1st dismantling of nuclear reactor begins in central Japan

Besides these reactors being very old and therefore far less safe than when originally built, the legacy technology itself is even more dated and dangerous.

Japan cannot afford another Fukushima Daiichi meltdown. Far safer nuclear tech. exists that operates at far lower temperatures, making meltdowns impossible.

Decommissioning for $DECADES, Environmentally Risky, and thus such legacy reactors were never economically actually justifiable, unlike modern small modular reactors

The decommission costs covered by law are the responsibility of the power companies. A small charge is added to the monthly bill. When applying for a decommissioning license the power company must show the work will be complete within 50 years. And they have the money in the bank to cover all costs.

They are dismantling the containment vessel but have nowhere to store the nuclear fuel rods. This would mean there is no protection if there is an accident with the rods. Is anybody else having flashbacks to Chernobyl?

This has no connection to Chernobyl at all.

The fuel rods will be stored in pools like they have been for the last 50 years.

Nothing new or radical there.

However, you are correct that Japan has not organized long term storage for high level waste like the containment vessels and highly contaminated pipes and pumping systems and so on.

My guess is that they will wait till the crunch comes and then load it all off to Aomori saying , "We are sorry for the inconvenience, but it can't be helped".

By then the population in that area will be so low that there will be almost no resistance.

As there shouldn't be.

gary

The reprocessing plant in Aomori is at more than 90% capacity for nuclear fuel rods. They will be kept at the various plants until the government decides on building a nuclear waste storage site.

RE; The reprocessing plant in Aomori is at more than 90% capacity for nuclear fuel rods.

Strange. the Aomori nuclear storage facility has not been fully opened yet.

Quote. "Currently, Japan's nuclear waste is stored at power plants operated by utilities. "

https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/15366939

Japan will have an even harder time attracting workers and capital if the consensus view is it's too risky due to legacy nuclear reactors vs. modern safe nuclear tech.

Furthermore, the people living in Japan will not feel added stress and a greater lack of confidence in the future as well = never a good outcome for society.

Sometimes, like now, major policy shifts needed when failed polices become "too costly" and "too risky".

Japan will have an even harder time attracting workers and capital if the consensus view is it's too risky due to legacy nuclear reactors vs. modern safe nuclear tech.

Furthermore, the people living in Japan will feel added stress and a greater lack of confidence in the future as well = never a good outcome for society.

Sometimes, like now, major policy shifts needed when failed polices become "too costly" and "too risky".

garymalmgren

RE; The reprocessing plant in Aomori is at more than 90% capacity for nuclear fuel rods.

> Strange. the Aomori nuclear storage facility has not been fully opened yet.

> Quote. "Currently, Japan's nuclear waste is stored at power plants operated by utilities. "

> https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/15366939

Sorry, I am corrected. Misread an article. Storage at nuclear plants is at 80-90% capacity. There is an interim storage at Aomori.

https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/15441943

the average age of u.s. nuclear power plants is 42-years old, older than japan. decommissioning cost is factored in with construction and operating costs.

storage of spent fuel rods until cooled is not a problem anywhere in the world. it’s not as much as some may think.

and there are no small modular reactors. people are “thinking about” developing them.

nuclear power remains the most cost efficient method of generating electricity.

decommissioning cost is factored in with construction and operating costs

Unfortunately, 12 years ago British Nuclear Fuels finally admitted that it would take an unknown amount of time, and an unfathomable amount of money, to decommission the world's first nuclear power plant - Sellafield, nee Windscale.

Since then they've decided to build another NPP on the same site and leave the clean up for future generations to worry about.

More accidents waiting to happen from this dangerous and lethal technology!

Storage of the waste from these increasingly aged facilities is going to be impossible to find.The storage itself of radioactive waste that has lifespan measured in thousands of years not decades is also going to be a huge problem and Safety concern!

This along with the increasing number of facilities that need to be decommissioned is probably a major reason theJGOV foolishly allowed most of these aging and dangerous facilities to continue operation as even if they were decommissioned there is nowhere to store the huge amounts of lethal radioactive waste generated!

The power companies have applied for licenses to decommission 20 reactors.

https://www.jepic.or.jp/pub/pdf/epijJepic2020.pdf

Since a disposal site for burying radioactive waste generated in the dismantling process has yet to be selected, Chubu Electric said it will store the waste inside a reactor building.

Already being dismantled but still no storage for radioactive waste. Wow

Better late than never, and no need to rush anything, but such a slow process.

Hamaoka is built in the sand dunes on one of the most dangerously exposed sites in Japan. They have recently rebuilt the seawall higher against future tsunami, this is true, but Tokyo is downwind from there, and the plant sits on top of active earthquake faults.

Wallace...can it really be that "decommissioning costs " have already been paid for ?

Doesnt the waste require secure storage for many lifetimes ?

GuruMick

Wallace...can it really be that "decommissioning costs " have already been paid for ?

> Doesnt the waste require secure storage for many lifetimes ?

The law requires the power companies to have the total money to cover the decommission and an agreement the work will be completed within 50 years.

The cost of waste is not answered to date.