TEPCO eyes scrapping 2nd Fukushima nuclear plant

By Mari Yamaguchi

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

© Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

I'm on the fence about nuclear energy but, with scientists saying (for the past 20 years) that a major quake with strike the Kanto area and after Fukushima plants destroying so many lives and environment, after plants and been restarted only to be shut down due to problems, how can they still want to make Japan 20-22 percent nuclear within the next 10 years? Time to change the people participating in their think-tanks.

Also, they should make everyone who got/gets rich on nuclear energy pay for decommission of plants.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I believe this decision was actually made some time ago however as the article says this is the first time TEPCO has "announced" this.

I used to be pro-nuclear (with caveats) until some personal experiences changed my mind. I am now between anti nuclear or highly regulated nuclear power which must have international oversight (regardless of which country the plant is in).

Contrary to popular belief there are not a lot of people getting "super rich" off nuclear energy. What happened to Toshiba (Westinghouse) was not surprising.

Most nuclear generation projects have gone way over budget. Take a look at what is going on with Hitachi/Horizon in the UK. Profit margins on nuclear power are single digits. Often the plants are bailed out because it really is expensive to properly operate a nuclear power plant. Many plants in the U.S. are being decommissioned.

Japan has a proven poor track record with Nuclear power (including the resignation of the TEPCO president in 2002 due to falsification of test data at Kashiwazaki Kariwa). As with all articles on the subject I include a reference to the NAIIC report to the Diet (the report was prepared by Japanese), especially the Message from the Chairman on page 9.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

oops - forgot the link!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The utility responsible for meltdowns at a nuclear power plant in northeast Japan seven years ago said Thursday for the first time publicly that it will start making concrete plans to decommission another plant in Fukushima that narrowly escaped the crisis.

Should have done this 7 years ago.

Still, the government says nuclear energy should account for 20-22 percent of Japan's energy mix by fiscal 2030 in a draft energy plan that experts say as unrealistic.

of course its unrealistic. They should scrap nuclear and go renewable. But too many brown envelopes...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The Daini survived the 3/11 earthquake and tsunami thanks to the quick thinking go the plant manager. Since then TEPCO have spent more than ¥100 billion updating the plant. It's unlikely TEPCO will ever get permission to restart the NPP which is totally opposed by the Fukushima residents.

Also the government have taken the decision to decommission the Tokai reprocessing plant which will be paid by the taxpayers and take 70 years to complete.

It is reportedly expected to take about 70 years to decommission the plant, at a projected cost of almost ¥1 trillion (USD9 billion). Of this, ¥770 billion will be needed for decommissioning the plant and waste disposal, while ¥217 billion will be required for ten-year preparatory work

2 ( +2 / -0 )

"Nuclear energy now accounts for less than 2 percent of Japan's energy mix since most reactors were idled after the 2011 disaster. Only five reactors have since restarted.

While the government of pro-business Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is pushing to start up as many reactors as possible, restarts are coming slowly as anti-nuclear sentiment remains strong and regulators have stepped up screening process.

Still, the government says nuclear energy should account for 20-22 percent of Japan's energy mix by fiscal 2030 in a draft energy plan that experts say as unrealistic"

Total insanity

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Currently there are 8 reactors in operation a total of 7.4GW which I think would be about 3% of the total power. It's unlikely nuclear energy will never return to the 3/11 days.

We need more renewable energies and countries like the UK are doing much better on that.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Daini was actually damaged by the earthquake and shut down. The damage wasn’t servere, but the lack of reporting to the public was a total coverup.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

A rare common sense and evidence-based decision.

Lots of work for the newly reorganised Toshiba company.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The damage wasn’t servere, but the lack of reporting to the public was a total coverup.

The reactors didn't suffer any damage but the turbines did. The plant lost its water supply because of the power loss. The quick thinking plant manager ran a hose for several kms to a mountain to get water and keep the reactors cool. There was a report and available so there wasn't a cover up, not even partially.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Title should read "Fukushima eyes scrapping TEPCO"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Extensive report on the Daini NPP from the 3/11 disasters

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The only way the government can have nuclear energy accounting for 20% of production in 2030 is if they build more nuclear power plants. I'm sure the LDP plan to do that, but are keeping quiet about it for the time being.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Japan better scrap all nuclear power plants, not only one or two. They are no longer major power source. Japan can do without nuclear power and other eco powers seem better off financially like European countries do.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Any country with high seismic activity should not utilize nuclear power.

The release of radioactivity from Fukushima and the lack of facilities for the adequate storage of waste are also factors against.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Nuclear power is fine in theory but throw in real-world factors like budgets, corruption, human error, and natural disasters and it does not hold up in practice. That's with even if you fudge the future issues of decommissioning cost and long-term storage of waste.

If the LDP wants to increase the share of nuclear in Japan, I fear that there are parts of rural Japan whose local economies and depopulation issues are so bad that that they (i.e., their corrupt politicians) would actually accept building a plant. Iwaki itself was heavily incentivized to build the Fukushima plants.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I didnt know that there was another Nuclear Power station in Fukushima....( it's like saying the Russians had another one hidden away in Chernobyl that they didnt tell us about)... and now TEPCO admits that they were thinking about restarting it - I wonder what they've been smoking these past few years.

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