In Japan, energy security fears put nuclear power back in favor

Those old reactor when it will be replaced? Wait for another Fukushima again?

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2024/03/15/japan/aging-reactor-ruling/

I will keep writing this as long as people keep thinking that an idled nuclear reactor is safer than one being used to make electricity. With soaring costs and volatility in the energy market Japan has safe reactors just sitting there for the past 13 years doing nothing. Get them running making affordable electricity and help out the people of Japan. There is a nuclear facility in Higashidori Aomori that was just completed after the March 11th earthquake and tsunami, it has never been fully operational due to the restrictions on nuclear power. What a waste, but it is still being maintained and costing money everyday, but not helping anyone!

@sakurasuki

Don't worry about the old once. Those are still better than the once used in China.

@Albert

At least there's no China incident so far that has scale like Fukushima, it was man made don't blame tsunami.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/mar/22/japan-nuclear-power-plant-checks-missed

"It's in the national interest to promote domestic production of energy with renewable energy,"

It's never too late to start, stop talking and do something.

re: the 'national interest', Japan Inc. knew this before Pearl Harbor, and has done little about it since; long, long passed time to vote out the pols and children of pols that have continued approaches keeping Japan reliant on countries like the USA, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and others for energy. Long, long passed time to use Japanese resources to generate electricity without having to add more pollution, via burning fossils fuel, and without having to risk more Fukushima-type nuclear disasters, the nuke problems have been monetary and environmental disasters. Japan is at risk of many natural disasters and the archipelago does not need to create more of its own because of poor decisions regarding energy.

@MarkX

Those delay because they need to re-check again, after Fukushima there are check become stricter.

https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Natural-disasters/Japan-nuclear-plant-shaken-beyond-some-safety-estimates-by-Jan.-1-quake

Nuclear Power?

Where is the spent fuel to be stored for thousands of years?

Leave that problem for future generations?

Already there are lightweight solar panels available to completely cover structures able to produce electrical power and on site batteries available to store power.

There is no will in Japan to allow self determination regarding power production-this is the problem!

Just as the govt removed electricity help for the people ..how coincidental...and the stacked the panel as well.

Why not more hydro? Nearly all rivers are dammed in Japan anyway!

As resource-poor country, we can be a bit more independent on energy if we rely on Nuclear, but - as expected from humans - over reactions trump statistics.

Kansai still enjoy our pre-Putin's war energy prices. Take a look at these sweet Kansai Electric Nuclear Power Plants running https://www.kepco.co.jp/energy_supply/energy/nuclear_power/info/monitor/live_unten/index.html

While all others have stopped because over reactions https://www.nra.go.jp/jimusho/unten_jokyo.html

there was no need to spoil diplomatic relations with neighbors. Then you could buy energy resources at a low price for many, many years to come. Nuclear energy is a ticking time bomb for such an island. any earthquake and radiation leakage is inevitable. Purified water from Ftskusima has been pouring into the sea water around their country for almost a year now. is everyone happy?

And in the news yesterday, the ministry of economy trade and industry announced that will not be calling for power saving measures this year, as the target energy surplus at 4% has been consistently surpassed. And the introduction of more renewable energy and restart of key nuclear plants will create more energy surplus.

Conflicting information much?

Good, we need it and it is the best solution for now.

How soon we forget. As sakurasuki mentioned Fukushima was man made. The LDP, the regulatory agency and TEPCO were all in it together to fuel the economy and sold the people on the notion of a safe and stable energy source for a bright future, that is, until 3/11 happened. Japan has three major problems, energy, the dwindling population, and natural disasters, all of which the LDP have been slow or even negligent in addressing. So once again, the government is trying to sell back to the people the need for nukes for the economy. Misappropriation of the budget, and wasteful spending all coupled with a lethargic bureaucracy and a corrupt government doesn’t leave one with a comfortable feeling when these are the same people who will be declaring nuclear policy. Nankai trough earthquake, please make your acquaintance with Hamaoka and Nagatacho.

MarkX

I will keep writing this as long as people keep thinking that an idled nuclear reactor is safer than one being used to make electricity.

A reactor not operating is empty of nuclear fuel and therefore safer.

A reactor not operating is empty of nuclear fuel and therefore safer

Nope.

The fuel is in the reactor with the carbon rods down to absorb the neutrons to inhibit fission chain reaction.

I am totally supportive of more nuclear power for Japan despite owning stocks in Chevron, Osaka Gas and Eneos.

It's a no brainer for energy security and decarbonization, and best of all, it upsets the CCP LOL.

Nuclear energy is the cleanest and cheapest energy. It’s also feasible energy source to produce in large quantities to satisfy demand. It will always be the most favourable way until South Korean researchers improve the sun energy technology they have been successfully working on.

When all other clean options are taken into consideration, nuclear energy is a clear cut winner i.e. clean, robust, and reliable.

Three mile island, Chernoble, and Fukushima did happen but the world did not come to an end. Also, nuclear techonology has advanced and spent fuel rods can be reprocessed. No Yucca mountain required.

What's missing is the will.

Triring

A reactor not operating is empty of nuclear fuel and therefore safer

Nope.

The fuel is in the reactor with the carbon rods down to absorb the neutrons to inhibit fission chain reaction.

No. That only happens when an operating reactor is temporarily shut down.

A shutdown reactor is empty of nuclear fuel which is kept in the cooling pool. The law requires the reactor to be shut down and the fuel replaced about every 18 months which usually takes about 6 months.

There are about 20 reactors that are operable but currently only 9 are used.

If all 20 were used probably nuclear power could generate about 15% of the total power compared with 27% before the disasters.

Nuclear energy is the most efficient and cheapest energy resource. Wind turbines kill birds and after its full depreciation adds to the trash. Wind turbines in the seas create loud sounds in the water disorienting and killing whales and dolphins. Solar has a short lifespan and adds to the trash and destroys the greeneries where they are located. Solar farms are also an eye sore.

sakurasukiToday 07:10 am JST

Those old reactor when it will be replaced? Wait for another Fukushima again?

The Fukushima accident was nothing to do with old reactors, which can be safe if they're properly maintained. It was a management failure. Both technical standards and regulation are now much better.

kurisupisuToday 07:48 am JST

Where is the spent fuel to be stored for thousands of years?

Some of it will be stored at Rokkasho in Aomori. The government is doing surveys for new disposal sites and there are three places (two in Hokkaido; one in Saga) currently in the running, though it's unclear what the outcome will be.

https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2024/05/178b40fd7df7-nuclear-waste-site-survey-to-go-ahead-in-southwestern-japan-town.html

nikToday 08:09 am JST

there was no need to spoil diplomatic relations with neighbors.

Yes, there was absolutely no need for China's purely political ban on Japanese seafood, which has zero basis in science. But that's China for you - it spoils relations with just about every country on the planet.

any earthquake and radiation leakage is inevitable.

No, it isn't.

dbsaiyaToday 08:46 am JST

So once again, the government is trying to sell back to the people the need for nukes for the economy.

If you, or anyone else, can put together a better plan (or convince the people of Japan to pay far higher energy bills due to the lack of nuclear), I'm sure the government would love to hear it. My guess is that you/others can't, and that the current plans for resumption of nuclear power are the best option for resource-poor Japan.

Even countries that have a high percentage of renewables still often use nuclear and thermal, as they provide stable, base power (whereas renewable output fluctuates). Without this, a country will suffer regular power cuts.

Many countries are generating 20-50% of power from renewables. The negative downside is far less than using fossil fuels. Wind turbines can be constructed from wood which is now happening in Sweden. Solar panels have a life of 25 years or more. New ones are recyclable.

I worked for many years in heavy chemical plants that had the highest safety standards, and safety including the training of the operators was always a priority.

I always assumed that it applied to nuclear power plants. I was shocked following the nuclear disaster to learn that was far from the truth.

The lack of the required safety features at the Fukushima plant was shocking to me. The costs of making the plant safe would not have cost much more than the original.

The plant was destroyed not by the earthquake but by the tsunami. No water-tight emergency generator rooms. No water-tight reactor building. No emergency water supply for cooling the reactors. No safety manual or training for the operators.

The same lack of safety at Fukushima applies to most of the other reactors.

wallaceToday  10:50 am JST

Many countries are generating 20-50% of power from renewables. The negative downside is far less than using fossil fuels. Wind turbines can be constructed from wood which is now happening in Sweden. Solar panels have a life of 25 years or more. New ones are recyclable.

Expensive and unreliable, suitable only as supplements.

Restarting the nukes only makes sense. Australia is finding out that hard way that the headlong rush to embrace renewables is pushing power prices to unaffordable levels for both commercial and domestic customers but a few subsidy farmers are doing alright out of it.

John

Today 09:23 am JST

Nuclear energy is the cleanest

Yep you only have to deal with radioactive wastes

Bad Haircut

as I posted, restarting the available reactors will only generate 15% of the total power. Maximum use of renewables will still be required. Ending the use of coal must be a priority.

Japan needs to resolve the very long-term problem of storing spent fuel and nuclear waste. The power companies have applied for licenses to decommission more than 20 reactors over the next 50 years. Fukushima will create a very high rate of nuclear waste with 800 tons of molten fuel. if it can be removed.

Finding locations with deep caves and solid bedrock.

There needs to a private investigation into the safety of the reactors before starting them up again.

I’ve often wondered why, with such vast amounts of thermal resources, Japan hasn’t developed its thermal power, the way countries like Iceland do. I’ve read numbers of below 1%.

I am no specialist, but have always been admirative of Japan’s resilience so would be glad if someone can answer !

I am no specialist, but have always been admirative of Japan’s resilience so would be glad if someone can answer

Not to worry. There are many 'specialists' on this board who will be more than happy to answer .!.

Entuojo

I am no specialist, but have always been admirative of Japan’s resilience so would be glad if someone can answer 

Not to worry. There are many 'specialists' on this board who will be more than happy to answer 

There are several posters who work in the nuclear industry. One is an Indian engineer working at Fukushima but posting less these days. You shouldn’t make assumptions about people you don’t know. There are also posters who are engineers and have good understanding of the problems.

JT is a discussion forum and not a university so qualifications are not needed.

Wonder how it will compare to the fears of seeing a total meltdown when the next big quake takes out an NPP. How much has Fukushima cost us so far? How long will the meltdown and cleanup last? How many more times will they dump in the ocean or look for places to store the waste? How many more times will they complain to international bodies when called out for dumping and having their products shunned? Or how about the fear Naoto Kan felt when realizing Tokyo may have to be abandoned forever? That he had been lied to by the operators of the plant and not told for three days how bad it was? How about the fear of those who lost their homes and had to live in shelters -- and maybe still have to? Or the fear they felt when they were told they would no longer receive any assistance because their abandoned towns were no longer considered evacuation zones after the government reduced said zones to save costs?

Or maybe just the far more justified fears of how things like Fukushima have poisoned the planet while power companies reap record profits?

JT is a discussion forum and not a university so qualifications are not needed.

You don't say .!.

About 5 months before, Noto peninsula quake brought massive damages to many facilities of Shika nuclear plants.

2023 November, chairman of Japan's economy group had demanded to restart Shika nuclear plants.

If it had been restarted, 2nd nuclear disaster in Japan might have been caused, it revealed dangerousness of Japan again where depending on nuclear plants despite strong disaster often occur.

Who want to expand nuclear power in Japan are major power corporations or economy circle who think nothing besides immediate profit, local beneficiaries who tamed with subsidy, ruling party LDP who are tamed with contribution from corporations, and Japanese far-rightists who support LDP.

But, Japan's nuclear regulation agency already lost independency as same as before Fukushim disaster, domestic all nuclear plants' seismic resistance are far less than general quake-proof designed houses and those are superannuated.

Besides, practicable evacuate plans that considering even direction of wind don't exist at all in Japan, because it's impossible.

Moreover, now nuclear plant became a kinds of military target since Russian invaded Ukraine, Japan's most nuclear plants are located on seacoast where near China or North Korea, it's other security risk.

If only one nuclear plant at western Japan will be destroyed, it will bring uncountable damages to innumerable people extensively by radioactive contamination with wind of direction such as westerlies.

Hideomi KuzeToday 05:00 pm JST

Who want to expand nuclear power in Japan are major power corporations or economy circle who think nothing besides immediate profit, local beneficiaries who tamed with subsidy, ruling party LDP who are tamed with contribution from corporations, and Japanese far-rightists who support LDP.

Or those who want stable, base power. Or those who want reasonable energy prices. Or those who want to move away from fossil fuels, and realize that 100% renewables is unfeasible. Or those who want greater energy security. And many more besides.

But, Japan's nuclear regulation agency already lost independency

No, it didn't.

Moreover, now nuclear plant became a kinds of military target since Russian invaded Ukraine, Japan's most nuclear plants are located on seacoast where near China or North Korea, it's other security risk.

This is the same for every single country that uses nuclear power. The world is not about to stop using nuclear power because Russia, China, and North Korea are rogue states.

The problem here is Russia/China/North Korea, not Japan.

In the remaining 20 reactors there is still ¥15 trillion of profits. The power companies won't give that up. There will be no new reactors and will end by default.

Fossil fuels currently support Japan's electricity.

In FY2019, the breakdown of electricity generation in Japan by source was 37.1% natural gas, 31.9% coal, 6.8% oil, 7.8% hydroelectric, and 10.3% renewable energy other than hydroelectric. The breakdown of renewable energy is 6.7% solar, 2.6% bio, 0.7% wind, and 0.3% geothermal.

Japan relies on fossil fuels for much of its electricity supply, but thermal power plants emit the most greenhouse gases when burning fossil fuels, which has an impact on global warming.

Now that carbon dioxide is a problem, thermal power plants will be the first to be shut down. Instead, it will be necessary to reconstruct nuclear power plants and utilize natural energy.

We will have to reduce the use of fossil fuels as much as possible and ensure a stable supply until nuclear fusion is developed.

Distribution of electricity generation in Japan in fiscal year 2022, by energy source

https://www.statista.com/statistics/745675/japan-share-of-electricity-production/

On hot sweaty days, everyone wants their A/C to work, but they don't like to plan how to get the power that requires. All forms of power generation have trade-offs. Nuclear power has the fewest. Why isn't Japan building solar panels? Why isn't Japan capturing wind power? Why isn't Japan capturing wave power? Why isn't Japan building industrial-sized batteries? https://reneweconomy.com.au/biggest-battery-facility-in-nsw-is-now-fully-operational/ I don't know the answers to those questions, besides they don't have the "will".

Other countries do these things, Japan can too. It just takes the will to make it happen.

The Chinese governement have just announced in their May report that there are no discernable levels of strontium or cesium in the seas around China, but they continue to keep in place a ban on Japanese seafood.

What should we believe? Is it worth the risk to jack up nuclear power generation with such neighbours?

中国周辺海域の放射性物質濃度「異常なし」 日本産水産物禁輸は継続 (msn.com)

Edit, 'government', discernible' above.