France importing power, as nuclear stations cut output because of global heating
EDF has warned it will be forced to cut power output from some of its
nuclear reactors as hot weather in France drives up river temperatures. It
leaves Europe facing even higher prices as the energy giant is unable to
use the Rhône and Garonne river to cool its plants.
The company’s S Alban plant’s output will be reduced, from 2.6 gigawatts to 700 megawatts
from Saturday, to adhere to environment regulations. Cutbacks are also
expected at the Tricastin plant, where two units will stay at a minimum
level of 400 megawatts.
EDF’s nuclear fleet is already operating below
capacity due to reactor faults that it is trying to fix, an issue that has
pushed up electricity prices and forced France to rely on power imported
from Britain.
Telegraph 3rd Aug 2022
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/08/03/water-shortage-cripples-nuclear-reactors-france/
France’s problems with nuclear corporation EDF
Following my previous post on EDF’s woes and their impact on the
European market, here’s a list of topics, both practical and political,
that the company needs to deal, and their domestic impact in France.
Corrosion issues. 12 plants, mostly the more modern ones, have been stopped
due to cracks in pipes;
Flamanville. The only new nuclear plant in
construction in France, it has been beset by delays and cost overruns;
Overall supply levels. With the existing nuclear fleet getting older, it
will likely require more maintenance (both scheduled and unscheduled), and
become more vulnerable to loss of skills as experienced nuclear workers
retire and are only partly replaced given the uncertain prospects of the
sector; Expensive imports. The lower production levels mean that EDF needs
to import increasing volumes of power. With the current gas crisis
triggered by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, this leads to very high power
prices and significant costs;
Blocked retail prices. After years of being
told that France has the cheapest electricity thanks to nuclear, the price
of retail electricity is a highly volatile political topic. Energy prices
are a hot-button issue everywhere, but they are specifically so for
President Macron;
The ARENH boondoggle. As part of the opening of the
French power market pushed by the EU commission, EDF has been forced to
sell a chunk of its nuclear production (initially 100 TWh/y, ie roughly 25%
of its production) at a fixed price (42 EUR/MWh) to new competitors on the
retail market;
EDF restructuring and EU competition issues. Several of the
items above remind us that EDF is a topic closely watched in Brussels. The
earlier EDF restructuring concept (codename “Hercule”) which proposed
to split EDF in 2 entities (nuclear and hydro, publicly owned: networks and
renewables, to be listed) was opposed by unions, and viewed with skepticism
in Brussels;
One of the topics that derailed the Hercule process was what
to do with EDF’s large portfolio of hydro generation. The EU commission
has long wanted to open up that sector to competition and force the
government to tender the dams when the concessions granted to EDF come to
an end. The fact that EDF has proven unable to build the next-generation
EPRs is either seen as a temporary blip, or a plot by outsiders to weaken
the country (anti-nuclear policies, pushed in particular by Germany, are
seen to have willfully weakened France’s industrial base). Renewables,
despite all evidence to the contrary, are still seen as either a useless
greenwashing sideshow or a dangerous distraction.
Jerome in Paris 4th Aug 2022
https://jeromeaparis.substack.com/p/edf-the-strategic-questions-and-to
Danger of nuclear weapons convoys on the UK’s M6
CAMPAIGNERS have again released photographs of a Ministry of Defence
convoy on the M6 – something they say ‘terrifies’ them. Members of
the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament say they believe trucks making up the
convoy were transporting nuclear warheads.
The route they take uses the M6 through Cheshire, Warrington and St Helens to and from the atomic weapons establishment in Berkshire and the Trident nuclear weapons system base at
Coulport, in the West of Scotland. The convoy is believed to have been
parked at Weeton Barracks, near Kirkham in Lancashire, on the night of
Monday, July 25, after passing through Cheshire on the M6.
St Helens Star 4th Aug 2022
https://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/news/20601561.nuclear-weapon-convoy-m6-terrifies-campaigners/
Nuclear energy vs renewables: which is the best solution for the climate crisis?
There is no silver bullet to the climate crisis, and renewables
look like a better, cheaper solution.
In addition to safety concerns,
rising costs are a central reason why the number of new plants under
construction remains limited. Since 2011, nuclear power construction costs
globally have doubled or even tripled.
China is, however, notable in its
nuclear ambitions. The country is planning at least 150 new reactors in the
next 15 years, more than the rest of the world has built in the past 35,
though cost could ultimately change this direction of travel. There are
some big nuclear power stations on the cards – think Hinkley Point C or
Sizewell C in the UK.
But the major excitement among many nuclear
enthusiasts, including plenty of UK MPs is around so-called small modular
reactors (SMRs). If you believe the hype, they are the answer to all
climate and energy ills.
So what is the solution? Renewables, renewables
and more renewables? In short, yes. The costs of solar, wind power and
storage continue to fall, and by 2026 global renewable electricity capacity
is forecast to rise by more than 60 per cent, to a level that would equal
the current total global power capacity of fossil fuels and nuclear
combined, says the IEA.
Some argue nuclear can be a clean back-up option
for when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun isn’t shining. But again,
other options already exist, including demand response (for example,
plugging in your electric car when there is lots of energy and not
switching on your washing machine when the system is under strain),
large-scale storage and interconnections between different countries.
New Statesman 4th Aug 2022
Nuclear energy for Colorado? The cost is one very big obstacle
Post Independent, Allen Best 6 Aug 22, A nuclear reactor might be a nice addition to the economy of Craig, the community in northwestern Colorado. But can Colorado afford nuclear power?
……………….Sen. Bob Rankin in the last legislative session tried to get fellow legislators to appropriate $500,000 (amended to $250,000) to study the potential for nuclear.
…………Conspicuously absent was support from the administration of Gov. Jared Polis. The bill failed 3-2 on a party-line vote.
Nuclear has a nagging problem, though. It’s expensive. Advocates rarely mention this. Costs of Georgia’s Plant Vogtle, the only U.S. nuclear power plant under construction, have ballooned from $14 billion to now $30 billion-plus. In South Carolina, investors pulled the plug on a nuclear power plant after spending $9 billion. It has become among the very costliest of energy sources, only slightly less than rooftop solar, according to Lazard, the financial analyst.
Modular nuclear reactors have been promoted as a way to shave costs. Specific projects have been conceived in both Idaho and Wyoming. Bill Gates is an investor in the latter. Maybe they will overcome this cost problem. We won’t really know for another 10, maybe 15 years.
State Sen. Chris Hansen remains skeptical. He has expertise unsurpassed among legislators. He set out to become a nuclear engineer after first laying eyes on a reactor when a high school junior from the farm country of Kansas. He got his degree but had already turned his attention to economics. He went on to earn degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and, from Oxford, a Ph.D. in resource economics.
Nuclear, he told a county commissioner from Sterling in 2019, when I first heard him answer this question, simply does not compete in cost. Last week, when we talked, he offered more detail.
“I think those technologies will have to prove themselves,” he said of modular nuclear reactors. “Right now, in the best-case scenario it looks like they will deliver electricity at $60 to $70 per megawatt-hour. Wind and solar are coming in at less than $20.”
……….. Hansen suggests that reliability [of rennewables] may more economically be provided by less expensive alternatives. For example, he has pushed transmission and passed legislation to create organized markets that will allow electricity to be moved across broader geographic areas in response to consumer demands. Colorado is currently an island with limited bridges to other areas………… https://www.postindependent.com/opinion/allen-best-nuclear-energy-has-obstacles-too/
Drought may force nuclear power production cut
https://journalrecord.com/2022/08/05/drought-may-force-nuclear-power-production-cut/ Associated Press August 5, 2022 0
PARIS — French Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne warned that France is facing the “most severe drought” ever recorded in the country and announced the activation of a government crisis unit.
The crisis unit will be in charge of monitoring the situation in the hardest-hit areas and coordinate measures like bringing drinking water to some places. It will also monitor the impact of the drought on France’s energy production, transport infrastructure and agriculture.
The drought may force French energy giant EDF to cut power production at nuclear plants which use river water to cool reactors.
France now has 62 regions with restrictions on water usage due to the lack of rain.
Borne said many areas in France are going through a “historic situation” as the country endures its third heatwave this summer.
“The exceptional drought we are currently experiencing is depriving many municipalities of water and is a tragedy for our farmers, our ecosystems and biodiversity,” the statement said.
A clarification about China and Taiwan
Norman Realname, 5 Aug 22,
I’m grateful to a reader for providing this explanation.
I still think that it’s a pretty bad idea for USA and Australia to start a probable World War 3 over Taiwan.
The Republic of China (ROC) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) are NOT synonyms and should not be used as such. The ROC has NO control over Hong Kong; it’s a semi-autonomous territory ruled by the PRC under the “one country, two systems” arrangement, as per treaty. Thus, grumbling about democratic subversion aside, there was no question of the PRC’s sovereignty over it.
The ROC, however, DOES have control over Taiwan, and the PRC does NOT. As to why this is the case, the most oversimplified answer is that the Chinese Civil War never fully ended and both governments claim to rule the territory of the other, but since the PRC has the de facto control of almost all of it, it’s recognized as the “real” China. The more complicated answer is that since democratization the ROC government no longer wants to rule the mainland and sees itself as a separate Taiwanese nation but is forbidden to relinquish its territorial claims (under threat of invasion) by the PRC who view Taiwan as integral Chinese territory and would interpret any movement away from them as secession (even though the PRC has never actually ruled over Taiwan).
The US and China differ over their interpretation of the situation. The PRC’s One China PRINCIPLE states that there is only one China, and Taiwan is a part of China. The US’s One China POLICY states that they *acknowledge* the PRC’s position on the matter, without actually saying whether or not they agree that Taiwan is part of China. In other words: the US generally agrees there is only one China, but they’re not sure (read: deliberately ambiguous) whether Taiwan is part of it.
Fundamentally, while the PRC has been successful in preventing international recognition of the ROC (Taiwan), they do not control the territory and cannot control the territory without:
1. The ROC (Taiwanese) government agreeing to hand over power peacefully to the PRC.
2. A full-scale military invasion of Taiwan aimed at the surrender and/or destruction of the ROC (Taiwanese) government.
To compare the situation to Hong Kong, – the crucial difference is the People’s Republic of China did not need to roll in their military to fight some theoretical Hong Kong military in order to be able to tell Hong Kong what to do.
Resumption of Mihama Nuclear Power Plant Unit 3 delayed due to leakage of water containing radioactive materials, Kansai Electric Power Co.
August 3, 2022
Kansai Electric Power Co. (KEPCO) announced on August 3 that it would postpone the resumption of power dispatch for the Mihama Unit 3 reactor (Fukui Prefecture), which is undergoing routine inspections and was scheduled to restart on August 12. This is due to a leak of water containing trace amounts of radioactive materials in the reactor’s auxiliary building, which has necessitated an investigation into the cause and restoration work. The resumption date has not yet been determined.
According to KEPCO, the leak was discovered during a routine inspection on the morning of January 1, near a device in the auxiliary reactor building that prevents primary cooling water from leaking outside. The amount of leaked water is estimated to be approximately 7 tons. The company claims that the water did not leak outside the building and that there is no environmental impact or radiation exposure to workers.
KEPCO, Yagi, Mori, and 3 others “appropriate for prosecution” by the Public Prosecutor’s Examination Board
Aug. 1, 2022
On August 1, the Osaka Second Public Prosecutors’ Office (Prosecutor’s Office) announced its decision to “consider indicting” former KEPCO Chairman Makoto Yagi (72), former Chairman Shosuke Mori (81), and former President Shigeki Iwane (69), all of whom had been accused of special breach of trust under the Companies Act, but were not charged by the Special Investigation Department of the Osaka District Public Prosecutors Office. The Special Investigation Department reopened the case.
The Special Investigation Department will reopen the investigation and, in principle, make a new decision within three months as to whether or not they are criminally responsible. Even if the indictment is not filed again, if the Public Prosecutor’s Office issues a second “appropriate for prosecution” resolution, the lawyer designated to act as prosecutor will be forced to prosecute the case.
In January, a citizens’ group, “Association to Prosecute KEPCO’s Illegal Refund of Nuclear Power Plant Money,” filed a review with the Public Prosecutor’s Office, appealing against the action taken by the Special Investigation Department.
A tax investigation by KEPCO led to the discovery that since 2019, 83 successive executives of KEPCO had received a total of approximately 370 million yen worth of money and goods from a former assistant director of Takahama Town in Fukui Prefecture, where the Takahama nuclear power plant is located (he died in 2007). It was also discovered that Yagi and Mori took the initiative to compensate 18 former executives with a total of approximately 260 million yen in the form of commissioned remuneration for a portion of the executives’ remuneration that had been reduced due to deteriorating business performance after the Great East Japan Earthquake.
The citizens’ group filed criminal charges against Yagi, Mori, and nine others, but in November 2009, the Special Investigation Department dropped all nine charges, finding no evidence of willful intent to cause damage to KEPCO. The prosecutors’ committee voted to “drop the indictment” against six of the nine except for Yagi and Mori. Ryo Numata and Yukina Furukawa
https://mainichi.jp/articles/20220801/k00/00m/040/062000c?fbclid=IwAR31eI65WQN2p6QhS-aNRYiZM7MookQGcsuQI6FrojStiS_3pINB4ep0_jE
Nuclear Weapons Policies of Japan and South Korea Challenged
July 31, 2022
By Jaya Ramachandran
GENEVA (IDN) — The Basel Peace Office, in cooperation with other civil society organisations, has challenged the nuclear weapons policies of Japan and South Korea in the UN Human Rights Council, maintaining that these violate the Right to Life, a right enshrined in Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
The two East Asian countries’ nuclear strategies have been called into question in reports submitted on July 14 as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the obligations of Japan, South Korea and 12 other countries under human rights treaties. (See Submission on Japan and Submission on South Korea).
The submissions, presented at a time when Russia has made nuclear threats to the US and NATO if they intervene in the Russian invasion of Ukraine, underline the need to address the risks of nuclear deterrence policies. Besides, Russia is not the only country that possesses nuclear weapons and/or maintains options to initiate nuclear war.
“In times of high tensions involving nuclear-armed and/or allied states, plans and preparations for the use of nuclear weapons elevate the risk of nuclear war, which would be a humanitarian catastrophe, severely violating the rights of current and future generations,” says Alyn Ware, Director of the Basel Peace Office. “Compliance with the Right to Life with respect to nuclear weapons is, therefore, an urgent matter, impacting the rights of all humanity.”
In 2018 the UN Human Rights Committee affirmed that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is incompatible with the Right to Life, and that States parties to the ICCPR have obligations to refrain from developing, acquiring, stockpiling and using them. They must also destroy existing stockpiles and pursue negotiations in good faith to achieve global nuclear disarmament.
But both Japan and South Korea are engaged in extended nuclear deterrence policies which involve the threat or use of US nuclear weapons on their behalf in an armed conflict. Both have also supported the option of first use of nuclear weapons on their behalf, even when the United States has been trying to step back from such a policy.
The Basel Peace Office and other civil society organisations argue that the extended nuclear deterrence policies of Japan and South Korea violate their human rights obligations, as is their lack of support for negotiations for comprehensive, global nuclear disarmament.
The submissions make several recommendations of policies the governments could take to conform to the Right to Life. These include adopting no-first-use policies and taking measures to phase out the role of nuclear weapons in their security doctrines.
This they could do by establishing a Northeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone and urging at the ongoing Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference an agreement on the global elimination of nuclear weapons by 2045, the 75th anniversary of the NPT.
The submissions are not solely critical of the two governments. They also applaud Japan and South Korea for the positive steps taken. South Kora, in particular, has deployed sports diplomacy (the 2018 Winter Olympics peace initiative) and other diplomatic efforts to rebuild dialogue and agreement with North Korea on a process for peace and denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
If the UN Human Rights Council decides to pick up on the challenges and recommendations in the submissions, and direct these to Japan and South Korea, the two countries are required to respond.
Similar submissions were made over the past two years to the Human Rights Council and other UN human rights bodies with regard to the nuclear policies of Russia, the USA, France, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, North Korea, Netherlands and the United Kingdom (see Nuclear weapons and the UN human rights bodies).
At that time, the issues were not taken up in earnest by the relevant bodies. However, it is hoped that the increased threat of nuclear war arising from the Ukraine conflict might stimulate the Human Rights Council to make this a much higher priority for the current review cycles. [IDN-InDepthNews — 31 July 2022]
Kishida to call for nuke-free world in historic address at U.N. treaty conference
July 31, 2022
In a year in which nuclear disarmament hopes have been dented by not-so-subtle references by Russia to its own arsenal following its invasion of Ukraine, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is set to make history as the first Japanese leader to address the United Nations’ nuclear nonproliferation treaty review conference, which begins in New York on Monday.
Kishida, who represents a district in Hiroshima, is expected to call for a world without nuclear weapons and for greater transparency among nuclear powers regarding their stockpiles and capabilities. His message will refer to Japan’s experience as the only country to have been attacked with an atomic bomb. The leader will also stress that all countries should neither use nuclear weapons nor threaten to use them.
Speaking to reporters in Tokyo on Friday, the prime minister said it was important to link the treaty’s ideals with current geopolitical realities.
“The debate on nuclear disarmament is atrophying,” Kishida said, and he announced he would present a plan at the conference that would hopefully serve as a roadmap toward reaching a world without nuclear weapons.
The prime minister sees Japan’s role at the nearly monthlong conference, which will focus on keeping the buildup of nuclear weapons under control, as one of helping to bridge the differences between nuclear powers and nonnuclear states. Kishida is hoping to promote talks between China and the United States on nuclear disarmament and arms control. He’s also expected to call on the international community to work toward North Korea’s denuclearization.
In addition, Kishida will attend a side meeting of foreign ministers of 12 nonnuclear states that make up the Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Initiative (NPDI).
Co-founded by Japan and nine other nations in September 2010, the NPDI works within the framework of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) on steps to increase transparency efforts on nuclear disarmament.
But the last NPT review conference in 2015 ended in failure. And the establishment of a separate treaty banning nuclear weapons is supported by nonnuclear weapons states frustrated with the lack of progress at the NPT toward the disarmament goal. In that context, reaching a final agreement among the 191 NPDI member states will be a challenge.
Long-held objectives
The NPT entered into force in 1970 with the objective of preventing the buildup of nuclear weapons and related technology. It also supported the peaceful use of nuclear energy, and had the goal of eventually achieving complete disarmament. Treaty signatories include five declared nuclear weapons states — United States, China, the United Kingdom, France, and Russia — all of which are permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates there were 12,705 nuclear warheads in existence worldwide as of January, of which about 9,440 were in military stockpiles available for potential use. An estimated 3,732 warheads were deployed with missiles and aircraft, and around 2,000 — nearly all of which belonged to Russia or the U.S. — were kept in a state of high operational alert. China had 350 warheads, Pakistan had 165 and India had 160.
India and Pakistan, which have declared their nuclear weapons programs, have not joined the NPT. Israel maintains a policy of strategic ambiguity on its nuclear weapons’ program and has not joined either, although it reportedly has 90 warheads. North Korea, believed to have at least 20 nuclear warheads, withdrew from the pact in 2003.
The tenth review conference is expected to consider a number of issues: universality of the Treaty; nuclear disarmament, including specific practical measures; nuclear non-proliferation, including the promoting and strengthening of safeguards; measures to advance the peaceful use of nuclear energy, safety and security; regional disarmament and non-proliferation.
NPT member states meet every five years, with this year’s conference having been postponed since 2020 due to the pandemic.
A shift in focus?
The 2015 conference failed to produce a substantial outcome due to differences over a proposal to establish a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. The U.S. criticized the Arab League over the lack of progress, while Egypt and Russia blamed the U.S., the U.K., and Canada.
Differences over a deadline for the process and individual requirements for reaching that goal sunk the deal, which would commit 27 Arab League members and observers, plus Iran and Israel, to ban nuclear weapons. Discussions on the issue may resume this year, but it’s likely that the Middle East will take a back seat amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
“We have to deal openly and honestly with threats to the treaty, in particular the effects of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its reckless behaviors that impact each of the treaty’s central tenets. I have no doubt that Russia’s actions will affect the climate at the conference,” said Adam Scheinman, U.S. special representative of the President for Nuclear Nonproliferation, at a news conference on July 26.
Marianne Hanson, an international security and arms control expert at the University of Queensland, said that one way conference participants could deal with fears about nuclear warfare in Ukraine is to issue “no first use” statements. But she is pessimistic about that coming to fruition.
“Members should issue no first-use statements — China is the only one of the treaty’s nuclear weapons’ states to do so. It would be a concession that would please the nonnuclear weapons’ states. But former U.S. President Barack Obama’s attempt to issue a no first use statement was halted by Japanese and South Korean objections. I don’t expect we will see any more NFU statements at this conference,” she said. The two U.S. allies were concerned such a statement would lead to a weakening of the nuclear deterrence provided by the U.S.
Japanese lawmakers and citizens will also be watching to see how NPT members handle the Russia issue and the role the prime minister and leader of the Liberal Democratic Party will play at the conference.
“Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine. It’s important to forge a path toward agreement (on the principle of no first use) after the joint statement is confirmed — an agreement that includes Russia,” Natsuo Yamaguchi, head of the LDP’s junior coalition partner Komeito, said at a news conference July 26. “I hope that Prime Minister Kishida will play a leading role in this process.”
‘Rival’ treaties
Another main issue the NPT conference will have to deal with is how to reach agreement in the context of the newer United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), a separate agreement which went into force in January 2021.
Member states of the 2021 treaty have agreed to not develop, test, produce, acquire, possess, stockpile, use or threaten to use nuclear weapons. The treaty prohibits the deployment of nuclear weapons on national territory and the provision of assistance to any state in the conduct of prohibited activities. Sixty-six states have ratified the treaty so far, while another 23 have signed but not ratified it. All, however, are nonnuclear states.
The nuclear power states all refused to join the prohibition treaty, calling it incompatible with the current security environment realities.
“As a final step on the long path to eventual nuclear disarmament, the world will need a verifiable, enforceable treaty, one that is consistent with security conditions in the world and helps generate the security necessary to prevent war,” Scheinman said. “That’s not how I would characterize the TPNW. We’ll either have an NPT-based system for reducing nuclear risks or we’ll have no treaty-based system at all,” he added.
Japan’s position on the TPNW is that, while it is an important step toward the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons, it is weakened by the fact that no nuclear weapons state is a member. Given the current international situation and Japan’s reliance on the U.S. nuclear security umbrella, Tokyo believes a more realistic approach like the NPT, which includes nuclear weapons states, is still needed.
Hanson noted, however, that while nuclear weapons states have only derided the TPNW, the fact that members met in June for the first time since the treaty went into force might push them to tone down their remarks about it at the NPT review conference.
While none of the nuclear weapons states were at the June meeting, NATO allies Norway, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, as well as Australia, participated as observers.
“I suspect that the nuclear weapons states, especially the U.S., the U.K. and France, will acknowledge that the TPNW exists and that it is ‘useful,’ even though they’ll continue to prioritize the NPT. But at least that would be better than the previous hostile statements about it,” Hanson said.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/07/31/national/nuclear-conference-kishida-speech/
Loss of Cooling Function Accident at Rokkesho Reprocessing Plant – High Level Radioactive Liquid Waste at Risk
July 31, 2022
On July 2, a serious accident of loss of cooling function occurred at the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant. As a result, cooling of high-level radioactive liquid waste (2.6 m3) stored in “Feed solution tank B” in the preliminary stage of crow solidification was interrupted for eight hours. This liquid waste is dangerous because it generates heat for a long period of time, and if the cooling function is lost, the liquid waste is expected to boil and evaporate in 24 hours and cause a hydrogen explosion in 280 hours.
The cause was an accidental closing of a dividing valve. The valve in question is located near the coils that cool the high-level radioactive liquid waste. When the cooling function of the internal loop is lost, the emergency response is to connect hoses from outside to inject cooling water and close this partition valve. Loss of cooling function is assumed to be caused by a major earthquake or aircraft collision, and the work will be carried out in a great hurry.
Locked with metal chains and padlocks
According to the press conference materials of the nuclear fuel company, the valve was closed by mistake, so a metal chain was wrapped around the valve and padlocked so that it could not be closed easily. However, where will the master key of the padlock be kept at the site where many things may have fallen down in a major earthquake? What will you do if you cannot find the key? Where will you find the cutter to cut the metal chain when the padlock does not open?
I must say that metal chains and padlocks are the worst possible response to a minute-by-minute cooling function restoration operation. According to NFI, similar locks and additional work will be implemented at 539 locations in the vitrification building by the end of July, and at 2,500 locations throughout the plant by the end of the year. The cooling function is placed in a very dangerous situation. It is only a matter of using paper-based seals that can be cut by hand.
Those who thought of metal chains and padlocks are those who do not know what to expect in a serious accident. Furthermore, it is a “countermeasure that was done in a rush. A calm Phase 3 response is necessary to deal with a serious accident. JNFL’s post-accident response is completely in Phase 4, making a series of mistakes and “digging its own grave. JNFL should quickly move to Phase 3 and reset the metal chain and padlock measures.
Confusion at the site due to multiple drawings?
Although JNFL attributes the cause of the accident to human error in misidentifying the dividing valve, it is possible that the piping drawings and the actual piping were different. The reason to suspect this is the 2019 and 2020 applications.
This is because the hose connections and shut-off valves have been renumbered, some numbers have disappeared from the drawings, some new connections have been added, and there are two connections with the same number that cannot be distinguished.
For safety reasons, changing the numbers is not a good idea. If it were to be changed, it would require a lot of corrective work and would be a source of human error.
Pick up the numbers on the 2019 and 2020 drawings in order: numbers 1-8 are the same, but number 9 in 2019 is gone and number 10 is number 9 in 2020; number 12 has two locations in 2019 and both are number 11 in 2020; number 13 in 2019 is 2020. In 2019, there are two locations with number 12, and in 2020 both are number 11; number 13 in 2019 is replaced by number 12 in 2020; numbers 15, 16, and 25 in 2019 are gone and number 14 is created where it was not in 2019.
KDDI’s major communications outage was a “mix-up in the operations manual. The operator who was doing maintenance on the router was working according to the manual. The work was not too difficult. But the reason for the mistake was that the manual they were referring to was an older version.”
At the reprocessing plant where the loss of cooling function accident occurred, the drawings and on-site confirmation are also urgently needed.
Also, which department at NFI approved the safety measures for the construction of System A that caused the accident? We do not even know if the Regulatory Commission approved them. I am shocked at the unbelievable response to the construction of a very dangerous facility.
The reprocessing process is a very dangerous and complicated process that must be carried out steadily, but JNFL has repeatedly responded to incidents of this magnitude in a panicked and erroneous manner. It has become clear that JNFL’s attitude toward safety is problematic and that they have not accumulated any experience. As a business operator, I cannot entrust JNFL with reprocessing.
<Reference.
Drawings for 2019 and 2020
2020/4/28 examination material pdf000309774
https://www.nsr.go.jp/disclosure/law_new/REP/180000013.html
2019/3/8 examination material pdf000264093
https://www.nsr.go.jp/disclosure/law_new/REP/180000009.html
Material on evaporation and drying
Examination Meeting on the Conformity of Nuclear Fuel Facilities, etc. to New Regulation Criteria
https://www.nsr.go.jp/activity/regulation/tekigousei/nuclear_facilities/index.html
FY 2015 Review Meeting on Conformity of Nuclear Fuel Facilities, etc. to New Regulation Criteria
https://warp.da.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/11275007/www.nsr.go.jp/disclosure/committee/yuushikisya/tekigousei/nuclear_facilities/ h27fy/index.html
Handout for the 65th Meeting June 29, 2015
Document 2
https://warp.da.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/11275007/www.nsr.go.jp/data/000112379.pdf
89th Session December 21, 2015 (2015)
https://warp.da.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/11275007/www.nsr.go.jp/disclosure/committee/yuushikisya/tekigousei/nuclear_facilities/ 00000060.html
Handout 2(1)
https://warp.da.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/11275007/www.nsr.go.jp/data/000134166.pdf
10 years after nationalization, Tepco still faces mounting challenges
July 31, 2022
Sunday marked the 10th anniversary since Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. was effectively nationalized after the devastating triple-meltdown nuclear crisis at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant.
Tepco has struggled to rebuild its business while attempting to restore its reputation and compensate for its role in the disaster that immediately followed the Great East Japan Earthquake of March 11, 2011. However, more competition, a string of scandals and other problems have prevented the restart of its nuclear power plants — a key to rebuilding the company — resulting in sluggish performance.
Recently, the soaring cost of oil due to the Russia-Ukraine war has taken its toll, further exacerbating uncertainties in its restructuring roadmap.
In 2012, the Japanese government placed Tepco under its control by injecting about ¥1 trillion into the firm through the Nuclear Damage Liability Facilitation Fund to prevent the utility from bankruptcy and facilitate compensation efforts.
The total cost of the nuclear accident, which includes compensation, decommissioning and decontamination, is expected to be around ¥21.5 trillion ($161.3 billion), of which ¥15.9 trillion will be paid by Tepco.
Tepco, which shifted to a holding company structure in 2016 to improve management efficiency, announced a reconstruction plan in 2021 and aims to secure ¥500 billion annually for compensation and decommissioning costs. It also targets annual profits of around ¥450 billion after fiscal 2030.
But for fiscal 2021, the utility’s net profit plunged to ¥5.6 billion from ¥180.8 billion the previous year, as it saw a drop in electricity sales due to intensified competition and was hit by higher fuel costs from liquefied natural gas (LNG) and coal.
In September, the fuel cost adjustment system, which allows higher fuel costs to be added to rates, will reach its limit, putting further pressure on the company’s operations. Tepco has not disclosed its outlook for this fiscal year.
Its major hope is to restart reactors at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in Niigata Prefecture, as firing up one reactor is expected to improve earnings by about ¥50 billion. Yet the plant has been hit by a series of scandals, including inadequate anti-terrorism measures. The Nuclear Regulatory Authority, Japan’s nuclear watchdog, has issued a de facto ban on the plant’s operation.
Although Tomoaki Kobayakawa, Tepco president and CEO, claims that “we are working on nuclear reform with the restoration of trust from the community and society as our top priority,” restarting the plant will not be easy.
The stock price is also an obstacle to denationalization. The government hopes to cover the ¥4 trillion cost of decontamination efforts with the proceeds from the sale of Tepco shares. However, the closing share price on Friday was ¥523, far from the ¥1,500 needed to secure the cost.
As its attempt to reconstruct the firm has not proceeded as expected, Tecpo has repeatedly postponed its decision to denationalize.
A government official said that Tepco “was allowed to continue to exist by fulfilling its responsibility to Fukushima, in order to make steady progress in dealing with the accident.”
To steadily continue taking care of tasks related to the Fukushima nuclear disaster, Tepco will need to improve its business performance through strengthening its retail business by enhancing its services. The utility is also aiming to increase its corporate value by focusing on renewable energy.
NYC: Anti-Nuclear Protest at U.S. Mission to United Nations
https://www.pressenza.com/2022/08/nyc-anti-nuclear-protest-at-u-s-mission-to-united-nations/ 03.08.22 – US, United States – Pressenza New York
Today, on day two of the four-week 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, several hundred people marched to the US Mission from the Isaiah Wall across the street from the United Nations, passing by the Wall’s quote from the Prophet Isaaiah,
Report by Alice Slater
“He shall judge between the nations, and shall arbitrate for many peoples; they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.”
Singing peace and anti-war songs, to “lay down their swords and shields” with dramatic interventions and a multitude of posters with slogans calling for nuclear abolition in every possible way, the indomitable peace activists from every continent joined together to press the governments in the coming weeks, who promised in 1970 to make “good faith efforts” for nuclear disarmament, to “lay down their swords and shields” and make their promised “good faith” commitments to restore their tattered promises to finally ban the bomb.
Despite the 2017 enactment of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons that closed the NPT loopholes, finally saying that nuclear weapons are illegal in every way, including use, threat to use, sharing, shipping, and manufacturing– the race goes on with all the major powers expanding their arsenals and spending trillions of dollars and millions of IQ points confronting each other with their evil nuclear deterrents. Meanwhile, Mother Earth desperately needs extraordinary global cooperation to prevent a catastrophic climate collapse, a nuclear cataclysm and spreading lethal plagues. We are at a turning point, and this NPT might be the last time that people can bring their governments to their senses, instructing them to step back from the catastrophic cliff edge, towards which we are perilously and thoughtlessly careening.
Report by Anthony Donovan
When I look at the UN from the U.S. Mission today, I think of a wonderful mentor and champion for nuclear disarmament, Amb. Zenon Rossides of Cyprus. I interviewed him in 1983. He’d been challenging the nuclear countries since taking to the UN podium in 1960, to focus on common and collective security, not with nuclear arms. “Listen to the scientists!” He’d often exclaim.
I’d like to echo his public words when speaking about the negotiations for the NPT and other nuclear treaties
“The negotiations are a stagnant pretense, deceiving the people that something is being done about the nuclear arms race, a galloping reality.”
He would often also repeat
“It is not the power of weapons,
but the power of Spirit
That can save the world.”
He met and felt very close to Pres. John F. Kennedy. He said JFK was determined to end nuclear weapons and that the Herculean effort and great success of his Test Ban Treaty was meant to only be the first step toward total abolition.
My word for today’s action, when things look so dire, and heading evermore in the wrong direction, is…… community. A courageous community that sustains life, and joy.
Alice Slater is an Advisor to the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation and serves on the Coordinating Committee of World Beyond War worldbeyondwar.org
Anthony Donovan. A political campaigner and activist from the age of 12, ending up in jail three times for Vietnam War nonviolent civil disobedience.
Washington Is Making the Same Blunder Regarding Taiwan That It Did in Ukraine
y Ted Galen Carpenter Posted on
Tensions between the United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) are rising sharply over the Taiwan issue. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s stated intention to include a stop in Taipei to meet with Taiwanese officials during her forthcoming trip to East Asia is the latest source of trouble. Pelosi apparently escalated that provocation further by inviting other prominent members of Congress to join her in that stop. Her actions have caused even the staunchly pro-Taiwan Biden administration to quietly press her to change her plans. Conversely, congressional hawks are urging Pelosi not to back down.
The reason for the administration’s caution are readily apparent. Beijing has reacted with unusually intense anger to the prospective visit…………………………
For 4 decades after Washington shifted diplomatic relations from Taipei to Beijing in 1979 and passed the Taiwan Relations Act to govern reduced, informal relations with Taiwan, US administrations were careful to limit visits to the island to low-level officials.
That restraint diminished dramatically during Donald Trump’s presidency, when Congress authorized and the administration approved meetings by National Security Advisor John Bolton and other Cabinet-level officials with their Taiwanese counterparts. Those trips were part of a new policy of much stronger US diplomatic and military support for Taiwan – a course of action that the Biden administration has continued, despite insisting that the United States still adheres to a “one-China” policy.
………. The Biden administration needs to take the PRC’s warnings more seriously. In many ways, Washington’s determination to press ahead with greater support for Taiwan as part of an overall containment policy directed against China is reminiscent of the blunders US officials made with respect to NATO expansion, especially the campaign to incorporate Ukraine, and Washington’s tone-deaf response to Moscow’s escalating complaints.
Biden administration policymakers dismissed the Kremlin’s repeated warnings that trying to make Ukraine a NATO military asset would cross a red line with respect to Russia’s security interests. They discovered belatedly that Russian President Vladimir Putin was not about to cower and accept US diktats simply because the United States insisted that Ukraine had a “right” to join NATO. Nor did he accept Washington’s accelerating campaign to make Ukraine a de facto US military and intelligence ally perched on Russia’s border.
The outcome of Washington’s approach has been horrifyingly bloody and tragic for the people of Ukraine. Even more worrisome, the administration’s policies have led to an extremely dangerous confrontation between NATO and a nuclear-armed Russia, with the United States and NATO cynically using Ukraine as a pawn in a proxy war against Moscow.
Washington risks making a comparable blunder in its dealings with China. The administration must implement a quiet retreat regarding its growing political and military ties to Taipei and adopt a less confrontational approach to Beijing. Moreover, that change needs to go well beyond merely discouraging Pelosi’s provocative visit to Taipei. It has become increasingly obvious to PRC leaders that the United States is pursuing a full-blown anti-China containment policy, with Taiwan as the point of the spear, in a desperate effort to preserve Washington’s fading strategic primacy in East Asia. It is highly unlikely that Beijing will passively accept such an intrusive US presence in China’s core security sphere over the long term. As the PRC’s economic and military power continues to grow, Beijing’s resistance to Washington’s hegemonic efforts will escalate.
US arrogance and inflexibility helped lead to the current tragedy in Ukraine. Policymakers blew through red warning light after red warning light from the Kremlin. A similar approach seems to be taking place in Washington’s relations with Beijing, and it threatens to produce a similar ugly outcome in East Asia over the Taiwan issue.
Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute, is the author of 13 books and more than 1,100 articles on international affairs. His latest book is Unreliable Watchdog: The News Media and U.S. Foreign Policy (forthcoming, September 2022).
1 This Month
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (32)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
