nuclear-news

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

China’s spy balloon can help deflate US nuclear tensions with Beijing

Defense News, By David Gompert and Hans Binnendijk 8 Feb 23

The row over China’s surveillance balloon could, once the dust settles, present a chance to begin lessening the risk of nuclear war between the two superpowers.

While the United States is right to charge China with violating its airspace in an apparent attempt to spy on America’s strategic missile systems in Montana, this episode reminds us that the two nations have no mechanism to exchange views and clear up misconceptions on the purpose of their respective nuclear arsenal.

Consequently, suspicions abound.

It is understandable that this infamous spy balloon has riled up the American body politic. Yet, it is important to keep the strategic situation in mind. The United States and China are in a stable state of mutual deterrence, meaning that neither power could launch a nuclear first strike on the other without inviting devastating retaliation. That said, the greater the mutual suspicions about intent, the greater the danger that this stability could fail.

The absence of a way to build mutual confidence between the United States and China regarding nuclear weapons and nuclear war is potentially dangerous. The United States is unsure what to make of China’s build-up of its nuclear arsenal, and China is fearful that the United States seeks the capability to deny China a credible deterrent. What makes this situation increasingly perilous are the rising tensions in Sino-U.S. relations in the Pacific and the growing risks of escalating crises and even war there.

In an article in the journal Survival to be published soon, we spell out the case and agenda for a process whereby the superpowers could clarify why they have nuclear weapons and the doctrines governing their use.

Specifically, we recommend direct and candid bilateral strategic stability talks on nuclear doctrines, forces, intentions, and worries. This would be coupled with confidence-building measures such as providing prior notifications of missile testing, clarifying the purpose of new weapons, and managing disconcerting intelligence. 

This could reduce suspicions, such as Chinese fears that the United States aspires to have a first-strike capability and American fears that China will relentlessly expand its capability to target U.S. deterrent forces. Each nation would of course continue independent intelligence-gathering. But “worst-case” interpretation of intelligence could be mitigated by dialogue.

These strategic stability talks might include implementing a bold concept: a bilateral US-Chinese pledge not to use nuclear weapons first against each other or against the other nation’s treaty allies……………………………. more https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2023/02/07/chinas-spy-balloon-can-help-deflate-us-nuclear-tensions-with-beijing/

February 9, 2023 Posted by | China, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Japan Plans to Dump Fukushima Wastewater Into a Pacific With a Toxic Nuclear History

In December, the U.S.-based National Association of Marine Laboratories also announced its opposition to TEPCO’s plans, publishing a position paper that says “there is a lack of adequate and accurate scientific data supporting Japan’s assertion of safety” while “there is an abundance of data demonstrating serious concerns about releasing radioactively contaminated water.”

BY AMY GUNIA , FEBRUARY 6, 2023,

Pacific Island nations have for decades been grappling with the environmental and health consequences of Cold War-era nuclear testing in the region by the likes of the U.S. and France. Now, they worry about another kind of nuclear danger from neighbors much closer to home.

As concerns over energy security and the desire to transition away from fossil fuels pushes several Asian nations to reconsider once-scrapped nuclear power programs, there is increasing anxiety over how the waste from those facilities—depending on the methods of disposal—might impact the lives of Pacific Islanders.

Notably, in the region, Philippines President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos said in his first address to Congress in mid-2022 that he was open to adding nuclear energy to the country’s energy mix, the Indonesian government said in December it plans to build a nuclear power plant by 2039, and weeks later Japan announced that it plans to ramp up the use of nuclear energy.

Nuclear plants have long been touted as a reliable source of carbon-free energy, though many plants across the world had been shuttered in past decades over worries about the safety of nuclear waste disposal. In this new era of nuclear revival, similar uncertainties abound.

In Japan, one plant that isn’t even operational has become the frontline for the fight between activists seeking safety assurances for waste disposal and operators who are running out of space in on-site tanks to store the wastewater accumulating from keeping damaged reactors cool. Currently, Japan plans to release wastewater from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean later this year.

“It’s just horrendous to think what it might mean,” says Henry Puna, the secretary general of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), a regional intergovernmental organization that has more than a dozen member countries, including, for example, the Cook Islands, Fiji, Tonga, and Vanuatu. “The people of the Pacific are people of the ocean. The ocean is very much central to our lives, to our culture, to our livelihoods. Anything that prejudices the health of the ocean is a matter of serious concern.”

When a magnitude 9.1 earthquake and tsunami hit off the coast of Japan in 2011, it caused a meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear power plant. Since then, water is being used to cool the damaged reactors and prevent further catastrophe. Now, more than 1.3 million metric tons of radionuclide-contaminated water has been collected on site, and it continues to accumulate, as rain and groundwater seep in. Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the operator of the plant, says that the storage tanks take up too much space and hinder decommissioning the plant.  Japan initially said that it would begin releasing the water into the ocean in the spring of 2023. Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno told the media in January that the release target date is now around spring or summer, which appears to be a postponement, according to the Associated Press, due to construction delays on a pipeline and the apparent need to gain greater public support.

The plan has faced widespread opposition. Japanese fishermen, international environmentalists, and other governments in the region, including China, South Korea, and Taiwan, have all expressed concern. Some of the strongest pushback has come from Pacific Island countries, including from lawmakers, former leaders, regional fisheries management groups, and other organizations. Among those voices is the PIF, which is advocating for more time to deal with questions and concerns. Earlier this year, the PIF appointed a panel of independent global nuclear experts to help inform its members in their consultations with Japan and TEPCO. The experts have stressed that more data are needed to determine the safety of the water for disposal.

“We think that there is not enough scientific evidence to prove that the release is safe, environmentally, healthwise, and also for our economy in the Pacific,” says Puna, who is also the former Prime Minister of the Cook Islands. Until more information is shared and evaluated, he asks that Japan “please defer the discharge of the water.”

…………………………….  there appears to be a major disconnect between TEPCO and others, including the PIF panel of experts—who say that they’re concerned with the adequacy, accuracy, and reliability of the data backing up the decision to release the water.

Robert H. Richmond, a research professor and the director of the Kewalo Marine Laboratory at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, who is one of the panel experts, tells TIME that “the critical, foundational data upon which a sound decision could be made was either absent or, when we started getting more data,” he says, “extremely concerning.” He also casts doubt on if the IAEA is in the best position to assess the risks. “They’re an agency that has a mandate to promote the use of nuclear energy,” says Richmond, “and our mandate is to look after the people, the ocean, and the people who depend on the ocean. And our unanimous conclusion … is that this is a  bad idea that is not defended properly at this point, and that there are alternatives that Japan should really be looking at.”

“One of the biggest surprises to me was the fact that the data was so sparse,” says Ferenc Dalnoki-Veress, scientist-in-residence and adjunct professor at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, who is also on the PIF panel of experts. “There were prolonged gaps in data collection, which suggests that the matter may not have been given the level of attention and importance it deserved.” He adds that only a fraction of the tanks had been sampled, and only a handful of some 60 isotopes were typically measured in the samples—fewer than he would expect for this kind of assessment. (TEPCO says that the analysis done on a sample of tanks so far is just to assess the water’s condition in storage but that, after the purification process, further measurements will be taken on all the treated water before discharge to ensure that only that which meets sufficient standards of safety is released into the ocean).

Some still fear the safety of the treated water, and the far-reaching implications if it’s dumped into the ocean. Puna points out, for example, that the waters of the Western and Central Pacific Ocean produce much of the world’s tuna. If the tuna were to be impacted, it would cause major problems for Pacific nations, for which fisheries are a significant source of income, as well as for consumers globally.

In December, the U.S.-based National Association of Marine Laboratories also announced its opposition to TEPCO’s plans, publishing a position paper that says “there is a lack of adequate and accurate scientific data supporting Japan’s assertion of safety” while “there is an abundance of data demonstrating serious concerns about releasing radioactively contaminated water.”

……………………………………. A scarring past and a new path forward

Other nuclear plants across the globe have released treated wastewater containing tritium. Rafael Mariano Grossi, the IAEA’s director general, said in 2021 that Japan’s plan is “in line with practice globally, even though the large amount of water at the Fukushima plant makes it a unique and complex case.”

But Pacific Island nations have particular reason to be anxious. There is a noxious legacy of nuclear testing in the region, and other countries have historically treated the Pacific as a dumping ground for their waste. The U.S. conducted 67 nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands between 1946 and 1957—and disposed of atomic waste in Runit Dome, where it’s still stored. That testing led not only to forced relocations, but also to increased rates of cancers. Today there is concern that the dome is leaking and that rising sea levels might impact its structural integrity. France also conducted 193 nuclear tests from 1966 to 1996 at Moruroa and Fangataufa atolls in French Polynesia.

…………………….. Rather than let dumping wastewater into the ocean become the norm, at this juncture for nuclear energy, some say it’s an opportunity to explore different ways of doing things. The panel of PIF experts has proposed several alternative solutions, including treating the water and storing it in more secure tanks to allow the tritium time to decay, or using the treated water to make concrete for use in projects that won’t have high contact with humans.

“This is not the first nuclear disaster and by no means is it going to be the last,” says Richmond. “This is an opportunity for Japan,” he says, “to do the right thing and to invest time, effort, and money into determining and coming up with new ways of handling radioactive waste and setting a new trajectory.”

February 6, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans, wastes | 1 Comment

Renewables In China Trend Upward While Nuclear Trends Flat.

The blue line at the bottom is nuclear, and not particularly sharp eyes will note that it’s trending to flat. The red line at the top is wind, water, and solar cumulative additions to annual TWh of electricity flowing into China’s grid, and not particularly sharp eyes will note it’s curving upwards.

The natural experiment of renewables vs nuclear continues in China, and it continues to unfold in renewables’ favor. 

Clean Technica, ByMichael Barnard, 7 Feb 23,

I’ve been publishing assessments of the poor performance of nuclear compared to wind and solar in China for years (2014, 2019, 2021, 2022). My premise nine years ago was a first principles assertion with limited empirical results that wind and solar would radically outstrip nuclear in China. Why? Modularity reducing long-tailed risks, as Professor Bent Flyvbjerg, global expert and go to person for megaprojects, puts it in his new book How Big Things Get Done, where he includes my assessment of the natural experiment.

Subsequent assessments found that was true. Every year, the combination of wind and solar, and usually both individually, outstripped new nuclear generation, both in raw nameplate capacity and in additional TWh of annual generation. But as Professor Mark Z. Jacobson likes to remind us, it’s not WS, it’s WWS, that is wind, water, and solar. And so, today I spent a bit of time looking at hydroelectric generation capacity additions around the world since 2000, which turned out to be almost entirely in China. Of the 132.5 GW of new big hydroelectric projects connected to the grid in the world since 2000, 113 GW were in China. Unsurprising to anyone paying the slightest attention, but still, big numbers.

But what does that mean when added to wind and solar and compared to nuclear, leveraging the 2010 to 2022 data set I already had?…………………………………….

there is an interesting question about all forms of electrical generation, which is what capacity factors they are operating at. China’s wind and solar were historically curtailed by transmission connection challenges, which have been being resolved every year. Last year’s bumper crop of offshore wind, of course, were connected with HVDC to the grid without challenges.

What about hydro? It has different challenges for capacity factors, typically having a spring spate with often far too much water to use for generation, and a fall lull where generation is low. In the case of China, the best data I have at present is from the International Hydropower Association (IHA) which lists 1,355 TWh of electrical generation from 370,160 MW of capacity in 2020. That’s a 42% capacity factor, which I used for the generation.

I was somewhat surprised by this, and would be interested in better data, should anyone have some at hand. What it does mean is that while nuclear added a total of about 243 TWh of net new electrical generation from 2010 through 2022, hydro only added about 229 TWh of new generation. It was an interesting result which I’ll spend a little time assessing in a bit. Of course, wind energy added about 711 TWh of new generation annually over that period and solar added about 474 TWh. Both outstripped nuclear and hydro.


For purposes of wind, solar, and nuclear, I’d been simply presenting the new TWh of generation added each year. But in adding water to the data set, it seemed reasonable to make it cumulative.

In the graph above , the blue line at the bottom is nuclear, and not particularly sharp eyes will note that it’s trending to flat. The red line at the top is wind, water, and solar cumulative additions to annual TWh of electricity flowing into China’s grid, and not particularly sharp eyes will note it’s curving upwards.

Poking at the disparity between additions of actual TWh by renewable generation source a bit more, there are a few things to note.

The first, of course, is that wind and solar siting is much simpler than major hydroelectric siting. They just need flattish areas with good wind and sun, and wind likes ridge lines where flat bits can be made. Big hydro needs a big river with a reasonably significant drop along its length and at least one place where it’s carved a big valley. Meandering rivers like the Mississippi need not apply, although they are much better for inland shipping. The combination means that it’s typically easier to get materials and workers for wind and solar farms to the sites, easier to move construction vehicles around them and the like.

And hydroelectric reservoirs have another reality: you can’t live or work where they are. Unlike solar farms which can simply be built around existing buildings or roads, or wind farms where turbines can be built in the non-productive corners of farm fields, hydroelectric reservoirs displace everybody and everything where they exist. …………………………………

Still, China has managed to construct and attach 16 of them [hydro-electric dams] to the grid since 2000. I was aware of the Three Gorges Dam, of course, but was unaware that it was a small portion of the hydroelectric China had constructed. And while each project’s cost and schedule results vs plans are unavailable, China did succeed in building them.

The natural experiment of renewables vs nuclear continues in China, and it continues to unfold in renewables’ favor.  https://cleantechnica.com/2023/02/06/renewables-in-china-trend-upward-while-nuclear-trends-flat/

February 6, 2023 Posted by | China, renewable | Leave a comment

Death and Japan’s nuclear shelter salesman

Khrushchev once speculated that the survivors of the apocalypse would envy the dead. I agree.

LEO LEWIS,  https://www.ft.com/content/5dbd0e08-5eec-4486-a1ba-fe1948d11159— 5 Feb 23

The “doomsday clock” maintained since 1947 by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists is many things. An index of our gossamer proximity to annihilation; a metaphor for the human paradox of progress and regression; a near-drained reservoir of hope that the gods will spare us from ourselves. And, of course, a superb marketing tool for any half-decent nuclear shelter salesman.

The Bulletin’s January 24 decision to move the hands of its doomsday clock closer to midnight (signifying global catastrophe) than they have ever been before should, logically, give the bunker business a recession-defying sales spike. The collective shrug it will actually get is more profoundly alarming.

For Hiroki Nakajima, the marketing director of shelter-maker World Net International (WNI), these are comparatively good times. North Korean ballistic missile tests and China’s rising military power, he says, have driven Japanese shelter sales significantly higher than in the past. The fear factor soared after Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine and started issuing explicit nuclear threats. WNI historically used to sell only a couple of $80,000 premium shelters a year; in 2022 that shot up to a still modest 25 — hardly a nation gripped with fear.

Nakajima, whose best customers are the very wealthy and very nervous, says he will consider listing the company on the Tokyo Stock Exchange “as society’s needs require”. He delivers his nuclear shelter sales pitch from a medium-sized warehouse with models arranged by size, blast resilience and interior decor. I am shown into one with eggshell blue padded walls and, optimistically given the post-Armageddon broadcasting constraints, a wall-mounted TV.

We are in the smallish seaside town of Yaizu, a pretty fishing port that looks back on to a snow-capped Mount Fuji and whose placidness contrasts effectively with the mental picture of the horrors that would make a shelter purchase value for money. Nakajima’s marketing strategy includes judicious repetition of the phrase “your whole family will die” wherever appropriate; mostly as the certain outcome of any attempt at self-preservation other than buying a WNI shelter.

As efforts to induce apocalyptic terror go, it is valiant stuff. But he is talking to someone who grew up in Britain in the 1980s: someone who has had his wits scared out of him by far, far more proficient fearmongers. Set against (among others) Threads, The War Game, When the Wind Blows and the Protect and Survive public information films, Japanese shelter marketing feels almost upbeat. As Cold War children we hummed pop songs that were more chillingly referential to nuclear obliteration than the WNI website. And that was when the Doomsday clock was set further from midnight than it is now.

But Nakajima is not without support in his bid to set out the risks. Last month, the Japanese government began considering for the first time what a shelter subsidy scheme might look like, suggesting that its assessment of the nuclear threat has advanced from the general to the specific. Should such a subsidy emerge, says Nakajima, sales could be 100 times what they are now.

I sit for some time in WNI’s cramped showcase shelter, imagining the circumstances that might bring me to this bunker if I ever owned one: the mass extinction beyond its sturdily engineered walls, the irradiated cinders of civilisation blown against its air filter intake, the endless weeks cocooned with whichever loved ones made it in time, mourning those who did not. Nikita Khrushchev once speculated that the survivors of such a war would envy the dead. I agreed, and Nakajima quietly lost a customer.

The faint feeling of absurdity in WNI’s showroom points, obliquely, to a problem with the doomsday clock. Arguably the most potent symbol of humanity’s collective need to change tack, the clock is now set at just 90 seconds to midnight but seems to have lost its capacity to terrify at a time when we should be more terrified than ever before.

For while the clock is most closely associated in the public mind with the threat of nuclear war, it has long been a broader metric of imperilment from all human-made global disaster — a spectrum of risk ranging from climate change, and the denial of it, to microscopic autonomous robots.

The trouble with the clock is that, where once it was a paramount siren, it is now merely one of many alarms telling us that we are doomed. Under cover of that surfeit of fear, the clock has now gone pretty much as far as it can without being right. That is something none of us — even those with the best shelter $80,000 will buy — can afford to see proved.

February 6, 2023 Posted by | Japan, marketing | Leave a comment

China expresses dissatisfaction and protest over US shooting down civilian airship; US sets bad precedent

The Pentagon earlier said on Friday that the balloon did not pose a “military or physical” threat.

It’s widely known that US aircraft, appearing in civilian or military purposes, operate around China much more frequent than Chinese aircraft do around the US

Global Times, By Chen Qingqing and Liu Xuanzun, Feb 05, 2023

China expressed strong dissatisfaction and protest on Sunday against the US’ move to shoot down a non-threatening Chinese airship for civilian use, calling the US’ move an overreaction and vowing to reserve the right to take necessary actions. By turning an unintentional accident into an incident that has been hyped by the US officials and media, Washington is adding new uncertainties into the already-intense relations with China, creating a bad precedent for blurring the line between civilian and military uses, experts said. 

The Chinese Foreign Ministry expressed strong dissatisfaction and protested against the US’ use of force to shoot down a Chinese civilian unmanned airship, urging the US to properly handle the incident.

The Chinese side has verified the situation and communicated with the US side multiple times, saying the unintended entry of the airship into US airspace was due to force majeure and the incident was totally an accident, the ministry said.

The US military on Saturday local time shot down a “suspected Chinese spy balloon” off the Carolina coast following an authorization of the Biden administration after the airship has been flying over the US for days. The action was hailed by the US President Joe Biden as “a success,” according to US media reports. 

The “balloon episode” went viral on the US social media. A number of US hawks on China-related matters have been hyping the use of balloon for spying purpose and deliberately distorted it as “a direct assault on the US national sovereignty.” 

“The US attack on Chinese civilian unmanned airship by force is an obvious overreaction,” Senior Colonel Tan Kefei, a spokesperson at China’s Ministry of National Defense, said in a statement on Sunday. 

China will reserve the right to take necessary measures in dealing with similar situations, Tan said.

Tan’s remarks mean that if a foreign airship accidentally enters the Chinese airspace, the Chinese forces could also shoot it down in a similar manner, observers said.

Biden was first briefed on the balloon Tuesday and has been receiving updates from his national security team, CNN said. The Pentagon earlier said on Friday that the balloon did not pose a “military or physical” threat………………………………………….

Overreaction, bad precedent

The US shooting down the Chinese civilian balloon is also considered an overreaction from a technical point of view, said military aviation experts.

Despite admitting that the balloon did not pose a military or physical threat, an F-22 fighter of the US Air Force fired an AIM-9X air-to-air missile and shot down the balloon,  supported by F-15 fighters, tankers and warships, the Pentagon said on the day on its website. 

The missile was fired from the F-22 from an altitude of 58,000 feet (17,678 meters) when the balloon was 60,000 and 65,000 feet, the Pentagon said. 

This is like shooting a mosquito with a cannon, which is not only overreacting but also impractical, a Chinese military expert who requested anonymity told the Global Times on Sunday.

Compared with an unmanned balloon that flies with the wind, the US interception method that featured an advanced stealth fighter jet and fired a missile is too costly………………………………….

It’s widely known that US aircraft, appearing in civilian or military purposes, operate around China much more frequent than Chinese aircraft do around the US, Lü noted. …………
more https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202302/1284857.shtml

February 6, 2023 Posted by | China, politics international | Leave a comment

China marketing nuclear reactors to Pakistan

 Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has inaugurated the third unit of
the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant (KANUPP), which has 1.1GW of power
generating capacity. Built with an investment of $2.7bn, the K-3 nuclear
unit is expected to ease Pakistan’s ongoing energy crisis, according to
Bloomberg.

It is the second Chinese-designed Hualong One reactor to be
deployed at KANUPP, having been built with the Chinese Government’s
assistance under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) initiative. At
the inauguration ceremony, Prime Minister Sharif said Pakistan ‘badly
needs’ clean and cheap sources of energy, be they nuclear, hydropower or
other renewables.

 Power Technology 3rd Feb 2023

https://www.power-technology.com/news/pakistan-karachi-nuclear-power-plant/

February 6, 2023 Posted by | China, marketing, Pakistan | Leave a comment

South Korea to sell 40 trilion won ($32.55 billion) nuclear power plant to Turkey.

 South Korea has conveyed its preliminary proposal to Turkiye for
constructing a major nuclear power plant in Turkiye, local Turkish media
reports. According to the report, Korea Electric Power Corp. (KEPCO)
presented the proposal regarding the construction of four reactors capable
of providing 1,400 megawatts (MW) of electricity in the northern province
of Sinop. The project is forecast to be worth about 40 trillion won ($32.55
billion).

 Middle East Monitor 2nd Feb 2023

South Korea to build nuclear plant in Turkiye

February 6, 2023 Posted by | marketing, South Korea | Leave a comment

Confusion to the public” and “embarrassing expressions”…Nuclear Regulation Commission blacked out documents provided by METI, which were not made public

Three internal review documents of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), which are conspicuously blacked out, in Minato Ward, Tokyo, on March 3.

February 3, 2023
On February 3, the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), the secretariat of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), released documents on its review process in response to the issue of undisclosed information exchange between the NRA and officials of the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) over the review of nuclear power plant operation periods. The Agency did not disclose any of the materials it had provided to the Regulation Authority, and most of the internal review materials were “blacked out” with only three pages. The Agency’s backward-looking attitude toward information disclosure was conspicuous, and it was not clear whether the views of the Agency, which promotes nuclear power generation, had any influence on the regulatory system.
◆The Regulatory Agency reiterated that it had “exhausted all necessary explanations.
　What was made public was the status of internal studies at the Regulatory Agency for reviewing the operating period, which was stipulated to be “40 years in principle, with a maximum of 60 years. Although the Regulatory Agency received from the Ene Agency an imaginary diagram of the revision of the law and other materials, it did not disclose any of the materials prepared by the Ene Agency, saying that the Ene Agency, the preparer, should decide whether or not to disclose the information.
Although the Regulatory Agency’s internal study materials were believed to envision multiple patterns of legal revision related to the operation period and describe the advantages and challenges of each, the majority of the materials were not disclosed. At the press conference, Yoichiro Kurokawa, director of the Regulatory Agency’s General Affairs Division, explained, “The documents contain the views of the person who prepared them and are far removed from the views of the organization, so disclosing them would cause confusion among the public.
　When asked by the media about the content of the blacked-out section, Mr. Kurokawa stated that in the section on the advantages of the proposed amendment of the articles to the minimum necessary, it was stated that “on the surface of the text, it looks almost unchanged,” and added, “In the first place, since we are changing the regulations for the operation period, it is inappropriate to say that ‘almost unchanged’ is the case. There were expressions that seemed embarrassing, and we determined that it was not appropriate to disclose them.”
　At the press conference, a number of people pointed out that the disclosure was insufficient, but Section Chief Kurokawa reiterated that “we have done all the necessary explanations.
　Before the Regulatory Commission ordered a review of the regulatory system regarding the operation period in October of last year, the Regulatory Agency had met with EneAgency officials at least seven times between July and September to exchange information. (Nozomi Masui)
https://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/229204

February 4, 2023 Posted by | Japan | , , | Leave a comment

Government to Revise Basic Policy on Final Disposal of Nuclear Waste for First Time in Eight Years

February 2, 2023
The Japanese government has decided to revise its basic policy for the first time in eight years toward the final disposal of high-level radioactive waste (so-called “nuclear waste”) generated by nuclear power generation.

The government has decided to implement “geological disposal,” in which a final disposal site will be established and buried deeper than 300 meters below the ground. However, the number of target areas has not increased since then, and there are calls from local residents to expand their interest nationwide.

Against this backdrop, the government has decided to revise for the first time in eight years its basic policy outlining the details of its efforts to realize final disposal, and has compiled a new draft basic policy.

The draft clearly states that “the government will work together and under its own responsibility toward the final disposal of the waste,” and it also states that the government will take a front-loaded approach to the issue.

The proposal also includes a new initiative to hold discussions with the heads of local governments where nuclear power plants are located, among other things.

Through these efforts, the government hopes to increase the number of regions that will accept surveys and move forward with the selection of a final disposal site.
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20230202/k10013968751000.html?fbclid=IwAR1N8fy-DN4FoPsdEzJjArdrYv5VO5EQiw85zrb7D3Y_xT3P2ONvtnl- PCc

February 4, 2023 Posted by | Japan | , | Leave a comment

Takahama nuclear reactor in Fukui halted after alert goes off



The No. 4 reactor at Kansai Electric Power Co.’s Takahama nuclear power plant in Takahama, Fukui Prefecture

Jan 30, 2023

Fukui – A reactor at Kansai Electric Power Co.’s Takahama nuclear power station in Fukui Prefecture was automatically halted Monday after an alert went off warning of a rapid decrease in the number of neutrons within the unit, the complex’s regulator and operator said.

The No. 4 reactor was halted at 3:21 p.m., the Osaka-based utility said, adding that there has been no indication of the incident causing environmental contamination. The reactor’s cooling function is normal, according to the Nuclear Regulation Authority.

The No. 4 reactor restarted in November after being shut down for routine inspections.

The seaside plant has four reactors and faces the Sea of Japan.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/01/30/national/takahama-nuclear-plant-halt/

February 4, 2023 Posted by | Japan | , , | Leave a comment

Judge to be Changed Just Before Tokai Daini Nuclear Power Plant Appeals Court; Plaintiffs See Problems with His Past Representation of the State

Tokai Daini Nuclear Power Plant is under construction for restart, from the Oozuru helicopter in Tokai-mura, Ibaraki Prefecture, in August 2021.

January 25, 2023
The Tokyo High Court, which is in charge of the lawsuit against Japan Atomic Power Company’s Tokai No. 2 Nuclear Power Plant (Tokai-mura, Ibaraki Prefecture), is expected to move to a different division in the appeal trial of the injunction lawsuit against the plant’s operation. The plaintiffs’ lawyers had asked the presiding judge to voluntarily withdraw from the case, citing problems with the fact that he had represented the national government in past administrative lawsuits related to nuclear power plants. The first date of the appeal hearing, which was scheduled for March 31, has been canceled. (Mayumi Kojima)
Defense team “appreciates the decision.
　According to the defense team, the chief judge in charge of the case, Norio Nagatani, worked for many years in the Litigation Division of the Ministry of Justice, which is in charge of proving the government’s case in administrative lawsuits. In addition to representing the government in several nuclear power plant-related lawsuits, he was also a councilor in charge of litigation and in a position to direct the administrative lawsuit (later withdrawn) that sought an injunction against the operation of Tokai No. 2 from the government.
　Last September, Nagatani was transferred from the head of the Hiroshima District Court to the Tokyo High Court, where he became the presiding judge for the appeal of the injunction lawsuit. In December, the defense lawyers asked Nagatani to voluntarily withdraw from the case on the grounds that a fair trial would not be conducted.
　According to attorney Yuichi Kaito of the defense team, on the 25th of this month, Mr. Nagatani explained to them that “in view of various circumstances, the case will be reassigned. A new department is expected to take over the proceedings.
　At a press conference held in Tokyo on March 25, attorney Hiroyuki Kawai said, “Mr. Nagatani said he would be fair and neutral regardless of his background, but objectively speaking, there is an inference that he is siding with the administration. （I commend him for making the decision to change the case. Mr. Kaito said, “You should not be both the representative of the government and the presiding judge in administrative lawsuits. （The exchange of judges (between judges and prosecutors) was banned by the DPJ administration, and the exchange of judges with representatives of the state in administrative lawsuits should also have been banned,” he noted.
◆Although the motion was filed… “It is highly unusual for a judge to actually be replaced.”
　The appeal of the injunction lawsuit against the Tokai No. 2 nuclear power plant by Japan Atomic Power Company (JAPC), which resulted in the unusual prospect of a change in the trial division in charge of the case, was heard by the court. It is rare for judges to be replaced under the same circumstances, and an expert pointed out that “the very fact that he tried to preside over the case in the first place shows a lack of common sense.
　According to the plaintiffs’ lawyers in the Tokai No. 2 lawsuit, a Supreme Court judge avoided participating in the hearing of the Hyakuri Air Base (Ibaraki Prefecture) lawsuit, in which the constitutionality of the Self Defense Forces was disputed and the Supreme Court rejected the appeal in 1989, because he had been involved in the government’s substantiation activities in the past. In 1991, a judge at the Odawara Branch of the Yokohama District Court was replaced after the plaintiffs alleged that he had conducted the case in a way that favored the defendants.
　In 2018, the Kanazawa Branch of the Nagoya High Court rejected a motion by the plaintiffs to replace a judge at the first instance court that had vacated an injunction on KEPCO’s Nos. 3 and 4 reactors at the Ooi Nuclear Power Plant in Fukui Prefecture. The Kanazawa District Court also rejected the plaintiffs’ motion for an injunction against Hokuriku Electric Power Co.’s Shiga Nuclear Power Plant (Ishikawa Prefecture), which is currently under litigation.
　Former judge Hajime Tada, attorney-at-law, commented on the replacement motion, “It is often a kind of a warning shot to the court. It is extremely unusual for a judge to actually be replaced. In the case of Tokai Daini, he pointed out, “It cannot be said that the court can make a neutral decision, and it is quite natural for the court to change the trial division. He criticized the change, saying, “It shows that the court is leaning toward the administration and disrespects the independence of the judiciary. (Kenta Onozawa)
Plaintiffs’ Residents Welcome the Decision
　The plaintiff residents living near the Tokai Daini Nuclear Power Plant voiced their surprise and welcome. Hiroko Kawano, 80, whose home is 1.7 km from the plant, said, “It was too badly done, so I am glad. I think the plaintiffs’ petition was approved,” she said happily.
　She learned of Judge Norio Nagatani’s background at a rally held by the plaintiffs’ group in Tokyo on April 22. I thought the government was doing an amazing job,” he said. Although there is supposed to be separation of powers, it looks as if the government has intervened in the appointment of the court.
　Kiyoko Aizawa, 81, of Tokai-mura, said, “I thought the government would continue to forcefully proceed. The news reports have been covering the situation, so perhaps they couldn’t just ignore it. Tokai No. 2 is decrepit, and there are many people living around it. I don’t know who the next presiding judge will be, but I definitely want to win.
　A 74-year-old man living in Hitachi City, a neighbor to the north of Tokai Village, said, “The court effectively accepted our side of the story, and I think they really meant to hit us where it hurts. I don’t think the government’s major policy of wanting to overturn the first trial at any cost has changed. I don’t think the government has changed its major policy of wanting to overturn the first trial at any cost, and I think they may try some more tricks.
　On the other hand, Japan Atomic Power Company (JAPC) responded to an interview with this newspaper, saying, “We do not know the details of the case, so we will refrain from commenting. (Nagasaki High School and University)
https://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/227401?fbclid=IwAR2M8pe0zQeUjHI6qABHn-U-W6rBcrAcd5A5jElo-qNPkMf9RmUGhNtz5w4

February 4, 2023 Posted by | Japan | , , | Leave a comment

China objects to more nuclear sub talks among UK, U.S, Australia

BEIJING, Feb 3 (Reuters) – China “firmly objects” to further cooperation between Britain, U.S. and Australia on nuclear submarines, its foreign ministry said in a regular briefing on Friday.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said, “China is gravely concerned about this and firmly objects to it,” in response to a question that cited a media report saying British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s visit to the United States in March may yield announcements on more nuclear submarine cooperation…………. Reporting by Yew Lun Tian and Joe Cash ; Writing by Liz Lee; Editing by Christian Schmollinger https://www.reuters.com/world/china-objects-more-nuclear-sub-talks-among-uk-us-australia-2023-02-03/

February 3, 2023 Posted by | China, politics international | Leave a comment

Many errors in TEPCO’s nuclear power plant examination documents at Kashiwazaki Kariwa Unit 3

January 19, 2023
On January 19, TEPCO Holdings revealed that 149 errors were found in the examination documents for the Kashiwazaki Kariwa Unit 3 nuclear power plant in Niigata Prefecture, which is under review by the Nuclear Regulation Authority before its 30th year of operation. 131 of the errors were made using information from Unit 2, which has already been examined.

TEPCO apologized at the review meeting on the same day, saying, “We should reflect on this. The Regulatory Commission said, “This is a matter that concerns the reliability of the documents, and we hope you will take it seriously,” and demanded that a recurrence of the problem be prevented.

According to TEPCO, because they did not know the names of the materials required for the documents, they used those of the Unit 2 reactor of the same type. The same document contained an error due to a programming error, which was discovered when the company checked for similar errors.

Kashiwazaki Kariwa Unit 3, which began operation in August 1993, is currently shut down and has not yet applied for an inspection to restart operations. Nuclear power plants are required to undergo an examination to check the management of their facilities before they reach 30 years of operation. Kyodo News
https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOUA19CCU0Z10C23A1000000/?fbclid=IwAR339KW18B9GAITAh2AdBAorc1cA-7vkU_OoWvyCT7G1ECB-RI8xeldvadc

February 3, 2023 Posted by | Japan | , , , | Leave a comment

Takahama nuclear reactor in Fukui halted after alert goes off

 https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/01/30/national/takahama-nuclear-plant-halt/ 30 Jan 23, FUKUI – A reactor at Kansai Electric Power Co.’s Takahama nuclear power station in Fukui Prefecture was automatically halted Monday after an alert went off warning of a rapid decrease in the number of neutrons within the unit, the complex’s regulator and operator said.

The No. 4 reactor was halted at 3:21 p.m., the Osaka-based utility said, adding that there has been no indication of the incident causing environmental contamination. The reactor’s cooling function is normal, according to the Nuclear Regulation Authority.

The No. 4 reactor restarted in November after being shut down for routine inspections.

The seaside plant has four reactors and faces the Sea of Japan.

January 31, 2023 Posted by | Japan, safety | Leave a comment

Can Talks with China about Nuclear Weapons Be Constructive?

January 26, 2023 Gregory Kulacki  https://blog.ucsusa.org/gregory-kulacki/can-talks-with-china-about-nuclear-weapons-be-constructive/

Politico reported US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is “under pressure” to “raise administration concerns” about the size of China’s nuclear arsenal when he travels to Beijing in early February.

Constructive conversations on nuclear weapons policy are urgently needed. Both governments are upgrading their nuclear capabilities. Chinese military planners worry about US preparations to use nuclear weapons first to forestall defeat in a conventional war, as well as US efforts to undermine China’s ability to retaliate. US military planners are concerned about the construction of new Chinese missile silos, which will significantly increase the probability and magnitude of Chinese nuclear retaliation if the United States uses nuclear weapons first.

The nuclear aspect of what some US observers describe as a new Cold War with China is different than the US nuclear contest with the Soviet Union. It’s not about numbers. Chinese leaders don’t express interest in numerical parity. President Biden’s remarks on China’s nuclear weapons policy suggest he thinks they do. That’s unfortunate. If a desired outcome of Blinken’s visit is to start a dialogue on nuclear weapons, he will need to focus less on the numbers and more on why Chinese leaders built the silos.

What Chinese leaders want – what they have wanted since they decided to develop nuclear weapons in 1955 – is to be able to use conventional military force without undue concern the United States will use nuclear weapons to stop them. Being able to credibly threaten to use nuclear weapons to prevent or defeat Chinese conventional military initiatives has been a cornerstone of US defense policy in East Asia since the Korean War.

Chinese efforts to negate US first use threats are an important part of Chinese nuclear strategy. Chinese leaders believe if they can convince US decision-makers they will retaliate, then they can safely ignore US threats to use nuclear weapons first.

Chinese military planners have always been concerned their comparatively small nuclear force could tempt US decision makers to try to wipe it out at the beginning of a war. Continued US investment in ballistic missile defense creates additional doubt about US respect for China’s ability to retaliate.

The bulk of China’s current nuclear force consists of missiles launched from trucks. Recent technological advances increase the possibility the United States could destroy or disable those missiles with conventional munitions. Switching to silos makes that far less likely. 

Current US projections of a large increase in the size of China’s nuclear force assume the new silos are an addition, not a replacement. They also assume everyone of those silos will contain a new missile and every one of those missiles will carry multiple warheads. But China does not need that many warheads to achieve its strategic objective.  Even if the silos sit empty, US military planners must assume they’re not, and US decision-makers must assume China can retaliate if the United States uses nuclear weapons first.

If Secretary Blinken’s only objective is to talk about numbers, his Chinese interlocutor can tell China’s leaders their decision to build the silos was a strategic success. It is hard to see how that makes the United States or its Asian allies safer. 

It would be wiser if Blinken said the United States no longer needs to threaten to use nuclear weapons first to keep the peace. Instead of handing Chinese leaders a strategic victory, he would convey a surprising US confidence in its conventional forces. That’s more likely to restrain Chinese leaders than what they continue to see as empty US threats to start a nuclear war; threats revolutionary leader Mao Zedong famously described as a “paper tiger.”

As paradoxical as it may seem to a US strategic culture obsessed with size, forgoing the option to use nuclear weapons first may be the best way to get Chinese leaders to respect the ability of the United States to defend its allies, and to begin a constructive conversation about nuclear weapons.

January 29, 2023 Posted by | China, politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »