Nuclear policy-setting body urges plant operators to prepare for decommissioning era

By Mari Yamaguchi

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Where to put all the radioactive debris?

Hard to prepare for that!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The storage of long term nuclear waste will have to be resolved first. The spent nuclear fuel can be stored in dry casks. Chopping up reactors and all associated plant is a more difficult problem.

In the intermediate period the waste can be stored at each nuclear plant.

Japan has gone from a major nuclear country to a major decommissioning one.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The cost of decommissioning a nuclear power plant in the UK increased more than 5 times from the initial estimate, and delays are common, as new techniques have to be devised to solve unexpected problems. Japan can hopefully learn from the experience of countries who have started decommissioning their own reactors.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The cost of decommissioning the reactors, by law, is 100% the responsibility of the reactor owners. Decommissioning any reactor requires a license issued by the NRA. To obtain the license, the reactor owner must show that the funds are available to complete the work to the end and set aside that money into a trust fund allowing the completion even if the owner business goes bust.

The decommissioning must be completed within a time scale, something like 40 years.

Basically there are two ways to decommission. Plough straight in, remove all the nuclear fuel and dismantle the reactors and the associated plant.

Alternatively, remove the spent nuclear fuel but wait a few decades before dismantling the reactors. During that time the money deposited into the trust fund is earning interest.

Even before the 3/11 nuclear disaster Japan was already decommissioning reactors but not at the levels now planned.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

America is a big place, and even they can't figure out what to dó with spent nuclear fuel. I have no idea what Japan will do - and neither do they.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Oh, better late than never. 70% of Japan’s reactors are within a decade of their decommissioning date. 10% have gone passed their date and have been approved to continue functioning after safety checks. Do they really need to be ‘urged’ to prepare for it?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Thank god, bet my taxes will be put to use subsidising this rather than or also booze for politicians. Didn't Abe urge, promise a Beautiful Japan? How is that going?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No tax payers money is used for decommissioning costs. During the life scale of a reactor the power company adds a small charge to cover the costs of decommissioning. This law is set by IAEA.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To urge is an much favoured verb. How about instruct or demand?

decommissioning was supposedly included in the planning stages of reactor commissioning.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites