national

Criticism mounts over plan to restart nuclear reactors

31 Comments

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

© 2012 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

31 Comments
Login to comment

The thermal plants are all online. Soon they will need maintenance too.

Thermal power plants can be maintained without shutting them down for an extended period of time every 12-13 months, like NPPs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just don't eat the seaweed!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sf2k, without an economy there is no money to do this project. Ah you are mistaken, less plants are needed now because there is less demand. The thermal plants are all online. Soon they will need maintenance too. This summer will mark the final stage of deindustrial Japan. As a Noble woman once said "it is better the common people walk. It keeps them in their place and they are more healthy."

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

The goal of a greener less nuclear Japan would have inspired younger people and helped businesses change their ways and endorse conservation efforts, biomaterials, and even .... getting rid of kerosene heetaa's by eliminating drafty homes. Passive heating and cooling work well and could be at least attempted.

However without an internal desire for these things it's not going to happen on its own

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The fact that Japan can still run now with only 1 reactor means that 50+ were not needed at all. This should have been the announcement for Japan to go for greener technologies and get Japanese to work and research on proven applied solutions. Too bad, Japan needed something to look forward to if it was to ever change the situation.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It is better to loose job and work in the farms do some odd jobs without a.c. on, than to have nuc. radiations in our genes.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Yuri: and I am - naively - expecting support to Japan from the Big Nuke countries like US, France, Russia, ... to help Japan to transition off NPP.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yuri: "This will cause more factories to "relocate" to other countries. Also more blackouts, etc. The jobs will never come back. While the public can endure blackouts, what about the economy?"

How much has the economy suffered thanks to the NPP in Fukushima? From tourism to local jobs the economy was devastated by people who think slightly cheaper power without guarantees of safety, and of course money for those with vested interests, should take priority. How much has the debacle in Fukushima cost Japan, Yuri?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@Yuri: If the wrong decision - building NPP Japan - has been done once, it does not means it is not allowed to step back without loosing face. Recognizing a mistake now is a much more honorable than running into a wall for millennium! An NPP MUST be perfect, that is the Big Nuke claim! And they failed as expected!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@Robert Dykes

magic does not exisit and we can not simply switch on a GREEN power that just isnt there... yet. Everyone is sitting here gripping, but offering no alternative.

I have been posting some alternatives offered by some experts, and asking you some questions. I have been ignored by you. There are other options to go through this summer without any NPPs as some experts say. Would it be at least worth making an effort to try those other options? If you think those alternatives won’t work, tell me why.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTx942kwh94

“Predictions of summer power shortages may be inaccurate” by Asahi Shimbun

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/AJ201204070047

“Sharing excess power could avert summer supply crisis” by Asahi Shimbun

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/behind_news/social_affairs/AJ201204100065

Can people not understand that the turning off the reactors is the main reason for the EXTREME economic trouble that japan is having in terms of trade deficit.

Please explain more how extreme trouble it would be. Nuclear energy maybe cheaper than other energy, but once there is an accident, it costs tremendous amount of taxpayers’ money as we see what’s happening at TEPCO. 3.5 trillion yen will be spent for financial aid from the government to TEPCO. Plus, there are still 100,000 Fukushima residents are at temporary houses and others. Each households receive 300,000 yen/month from TEPCO=government=taxpayers.Do you think earthquake won’t happen in Fukui? There are three faults (Kumagawa fault near the Oi NPPs and other two in the ocean near there), FYI.

http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/kaihatu/016/shiryo/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/09/21/1311103_1_2.pdf

It will take time, a lot of time to change this. It will change. In the meantime I am trying to be a DECENT human and accept what has to be done for the great good of the country.

I agree with you there. I would try to be a decent human and accept what has to be done for the great good of the country. That’s why I have been trying to get information how we can go through this summer without any NPPs and possibly breaking away from the reliance on nuclear plants and reduce dependence to zero as Edano said at a House of Representative committee last Friday.

and Japan's economy can not continue to import OIL/COAL/LGP at its current rate to supplement the switched off reactors

I don’t know much about current rate of OIL/COAL/LGP. Please explain and educate me more. What would go worse than 3.5 trillion yen financial aid from tax payers money and 100,000 Fukushima residents forced to live in temporary houses by receiving 300,000 yen/month (each household) from tax payers money in case of severe accident? Interest in shale gas is on the rise in Japan. LNG projects based on shale gas have been proposed to partially meet Japan’s LNG needs. Import of shale gas from the U.S. could lower the electricity bill in Japan if we could buy it in low price like Korea does under FTA agreement with the U.S. Japan does not have FTA agreement with the U.S., but TPP. Would it be difficult with TPP? If so, please tell me why.

http://nippon.com/en/in-depth/a00303/

There are also a number of IPP: Independent Power Producer, such as Sumitomo Kinzoku Co., Osaka gas, Kanden Plant Co., …and many others. Those producers would help providing more electricity throughout the country, not much maybe but not zero either.

http://www.shikoku.meti.go.jp/soshiki/skh_d6/9_info/top/e-arekore.htm

we need to put responsible people in charge.

I agree and we don’t have any nuclear regulatory organization functioning. The government was forced to abandon plans to replace NISA with the new agency on April. NISA failed to prevent the accident in Fukushima NPPs. The government ignores NSC (Haruki Madarame, chairman of the NSC, said the first-stage “stress tests” at nuclear reactors were insufficient to determine their overall safety. The results of the first-stage and second-stage should be looked at together in one package.” Chief Cabinet Secretary Fujimura said, “Madarame's comment is not in conflict with the government’s policy that determines the restart based on the assessment of the results of the first-stage check.” Do you still think it is ok to restart NPPs without any regulatory agencies?

Make changes that need to be made.

Yes. There are several changes need to be made.

*Oi NPPs need to set up vent systems with filters attached in order to reduce the risk of the release of radioactive substances in the event of a sever nuclear accident.

*Oi NPPs need to set up免震重要塔earthquake-proof accident management facilities. (even Fukushima NPPs has it and it was/is a very important facility for all the workers’ protection and communication with outside)

*Oi NPPs need permanent electricity generation systems for emergencies. All these three above are the ones on the timetable of 30 safety measures required by the government. They don’t have them yet. Edano said Oi NPPs are “more or less safe”, and also said in case of severe accident, the government would take full responsibilities. How are they going to take responsibilities? Tax payers money again?

http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20120409p2g00m0dm068000c.html

*Edano visited Fukui and explained gov't stance on restarting reactors. Fukui is the only local? I would say the whole Japan should be the local or maybe overseas, too. But local should be at least within 100km radius of the Oi plant including Shiga, Kyoto, Hyogo, Gifu, Nara, Osaka, and Mie prefectures. (Part of Chiba prefecture, Kashiwa, Nagareyama, Abiko, Kamagaya, 270km away from Fukushima plants, are seriously affected by the radiation.) Lake Biwa could be contaminated when a nuclear accident would occur at the plant. The whole region of Kansai is dependent on this biggest lake of Japan because it is the source of drinking water for the whole region.

"they'll do what THEY want with no regard to the public." maybe this one time they are actully doing what is best for the public.

If you think the government is actually doing what is best for the public, please tell me why you think so in detail with some data and source, please. Without any data or source, your argument is not convincing. I really hope you will answer to some of my questions this time.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

This is being driven by business interests who see keeping the nuclear industry going and an over abundance of electricity as far more important than public safety or the environment. They are also ignoring the very high risk of another disaster like Fukushima. Disasters ruin businesses too but they fail to think that far. In short, they are greedy and insane and need to be run out of office.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Yuri: I agree this is not an easy decision. But can we - you - take the real risk to destroy the Northern hemisphere from a so short view point? My limited knowledge of Japan teaches me the wisdom of long term consideration. And sorry, it was a lie saying it was 99.9% safe. Without mentioning the overlooking of all true scientists saying most of Japanese NPP are vulnerable to J-standard natural risks.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Think the estimated 18 percent power shortage this summer is the reason. This will cause more factories to "relocate" to other countries. Also more blackouts, etc. The jobs will never come back. While the public can endure blackouts, what about the economy? It was not a lie ol_borgeaud. You mistaken 99.9 with 100 percent. Fukushima was the .1 percent. Anything man does has a chance to fail. Nothing we do is perfect. Think of all of the life's that would be spared if we got rid of cars.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

@Robert: I understand your economical viewpoint. However we are talking about something more serious. If SFP 4 collapses or another similar catastrophe like Fukushima happens, Japan is written off the planet, like North America and most of the North hemisphere. In this context, energy cost is irrelevant and CO2 emission consideration must be put on stand by G8, G20, G100! Before Fukushima, the NPP were - supposedly - safe at 99.9%. That is/was a lie. Period!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It is hard to understand why the government is in such a haste to restart the reactors,” the major daily Mainichi Shimbun said in an editorial

I think it's quite easy to understand. The last reactor is scheduled to shut down in May, leaving no reactors generating power. The government wants to avoid that at all costs, and if they can get a couple of reactors up and running before then, they will. If that means cutting corners, so be it.

If Japan has 0 reactors online, it could bring the nuclear program down for good. That's their nightmare, though not necessarily yours or mine.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

More NPPs than we need, build some more until we bleed, from our ears our eyes and gut, when the next one doth blow up. Play with fire you will get burnt, was not this lesson before learnt? Money talks and bullsh-t walks, will our hands stay on our jocks? The rich men who demand bliss, hand us pots of pissy piss.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Wonder why Japan wanted to re-start Nuke Power plants when it is still unclear the safety check up if it passed. Well I guess it's the lobbyist of this Nuke Power plants business and stockholders who have connections with the government top officials. That's why Edano keep on saying different things about the Nuke safety. Poor guy... caught in between to cover up for those greedy businessmen of Nuke Power Plants.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The Oi nuclear power plant lies less than 100 km of Osaka. Quite close to the plant is lake Biwa, from where 99% of the water supply in Osaka is coming from.

If anything similar as Fukushima happened to the Oi plant, game over for the Kansai region. And with what happened in Fukushima, I think, that the Japanese still got very lucky. The worst case would have been game over for whole Japan, which still may happen if another large quake or tsunami hits Fukushima.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@sunhawk thank you!!! I am glad some people can see past the fear mongering band wagon. no one WANTS nuclear power but somethings have to be. I think japan has learned that a nuclear future is not the key, but magic does not exisit and we can not simply switch on a GREEN power that just isnt there... yet.

I live in Fukui, well within 100km of the Oi reactors. I am perfectly okay with. Can people not understand that the turning off the reactors is the main reason for the EXTREME economic trouble that japan is having in terms of trade deficit. These things where never meant to be last forever. its not Japan is building NEW ONES. but they have to use these for now.

Japan is building a MASSIVE new wind farm right now. I think up in Aomri. thats great!!! but guess how many houses it will run? 30-35,000. umm... last I check Japan has few million house holds. even if japan had the land to build 5,000 windfarms, which are MASSIVe and are kind of an eye sore, we are looking at TrILLIONS and TRILLIONS of MORE yen and a decades to finish.

I dont WANT nuclear power, but we have to use something in the mean time. Everyone is sitting here gripping, but offering no alternative. Its so easy to just type GREEN POWER. but thats just magic fairy dust as far as I converend. whatever.

"they'll do what THEY want with no regard to the public." maybe this one time they are actully doing what is best for the public. I for one am glad you are not deciding what is best for the public.

-11 ( +1 / -12 )

The key News papers who voice the public opinion have rightly warned the japanese national government that withput public consent they cannot go ahead with the plan to restart the two reactors at oi near Osaka which lies within the zoneof influence consequent to a Disaster.The location is highly hazardous from both Seismic and Tsunami angles and if people of Osaka are going to be killed or afflicted with cancer for decades,Edano is not going to save them.Edano is working like an agent of Nuclear industrialists who want to make tonnes of money by this plant even by sacrificing the lives and properties worth several trillion Yen.First of all let those who vouchsafe for nuclear safety comeforward to pledge all their properties and those of their families to meet the costs of damage in case of an accident as such a move perhaps instils in them a sense of responsibility in playing with the lives of millions of people.Let Edano first of all hold public hearing on safety of the reactors and let him conduct a mockdrill for evacuating the people within 30km.distance of the plant in case of a potential explosion at Oi reactors.If this exercise proves not feasible,then even Nado will realise that the Government cannot play with the lives of people for earning huge profits for the contractors and officials who contribute for the coming election funds for the present ministers who are promoting the reactors.If Japanese Government is incompetent to handle the questions of power shortage let them call for global tenders from companies who can use their brain power and offer quotatrions to resolve the impending power crisis.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

which can be generated more cheaply than at fuel-burning power

Ask TEPCO how much they are going to pay out because of their Fukushima plant (only four), then ask all those people forced to flee their radioactive homes and belongings how much they've lost, then tell us how cheap it is to generate nuclear power.

What is YOUR alternative plan to the needed energy required?

Conservation.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

The government is showing that it doesn't care one wit what the people actually think. For months all we've heard is them drone on and on about how they would never restart one without the people's consent, but they're making it clearer and clearer that they are not truly interested in the public, since it doesn't side with them as they'd hoped, and are in a major rush to get the money rolling back in.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The primary danger of nuclear power in Japan is not generation per se but the threat of natural disasters. Fukushima was a calamity waiting to happen. All the warnings were there. But when it happened there was this babyish surprise from the government and the power industry. If it happened in Kanto it can happen in Kansai. As someone pointed, the Oi reactors have the potential of pollution Lake Biwa.

Largely thanks to US pressure Japan became a nuclear junkie. It is time for this country to go cold turkey. Keep the reactors off line. There are alternative energy sources that have not been exploited because of the dominance of nuclear power. They won't be unless there is an incentive to find an alternative to nuclear power generation.

This summer, whether or not there will indeed be a power shortage, all be a great time to work on energy conservation. Again, incentive is the key.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

photovolatic is still too expensive per kilowatt versus any other source. you would still need power generators for cloudy periods. a power grid to distribute, power storage for excess solar power.

turn on the nuclear power. it has still killed and maimed fewer people then coal, oil, and gas.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

To be or Not to be...!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Solar panels require some levels of arsenic and cadmium which can be captured in the recycling process.

Nuclear contamination is deadly even at a distance- solar please

0 ( +3 / -3 )

lol photovolatic solar is not efficient. plus they require rare earth elements which mainly come from china.

my solution would be to turn on the reactors to cover energy needs until the 10-20 years it would take to tap all the geothermal power in japan.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Japan does not need deadly nuclear power.

And the solution is simple-solar power.

Solar panels over car parks,appt buildings,industrial premises.

Japan has the ability to become a world leader so let the exports subsidies the costs here.

Simple!

2 ( +7 / -5 )

What is YOUR alternative plan to the needed energy required ????

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The nuclear reactors need to be restarted. we can't sit around burning carbon based energy while the turds in the diet sit around discussing on the color of the cover of the binder. that they will use to contain the printed out material that lists the activities. of the committee summit for the future plans of alternate energy.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

I don't think the government cares what the public wants or thinks. They've proven time and time again that they'll do what THEY want with no regard to the public. I'd rather pay more for my power and know it is safe than restart the plants when the government hasn't done the proper safety checks it needs to do.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

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