Evaporating demand and few new projects spell trouble for technical know-how
A semicylindrical structure has been built to cover a reactor containment vessel at J-Power’s Oma nuclear power plant in Aomori Prefecture, where construction work has been suspended since the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.
TOKYO — Japan’s nuclear power industry is at the most critical juncture in its history. Demand for new reactors has dried up at home following the Fukushima nuclear disaster and dismal prospects for export are dual menaces threatening the fate of the country’s nuclear technology.
No domestic construction on a new reactor has begun for the past eight years. The catastrophic accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in 2011 blew a hole in the industry’s plans. The picture for exports of Japanese nuclear power technology looks just as gloomy.
Japanese reactor manufacturers and suppliers of key components are now facing the possible loss of their technological viability.
Shutdown
Warning signs for the nation’s nuclear power industry are visible in many parts of the country, including Oma, a fishing town in Aomori Prefecture on the northernmost tip of the main island of Honshu.
In that coastal town, Electric Power Development, a wholesale electric utility known as J-Power, has been building a new nuclear power plant.
At the construction site stands a huge semicylindrical-shaped structure bearing the Hitachi logo. It is actually a cover to protect what is inside: a reactor containment vessel, the core equipment of a nuclear plant, from the salty sea winds.
The humidity inside the structure is kept at 50% to prevent pipes and other parts of the vessel from rusting, according to an official in charge of the construction.
J-Power started construction of its first nuclear power plant in Oma in 2008. By the time the devastating earthquakes and tsunami in 2011 triggered reactor meltdowns at the Fukushima plant, 38% of the Oma project had been completed.
But the disaster brought construction to a halt as new, stricter safety standards have been introduced, forcing the company to make necessary adjustments to the plan and design of the plant. The plant was originally envisioned to start operation in 2014, but there is no prospect for quick resumption of full-scale construction.
http://asia.nikkei.com/Tech-Science/Tech/Japan-s-nuclear-technology-faces-extinction
April 11, 2017
Posted by dunrenard |
Japan | Extinction, nuclear technology |
Leave a comment
Trump’s Options for North Korea Include Placing Nukes in South Korea, NBC News 7 Apr 17 by WILLIAM M. ARKIN, CYNTHIA MCFADDEN, KEVIN MONAHAN and ROBERT WINDREM The National Security Council has presented President Donald Trump with options to respond to
North Korea’s nuclear program — including putting American nukes in South Korea or killing dictator Kim Jong-un, multiple top-ranking intelligence and military officials told NBC News.
Both scenarios are part of an accelerated review of North Korea policy prepared in advance of Trump’s meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping this week.
The White House hopes the Chinese will do more to influence Pyongyang through diplomacy and enhanced sanctions. But if that fails, and North Korea continues its development of nuclear weapons, there are other options on the table that would significantly alter U.S. policy.
The first and most controversial course of action under consideration is placing U.S. nuclear weapons in South Korea. The U.S. withdrew all nuclear weapons from South Korea 25 years ago. Bringing back bombs — likely to Osan Air Base, less than 50 miles south of the capital of Seoul — would mark the first overseas nuclear deployment since the end of the Cold War, an unquestionably provocative move.
“We have 20 years of diplomacy and sanctions under our belt that has failed to stop the North Korean program,” one senior intelligence official involved in the review told NBC News. “I’m not advocating pre-emptive war, nor do I think that the deployment of nuclear weapons buys more for us than it costs,” but he stressed that the U.S. was dealing with a “war today” situation. He doubted that Chinese and American interests coincided closely enough to find a diplomatic solution………http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-s-options-north-korea-include-placing-nukes-south-korea-n743571
April 10, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics international, South Korea, USA, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
North Korea says US air strikes on Syria vindicates decision to develop nuclear weapons, ABC News 9 Apr 17 North Korea has said US missile strikes against a Syrian airfield were “an unforgivable act of aggression” that showed its decision to develop nuclear weapons was “the right choice a million times over”.
Key points:
- North Korea says US strikes vindicates decision to strengthen its military power
- Kim Jong-un has exchanged pledges of friendship and cooperation with Bashar al-Assad
- Mr Trump earlier spoke of an “outstanding” relationship with North Korea’s ally China
The response by North Korea’s foreign ministry, carried by the official KCNA news agency, was the first since US warships launched dozens of missiles at a Syrian air base which the Pentagon says was involved in a chemical weapons attack earlier in the week.
“The US missile attack against Syria is a clear and unforgivable act of aggression against a sovereign state and we strongly condemn this,” KCNA quoted an unnamed spokesman for the North Korean foreign ministry as saying……….http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-09/north-korea-calls-us-syria-air-strikes-unforgivable/8428398
April 10, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
North Korea, politics international, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
The Diet passed on Friday a sweeping reform of nuclear inspections to allow regulators to conduct unannounced inspections of nuclear plants and give them unlimited access to needed data.
The enactment of the revised nuclear reactor regulation law comes after the International Atomic Energy Agency suggested Japan, which has been holding periodic inspections using checklists, needs a more flexible system.
The new inspection system, based on the U.S. system, will be implemented from fiscal 2020 after the Nuclear Regulation Authority sets specific rules.
http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2017/04/467500.html
April 8, 2017
Posted by dunrenard |
Japan | nuclear plants, Revised Law, Surprised Inspection |
Leave a comment
Rally participants protest the so-called “anti-conspiracy bill” at Hibiya Open-Air Concert Hall in Tokyo’s Chiyoda Ward on the evening of April 6, 2017.
Protesters say ‘anti-conspiracy’ bill aims to suppress anti-government demonstrations
Thousands of people gathered in Tokyo to protest the so-called “anti-conspiracy bill” hours after the government submitted the bill to the House of Representatives on April 6.
The group Kyobozai NO! Jikko Iinkai (Committee saying no to the anti-conspiracy bill) and multiple other civic organizations held a rally at Hibiya Open-Air Concert Hall, after which participants marched through the streets of Japan’s capital calling for the bill to be scrapped. According to event organizers, some 3,700 people took part.
“Suppression of protests against the government is the essence of this bill,” Yuichi Kaido, an attorney who has long been active in the movement against anti-conspiracy legislation, told the crowd. “Let us fight to kill this bill.”
Opposition lawmakers who participated in the event remarked, “The bill will turn the public into latent criminals,” “The bill is the modern-day version of the prewar Public Security Preservation Law” and “The prime minister said he would provide a careful explanation, but forcibly submitted the legislation.”
After the rally, participants marched in front of the Diet as they called out, “We don’t need anti-conspiracy legislation!” and “The bill has nothing to do with anti-terrorism,” while holding banners reading, “Simply having a discussion may become a crime!”
http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20170407/p2a/00m/0na/002000c
An estimated 3,700 demonstrators rally against a bill that penalizes conspiracies to commit crimes in Tokyo’s Chiyoda Ward on April 6, saying it could lead to the extensive monitoring of citizens and the suppression of freedom of expression
Local councils, citizens raise red flag against new crime legislation
Almost 4,000 protesters marched in Tokyo on April 6 to voice their concern that a proposed law to enable punishment for planning crimes is one step toward an Orwellian society of surveillance.
“The purpose of the bill is to silence citizens opposing the government when these people haven’t actually posed any threat,” said protester Yuichi Kaito, a lawyer who serves as the deputy chief of the task force dealing with the anti-conspiracy legislation at the Japan Federation of Bar Associations.
A 44-year-old public servant from Kawasaki who attended the rally in Hibiya Park in central Tokyo chipped in with, “People who are involved in labor union activities are just ordinary people. If they were cracked down on, they would not be able to enjoy a normal life.”
The protesters marched to the Diet building to coincide with the bill being introduced for a debate at a Lower House plenary session in which the four major opposition parties have pledged to fight it.
A similar bill has been killed three times since it was first submitted to the Diet in 2003. It was criticized that it could be used to target ordinary citizens’ groups and labor unions as the law could be arbitrarily applied by the police and the government.
The government argues the legislation is required to fight terrorism by joining the U.N. Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.
It insists the new legislation is urgently needed as the capital prepares to host the 2020 Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics.
But many citizens fear the legislation could lead to the suppression of freedom of thought.
The country has already experienced suppression in the years leading up to World War II. In 1925, the public security preservation law was enacted with the initial purpose of reining in communism. But its application was expanded to encompass attacks on critics, journalists and activists.
The prefectural assemblies of Mie and Miyazaki, as well as 34 other local assemblies across Japan, had issued statements as of April 6 opposing the legislation or calling for a cautious Diet debate, according to the Lower House.
Nagano Prefecture appears to be particularly opposed to the bill. Thirteen municipal assemblies in the prefecture, prodded by alarmed citizens, have made it clear they oppose the legislation, the largest of any prefecture in Japan.
The backdrop to this is what is known as the Feb. 4 incident of 1933, in which about 600 people in the prefecture–many of them teachers–were arrested on suspicion of violating the public security preservation law. Those arrested were suspected of harboring communist sympathies.
Local residents in Nagano Prefecture see many parallels between the current bill and the pre-war legislation.
“In my appeal, I ask, ‘Is it all right to repeat history?” said Yukio Nunome, head of the secretariat of a federation of civic groups advocating the protection of the pacifist Japanese Constitution.
In Fukushima Prefecture, four local assemblies adopted a statement opposing the bill.
“Since the Fukushima nuclear disaster, we have always protested against the central government,” said Kiyoshi Ishikawa, a Japanese Communist Party (JCP) member of the Kawamata town assembly. “It is only expected that opposition to the anti-conspiracy bill is spreading due to concerns that it could breach freedom of thought.”
In Tokyo, the Kunitachi municipal assembly condemned the legislation as potentially leading to a society where individuals are under constant surveillance and turned into informants for the authorities.
Miyako Owari, a JCP assemblywoman who drafted the protest statement, expressed concern that grass-roots activities could be targeted, such as weekly gatherings held in the city.
“The bill concerns each of us since if it is written into law, we may lose the atmosphere in which we can freely voice our opinions and express ourselves,” she said.
The government aims to pass the bill in the Lower House by early May so that officials can underscore Japan’s efforts to fight terrorism at the Group of Seven summit in Sicily, Italy, later the same month.
http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201704070033.html
April 8, 2017
Posted by dunrenard |
Japan | Anti-Conspiracy Bill |
Leave a comment
Nuclear roulette BY EDITORIAL THE EXPRESS TRIBUNE https://tribune.com.pk/story/1377625/nuclear-roulette/ , 8 Apr 17, A mutually agreed nuclear disarmament treaty between India and Pakistan has never been on the cards and is never likely to be. Both maintain a nuclear arsenal and both have the capacity to deliver nuclear weapons anywhere within the territory of the other. Mutually assured destruction (MAD) is indeed assured. Neither state presents a nuclear threat face to any other enemy. Given the oscillating volatility of both states it is unsurprising that the nuclear cards get a periodic shuffle, and India under Modi has moved into an altogether more martial phase with threat levels, nuclear and conventional, rising accordingly. Analysts and observers are of a uniform opinion — the place a nuclear exchange is most likely to happen accidentally, as in a reactive event rather than a first-strike assault — is between India and Pakistan, and India is likely in that event to be the state that pushes the button first.
April 8, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
India, Pakistan, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
Tillerson to chair U.N. meeting on North Korea nuclear program, Reuters By Michelle Nichols | UNITED NATIONS, 7 Apr 17,
U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will chair a United Nations Security Council meeting on North Korea on April 28 to discuss how the body can combat Pyongyang’s banned nuclear and missile programs, U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley said on Monday.
North Korea has been under U.N. sanctions aimed at impeding the development of its nuclear and missile programs since 2006. The 15-member council has strengthened sanctions following each of North Korea’s five nuclear tests.
“We do need to talk about it in terms of what are we as a council are going to do to deal with North Korea and how do we push that forward. So we hope that we get as many foreign ministers to come as possible,” Haley told a news conference to mark Washington’s presidency of the Security Council for April…….http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear-un-usa-idUSKBN1752LC
April 8, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
North Korea, politics international |
Leave a comment
North Korea Has Nuclear Weapons So It Won’t End Up Like Libya, The National Interest, Edward Chang, 6 Apr 17, North Korea has learned from the Qaddafi regime the importance of maintaining its nukes.
As many experts have predicted, North Korea is trending to become the Trump administration’s first major foreign-policy crisis. The latest developments continue to reinforce that trend.
In an interview with the Financial Times, Donald Trump threatened to take unilateral action to stop the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear program unless China stepped in to address the issue. U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, echoed that stance not long after Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis indicated that he views the DPRK as the gravest threat to America. The week prior to that, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson declared that the Obama-era strategy of “strategic patience” was over and warned that military action was an option if North Korea did not unilaterally disarm.
While the early post-war time period occasionally involved troubling acts of violence that resulted in the deaths of Americans, the United States and North Korea have since avoided such encounters (the same cannot be said for South Korea). And while no American president ever dismissed force as an option, Trump is unique in the blunt and direct manner he has used to challenge the reclusive regime. Which begs the question—has a clash between the United States and North Korea become inevitable?………
Like U.S.-North Korea relations, U.S.-Libyan relations were fraught with tension from the beginning, following the 1969 coup that brought Qaddafi to power. Like North Korea, Libya earned the reputation of “rogue state,” defying international norms and engaging in destabilizing behavior in the region……..
“Reagan’s undeclared war” against Libya hints at one possible future in Trump-era relations with North Korea. Both presidents have assumed unambiguously confrontational postures, employing rhetoric that previous presidents have attempted to avoid. Much like Reagan singled-out Qaddafi after focusing elsewhere during the election, Trump has now focused most of his attention on Kim Jong-un, after initially emphasizing threats like ISIL as the more pressing issue………
Conventional wisdom holds that Trump will behave in a manner consistent with his predecessors for one simple reason—the stakes are too high………
Perhaps the most useful lesson to learn from Reagan’s war with Qaddafi is that it was ultimately inconclusive. The Libyan problem spanned the entirety of Reagan’s two terms; by the administration’s end, Qaddafi was still in power. Nearly a full decade of sanctions and overwhelming force notwithstanding, the U.S.-Libya saga demonstrated decisive actions do not necessarily lead to decisive results……..
As his national security staff completes its North Korea review, it is hoped that “the Donald” will learn the hard line leads to uncharted territory. More importantly, the forty-fifth president would do well to accept there are no obvious solutions to this crisis; using force does not always lead to the desired outcome. Regardless of which path he takes, Trump may very well be dealing with Kim through the totality of his presidency. ……http://nationalinterest.org/feature/north-korea-has-nuclear-weapons-so-it-wont-end-libya-20060
April 8, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
North Korea, politics international, weapons and war |
Leave a comment
Girl, 9, sues Indian government over inaction on climate change http://news.trust.org/item/20170407113847-vw8c4 by Rina Chandran | @rinachandran | Thomson Reuters Foundation, 7 April 2017 India is home to four of the 10 worst ranked cities in the world for air pollution MUMBAI, – A nine-year-old girl has filed a legal case against the Indian government for failing to take action on climate change, highlighting the growing concern over pollution and environmental degradation in the country.
In the petition filed with the National Green Tribunal (NGT), a special court for environment-related cases, Ridhima Pandey said the government has failed to implement its environment laws.
“As a young person (Ridhima) is part of a class that amongst all Indians is most vulnerable to changes in climate, yet are not part of the decision making process,” the 52-page petition said. The petition called on the tribunal to direct the government “to take effective, science-based action to reduce and minimise the adverse impacts of climate change”.
The tribunal has asked the Ministry of Environment and the Central Pollution Control Board to respond within two weeks.
A spokesman from the Ministry of Environment told the Thomson Reuters Foundation that they would respond as directed by the tribunal.
India is home to four of the 10 worst ranked cities in the world for air pollution. Along with China, India accounted for more than half the total number of global deaths attributable to air pollution in 2015, according to a recent study.
Despite several laws to protect India’s forests, clean up its rivers and improve air quality, critics are concerned that implementation is poor, and economic growth often takes precedence over the environment.
Flash floods and landslides in the Himalayan state of Uttarakhand, where Ridhima lives, killed hundreds of people and left tens of thousands homeless in 2013.
The devastation affected Ridhima, the daughter of an environmental activist, said Rahul Choudhary, a lawyer representing her.
“For someone so young, she is very aware of the issue of climate change, and she is very concerned about how it will impact her in future,” he said. “She wanted to do something that can have a meaningful effect, and we suggested she could file a petition against the government,” he told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.
Ridhima is not the first child in India to take the government to task over inaction to protect the environment.
Last year, six teenagers filed a petition with the NGT over air pollution in New Delhi which has the worst air quality in the country.
India is taking some action to mitigate the damage. As a signatory to the Paris agreement on climate change, it is committed to ensuring that at least 40 percent of its electricity is generated from non-fossil-fuel sources by 2030.
In her petition, Ridhima asked the court to order the government to assess industrial projects for climate-related issues, prepare a “carbon budget” to limit carbon dioxide emissions, and create a national climate recovery plan.
“That a young girl is doing so much to draw the government’s attention is something. We hope the case puts some pressure on the government to act,” said Choudhary. (Reporting by Rina Chandran @rinachandran, Editing by Belinda Goldsmith; Please credit the Thomson Reuters Foundation, the charitable arm of Thomson Reuters, that covers humanitarian news, women’s rights, trafficking, property rights, climate change and resilience. Visit news.trust.org to see more stories.)
April 8, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
climate change, India, Legal |
Leave a comment
With Westinghouse Bankruptcy, the Nuclear Energy Story Nearly Over The much touted nuclear renaissance is now over. News Click Prabir Purkayastha 07 Apr 2017 With Westinghouse announcing its bankruptcy, India’s pledge to buy at least 10,000 MW as a part of the India US Nuclear Deal and reiterated by Modi last year, should be given a decent burial. Any agreement with Westinghouse now means that India would be bailing out Westinghouse and the US nuclear industry with Indian peoples’ money.
This also draws to a close all talk about a nuclear renaissance. The three major reactor manufacturers – Toshiba-Westinghouse, GE-Hitachi and Areva, France – are all in major financial difficulties. Only a fool will still believe their promise that the 3rd generation reactors they are developing – none of which have been successfully commissioned as yet – are either safe or cheap.
The Left’s position during the India US 123 Deal was that it neither served India’s strategic interest, nor made sense in energy terms. It also meant abandoning India’s self-reliant nuclear reactor industry for importing costly and unproven US reactors. Though it failed to stop the 123 Agreement in Parliament, the Left successfully led the struggle to modify India’s Nuclear Liability Act, ensuring that nuclear suppliers, like in any other hazardous industry, should be liable for their faulty equipment.
The Fukushima disaster has shown that a nuclear accident can cost up to $200 billion . Even this could be a conservative estimate. The Indian liability law caps operator and suppliers’ liability to just $ 407 million (300 million SDR’s). Though cost of a reactor is in billions of dollars, even this small liability, only a fraction of its cost, was perceived to be too “dangerous” and unacceptable to the US suppliers.
Last year, Modi, announced during one of his US visits that not only would India buy US reactors, a continuation of the assurance given by Shivshankar Menon, the Foreign Secretary under Manmohan Singh (Letter September 10th, 2008 ), but would also assume the liabilities of the US suppliers in case of of a nuclear accident. India offered Mithi Virdi in Gujarat to Westinghouse and Kovvada in Andhra to GE as the two sites. Subsequently on GE’s failure to show any successful contract combined with local resistance in Mithi Virdi, GE’s project was considered cancelled, and its Andhra site offered to Westinghouse.
Fortunately for India, Modi’s assurances have come too late for the US nuclear industry. The much touted nuclear renaissance is now over. In OECD countries, only 7 new reactors are being built with varying degrees of state support. With huge cost and time overruns, the curse of the nuclear industry, all of them are in deep trouble. GE, unsuccessful in selling even one of its so-called advanced design, has virtually pulled out of the nuclear business. After huge and continuing losses, Areva, the French reactor supplier, is being taken over by EdF, the French state-owned energy utility. EdF has already scrapped the new Areva EPR design, with which the Finnish Olkiluoto and French Flamanville plants were being built. This is also the design Areva is trying to sell for the Jaitapur project in Maharashtra.
The major objections of the Left regarding imported reactors have been proven correct. The untried and untested designs have meant numerous changes and difficulties in construction, leading to significant delays and sharp increase in costs. The cost of the two Areva plants of Euro 3 billion each originally, have increased by almost three times .
The Westinghouse story is no different………
In the exchanges between the UPA and the Left during Manmohan Singh’s government, the cost of new nuclear plants from French or US suppliers had come up. The UPA had presented figures for capital cost per KW of $1,500 and the price of power to be Rs. 1.49 paise per unit from imported nuclear plants. The Left had given figures from Olkiluoto and the US, showing that the capital cost would be at least $4,000 per KW and the price of electricity from such plants around Rs. 5 per unit.
The figures from the US and French projects now show that the capital cost per KW for such plants is in the range of $6,000-7,000, and therefore the price per unit of electricity from such plants will not be less than Rs. 8-10 per unit.
Why did the UPA claim such absurdly low figures for nuclear energy? They were either figments of their imagination or took these figures straight from the promotional material of the nuclear suppliers. To claim nuclear energy to be competitive, the nuclear suppliers took a 60-year life of the plant, left out the interest on capital during construction as a component of the cost, and claimed their new designs had much lower capital costs. They then did what are called levellised cost calculations – the cost of electricity over the lifetime of the plant. By this sleight of hand, they reached figures for the cost of nuclear power to be competitive with coal and gas.
Of course, the actual capital costs are much higher than what the nuclear industry was claiming. The regulators and utilities that price the electricity, have also to look at all the cost components including cost of capital, interest on loans, etc., and fix the price that of electricity. What matters to consumers and utilities (distribution companies or state electricity boards) is not the levellised cost of electricity, but the entry cost of nuclear power to the grid. This is what needs to be competitive to other sources. Any such calculations shows that nuclear energy is simply not competitive.
The collapse of Westinghouse, which has either built or licensed its designs to almost half the world’s reactors, shows that the nuclear story is nearly over. The reality is that with the cost of renewables – solar photovoltaics and wind – dropping sharply, the economics are increasingly against nuclear energy. This is apart from danger of catastrophic accidents or danger from long-term storage of radioactive nuclear wastes. It may still sustain itself for some time in countries, where there is a strong indigenous nuclear industry, such as India, China, Korea and Russia. But its days are now clearly numbered. http://www.newsclick.in/westinghouse-bankruptcy-nuclear-energy-story-nearly-over
April 8, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, India, politics, politics international, USA |
Leave a comment
Learning to live with a nuclear North Korea?, https://theconversation.com/learning-to-live-with-a-nuclear-north-korea-75620 The Conversation, Nick Bisley Executive Director of La Trobe Asia and Professor of International Relations, La Trobe University April 3, 2017 North Korea has been on a long march to acquire a usable nuclear weapon. Since 2011, when Kim Jong-un replaced his father at the head of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the pace of that march has quickened markedly.
Contrary to claims made by Nikki Halley, the new US ambassador to the UN, North Korea’s leader is not crazy – he has decidedly rational motives. Kim wants nuclear weapons to provide security from a world that he believes threatens North Korea’s existence.
So far, North Korea has conducted five nuclear tests – in 2006, 2009, 2013 and two in 2016. The decision to acquire nuclear weapons was initially prompted by the perception that without such a deterrent, North Korea risked Iraq’s fate: invasion and regime change.
Although North Korea has one of the largest militaries in the world – its army alone has more than 1 million soldiers – it is an antiquated fighting force whose principal advantage is its proximity to South Korea. Its ability to win a fight against a technologically sophisticated opponent is widely questioned. Nuclear weapons offset that weakness markedly.
An independent nuclear capacity would also reduce the country’s dependence on China. Beijing has long believed that North Korea is a useful buffer between it and an American-allied South Korea. Pyongyang realises, however, that were Beijing to change its attitude then it would find itself dangerously exposed.
North Korea perceives it is isolated in a world that is hostile to its existence. However loathsome the regime may be and however badly it misallocates resources to bolster the ruling elite, the reason for acquiring nuclear weapons is entirely rational: they are a vital means for North Korea to protect itself.
Kim has made the acquisition of nuclear weapons a core priority. It is central to government propaganda, figures prominently in nationalist iconography, and indeed the country’s nuclear standing is now enshrined in the constitution.
Most analysts believe North Korea has not yet mastered all three parts of the “nuclear trinity” required to make a usable weapon. This entails first developing a controlled nuclear explosion. The second is miniaturising and hardening that technology so it can work reliably while attached to a means of delivery. The final step is an accurate and reliable delivery system, such as a ballistic missile.
North Korea definitely has the first step and is getting close to both the second and third steps. Barring either a change in heart from the regime about its nuclear ambition or some kind of effective international intervention, North Korea is very likely to have a functioning nuclear weapon within a few years – if not sooner.
The acceleration of the nuclear program – three tests since 2013 compared with two tests between 2006 and 2012 – reflects most obviously the higher priority Kim has placed on it.
Development of missile technology – the third step in the nuclear trinity – has also increased in tempo, with more than 20 tests since January 2016. The recent acceleration is an attempt not just to “sprint” to the finish but also to take advantage of the sense of uncertainty in the region.
North Korea’s more adventurous tendencies are most effectively kept in check when the US and China are able to align their interests and policies. That has most assuredly not been the case over the past year or so.
During his “reassurance tour”, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson declared that the old policies toward North Korea had failed – and “everything was on the table”. Many interpreted this as a new appetite for strategic risk from the incoming administration.
As with other aspects of America’s Asia policy, Tillerson was light on detail about what new approach Washington might pursue. One assumes it was a major point of debate in Seoul and Beijing. But speculation abounds that pre-emptive attacks may be being considered more seriously than in the past.
The problem with managing North Korea’s nuclear ambition is that there are so few options, and none of them are appealing. As an isolated economy that cares little for international public opinion there are precious few carrots and sticks.
Sanctions have had some effect, but they largely punish the population and not the regime. And they are regularly flouted by China on an opportunistic basis.
Due to the compressed geography of the peninsula, military action would come at a heavy price – North Korea would retaliate by unleashing massive force on South Korea. Seoul is within 60 kilometres of the border with North Korea; pre-emption would be extraordinarily risky.
North Korea will be the most pressing issue at this week’s Donald Trump-Xi Jinping summit. What can be done? There are three main options.
The first is to somehow convince North Korea to step back from its nuclear ambitions, possibly using the stalled Six-Party Talks framework. Given how important it has become to the leadership, both as a security goal and as a sense of national purpose and identity, this seems highly unlikely.
Many once assumed North Korea had started down the nuclear path as an elaborate means to receive international aid. That is, it didn’t actually want them as such, but sought them as a means to extort international financial support. This no longer appears to be the case, if it ever was.
The second option is to coerce North Korea into giving them up. This is equally fraught. Not only is the risk of major war significant, but even short of war, more targeted and better-enforced sanctions seem unlikely to halt the run to the finish line.
The third and least-worst of the options is a tried and tested policy but one that is politically unsavoury. That is, to engage with the regime, bilaterally or in the Six-Party mode. The aim here would be to retard but probably not prevent its nuclear weapon development while devising ways of learning to live with a nuclear North Korea.
Well-managed deterrence can produce a more stable strategic environment in northeast Asia than has existed in recent years. Engagement could also lead to reduced tension, greater stability and possibly even economic reform in North Korea.
Of one thing we can be sure: North Korea acts rationally, and the one outcome above all it wants to avoid is its own demise.
April 7, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
North Korea, politics international |
Leave a comment
Is North Korea putting a nuclear-tipped bargaining chip on the table? Reuters, By James Pearson and Ju-min Park | SEOUL, 6 Apr 17,
As the leaders of China and the United States sit down for a summit on Thursday, North Korea has made sure it also has something on the negotiating table: A nuclear-tipped bargaining chip.
North Korea launched a projectile on Wednesday, which U.S. officials said appeared to be a liquid-fueled, extended-range Scud missile that only traveled a fraction of its range before spinning out of control and crashing into the sea.
The launch was North Korea’s latest in a long series of missile and nuclear tests that have accelerated in their variation and intensity over the last two years.
And now, experts agree, North Korea is closing in on the ability to hit the United States with a missile, a goal that for decades has been the subject of Pyongyang’s vivid propaganda posters.
“They’ve been able to put a nuke on a missile for a while now,” said Jeffrey Lewis of the California-based Middlebury Institute of International Studies.
“The stated purpose of the last test was to validate the nuclear weapon design that would arm all of North Korea’s missiles,” Lewis said of North Korea’s September 2016 nuclear test – its fifth and largest to date.
Since then, North Korea has further ramped up its tests and rhetoric, emphasizing a consistent message: To create a nuclear device small enough to mount on an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), and fire it at the United States.
“If we push the button, the bombs will be fired and reduce the U.S. to ashes,” an editorial in the ruling Workers’ Party newspaper the Rodong Sinmun said on Wednesday.
North Korea now has the strength to “wipe out” the United States “in a moment” with an H-bomb, the editorial said.
“This is again our warning”.
BARGAINING CHIP From last year, North Korea took the rare step of publicizing images of its missile equipment tests, convincing analysts that Pyongyang’s banned program was further along toward successfully testing an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) than first thought.
“The first few tests might fail, but that’s not good news because they’ll learn,” said Lewis. “How long it takes to make it work is anyone’s guess. Maybe a couple of years, maybe the first time”………
It was not clear if Wednesday’s launch was deliberately timed to coincide with Thursday’s summit between China’s President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump in Florida, where North Korea is expected to be a prime topic of discussions.
Some experts think North Korea has tried to make sure the two world leaders are aware Pyongyang has a bargaining chip in any forthcoming moves to clam down on its weapons programs…….http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-bargaining-idUSKBN17811R
April 7, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
North Korea, politics international |
Leave a comment
Executives at ailing conglomerate Toshiba have asked banks for additional support. Three main lenders say they are considering providing new lines of credit.
Toshiba executives met with representatives of about 80 financial institutions on Tuesday. They are believed to have discussed the temporary swell in the company’s losses following the bankruptcy of its US nuclear subsidiary Westinghouse.
The firm plans to spin off its mainstay flash memory chip operation. But it will be some time before it sees any gains from selling a majority stake in the new entity.
Toshiba said it needs to secure more than 6.3 billion dollars in fiscal 2017.
Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation and 2 other main creditor banks proposed additional support on the condition that Toshiba offers shares in the spin-off company as collateral.
The electronics maker has postponed the release of its earnings report twice because it needed to investigate accounting practices at Westinghouse.
It is trying to release the report by Tuesday of next week.
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20170404_35/
April 4, 2017
Posted by dunrenard |
Japan | Banks Support, Toshiba |
Leave a comment
JAPANESE corporate giant Toshiba has announced that its Westinghouse nuclear power unit has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the US, largely due to massive cost overruns for four reactor projects the company is building in South Carolina and Georgia. The financial loss to Toshiba is estimated to be about 1 trillion yen (about $9 billion) for the fiscal year that ended yesterday (March 31), which would be one of, if not the biggest, annual loss in Japanese corporate history.
Officials at both W estinghouse and parent company Toshiba are optimistic that the collapse is not total; the financial problems are rooted in Westinghouse’s construction division, while its nuclear fuel and plant operations/maintenance segments remain relatively profitable. On the other hand, the bankruptcy filing is glaring evidence that these same people have been very wrong before; every other objective indicator suggests that Westinghouse’s fall may be a fatal blow to what nuclear advocates were hoping would be a bit of a renaissance for nuclear power worldwide.
The Westinghouse Electric Company LLC is a remnant of the fabled US corporate giant Westinghouse, which was founded in 1886. Through the mid-1990s the original company was gradually broken up and sold off; the brand is still well known worldwide – mainly in household appliances and certain kinds of industrial equipment – but is owned and produced by a variety of unrelated parent companies. The nuclear power business has historically been one of Westinghouse’s strengths, and reached its zenith during the 1970s; a majority of the several dozen operating nuclear reactors in the US were built by Westinghouse, and it built reactors in several other countries. The mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) here in the Philippines is a Westinghouse product.
The company has over the years become embroiled in controversy at times – the BNPP being one example – but on the whole remained fairly sound, and was considered a good investment when it was purchased in 1999 by British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL). BNFL in turn sold Westinghouse to Toshiba in 2006 for $5.4 billion, just at a time when the prevailing view was that nuclear power was about to undergo a resurgence; China, the US and the UK were all then planning to invest heavily in new nuclear power facilities.
Toshiba thought they had a gold mine on their hands. Westinghouse had a new, marketable reactor design – the AP1000 – which had become the first Generation III+ design to receive final design approval from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 2004. The Japanese parent company sold 10 percent of its stake to the Kazakh national uranium company (Kazatomprom) in 2007 to secure a fuel source and strengthen its supply line, and in the same year won a bid from the China National Nuclear Corporation for construction of four AP1000 reactors and transfer of the AP1000 technology. In 2008, Westinghouse won a contract from Georgia Power Company to build two AP1000 reactors in that state and a second contract to build two more in South Carolina; two years later, the US government announced it would provide $8.3 billion in loan guarantees to complete the Georgia plant.
The Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011 and the boom in natural gas production in the US had a chilling effect on the plans for new nuclear plants in the US. Even without Fukushima raising safety concerns, nuclear plants suddenly became unreasonably expensive compared with gas-fired plants, which put a bit of pressure on Westinghouse. What really sank the company, however, was the enormous cost and schedule overruns at its Georgia and South Carolina projects. Both were expected to cost about $14 billion each, and be operational by the end of last year; so far, they have cost $19 billion and $22 billion, respectively, and are two years or more behind schedule.
To make matters worse, the financial trouble at Westinghouse has raised old, but still not completely answered, questions from regulators – in the US, the UK, and China – about the safety of the AP1000 reactors. Up to now, most of those concerns have been deflected, but what is likely to happen now, even if Westinghouse can continue to satisfactorily convince governments and potential operators of the system’s safety, is that uncertainty over whether the company – or more likely, whoever buys the ailing unit from Toshiba – can be relied on to keep up standards is going to make big customers look elsewhere. And once they do, they are likely to prefer the more economical and less contentious path countries like the US are taking, turning to gas generation or expanding renewables.
http://www.manilatimes.net/nuclear-disaster-different-kind/320327/
April 3, 2017
Posted by dunrenard |
Japan | Toshiba, Westinghouse |
Leave a comment
This is China’s strongest statement yet on climate action, Climate Home, 30/03/2017,
As President Trump rolls back climate policies and finance, China’s UN representative makes a detailed pitch for global leadership. By Karl Mathiesen
In the week before Donald Trump began to roll back Obama-era climate regulations, China’s government made its clearest statement yet that it sees climate action as central to its best interests.
Speaking at a New York event on 23 March, China’s permanent representative at the UN Liu Jieyi said China remained committed to openness and collaboration on climate change, “whatever the vicissitudes of the international situation”.
Under Barack Obama, the US state department expended huge effort and political capital cajoling the Chinese into a bilateral deal that laid the foundations for the Paris accord on climate change.
One of the pillars of that deal was the Clean Power Plan – which mandated emissions reductions in the US energy sector. On Tuesday, Trump signed an order that began rolling back that policy declaring he was “putting an end to the war on coal”.
But Liu’s comments make clear that China now sees climate action as a matter of national interest, independent of US policy.1 That applies not only at home, but across a range of diplomatic forums.
Senior global policy advisor at Greenpeace East Asia Li Shuo said the speech “highlights the shifting political stance of China on climate change”……..http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/03/30/chinas-strongest-statement-yet-climate-action/
April 3, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
China, climate change |
Leave a comment
nuclear-news 