the lifespan of reactors in the country, with a possible 20-year extension if strict safety standards are met.
As both units came online in 1979 and were approaching the 40-year limit, Kansai Electric had a choice of applying for the extension or scrapping them.
In December 2017, the utility announced it would scrap the aging reactors, citing the high cost of implementing additional safety measures. Kansai Electric submitted the decommissioning plan to the authority in November 2018.
The plant’s Nos. 3 and 4 units came online in 1991 and 1993, respectively, and are currently active.
Around 23,000 tons of low-level radioactive waste will be remain following the dismantling process, according to the plan, along with another 13,200 tons of nonradioactive waste.
The plan does not state where the waste will be stored.
The status of Japan’s nuclear policy and future prospects
|
Tohoku reactor restart: What is the state of Japan’s nuclear policy? Japan Times, BY ERIC JOHNSTON 9 Dec 19, OSAKA – In late November, the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) gave the green light for restarting the No. 2 reactor at Tohoku Electric Power Co.’s Onagawa plant in Miyagi Prefecture, which had been damaged in the March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami. The announcement once again put the spotlight on the country’s nuclear power policy, not only in Tohoku but nationwide.
Why did the Onagawa restart attract so much attention?
While the Onagawa plant is actually the second damaged on 3/11, after the Tokai No. 2 power station in Ibaraki Prefecture, to pass the NRA’s new safety regulations for nuclear power plants prepared after the disaster, it happens to be the nuclear plant closest to the epicenter of the magnitude 9 quake that struck off the Tohoku coast that day. The Onagawa facility is located near Ishinomaki, which received extensive damage and much domestic and international media attention after the tsunami claimed the lives of 74 Okawa Elementary School students. In addition, the Onagawa reactor, which was flooded on 3/11, is the first boiling water reactor to have its restart application approved by the NRA. There are three kinds of nuclear reactors in operation in Japan: 14 pressured water reactors (PWRs), four advanced boiling water reactors (ABWRs) and 13 boiling water reactors (BWRs), which are the same kind as those at the Fukushima No. 1 plant destroyed by the 3/11 quake and tsunami. The PWRs are considered more technologically stable than the other kinds, and have a better ability to contain radiation. Now that the NRA has greenlighted Onagawa’s restart, does that mean it will happen anytime soon? That depends on a number of factors. The Onagawa plant is not ready to be fired up tomorrow. It must first complete the installation of various anti-disaster measures, including a 29-meter-high, 800-meter-long seawall along the Pacific coast to guard against tsunami as high as 23.1 meters. That will not be completed until sometime in fiscal 2020, which begins April 1. Furthermore, various local governments, including Ishinomaki and Miyagi Prefecture, will have to give their consent to the restart. That could involve long, drawn out negotiations between the utility and local residents and politicians. It’s also probable that lawyers and local citizens opposed to a restart will seek a court injunction to halt the move based on safety concerns. If a court approves an injunction, that will create further delays. How many other nuclear power plants are there and what are their statuses? As of this month, there are nine reactors officially in operation. Four belong to Kansai Electric Power Co. (Kepco), which provides electricity mainly to Kyoto, Osaka, Nara, Hyogo, Shiga and Wakayama prefectures. Another four belong to Kyushu Electric Power Co. One of Shikoku Electric Power Co.’s reactors at its Ikata plant is also operating……. What about the future for nuclear power in Japan? The government’s long-term energy policy for 2030 calls for nuclear power to make up around 20 to 22 percent of the nation’s energy mix, and it is pushing hard for the restart of as many idled reactors as possible. By then, the plan calls for renewable energy to account for 22 to 24 percent of the mix, LNG to make up 27 percent, coal 26 percent and oil 3 percent. But the obstacles to restarting, or continuing to operate, nuclear plants in the coming years are vast. In addition to local opposition that could delay restarts for months or years, costing the utilities money, they include such issues as the economics of running reactors past 40 years, for which the utilities must first spend money to upgrade their facilities in order to meet new NRA standards regarding reactors older than four decades. While Kepco has secured permission to operate three reactors already over 40 years old for another two decades at the most, other utilities with reactors currently more than 30 years old — such as Tepco’s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa No. 1 reactor (34 years old) — will have to decide within a few years whether it’s worth the investment of money and time to apply for a two-decade extension or whether it’s cheaper to decommission. A second problem has to do with spent nuclear fuel generated by the restarted reactors. Tokyo is making efforts to find local governments able and willing to have a midterm spent fuel storage facility built in their backyard, and has agreed to offer financial incentives for anyone willing to accept a facility. No luck so far. Meanwhile, in Fukui Prefecture, which has the largest concentration of reactors (13 commercial reactors plus the Monju experimental fast-breeder reactor) in the nation, Gov. Tatsuji Sugimoto is insisting that such storage facilities be built outside the prefecture. His position could lead to other prefectures hosting nuclear power plants to take a firmer stance with utilities and the central government over what to do with spent nuclear fuel when they come seeking local consent for their own restart plans. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/12/09/reference/japan-nuclear-power-onagawa-reactor-restart/#.Xe6m4egzbIU |
|
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 (139)
- 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 