national

Kyushu Electric to start loading fuel rods into Sendai plant on Tuesday

29 Comments

Kyushu Electric Power plans to start loading fuel into the No. 1 reactor at its Sendai nuclear plant in Kagoshima Prefecture on Tuesday.

The utility informed the Nuclear Regulation Authority of its schedule on Friday.

Kyushu Electric said 157 nuclear fuel rods will be inserted into the reactor by crane over a four-day period.

Barring any problems, the Sendai nuclear plant is scheduled to be brought back online in mid-August. A restart of the 890-megawatt No. 1 reactor following stringent safety checks would mark the first resumption of nuclear power generation in nearly two years.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has said rebooting the country's nuclear sector is needed to cut the cost of using fossil fuels for power generation, but he faces a deeply skeptical public after the meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

Kyushu Electric initially planned to restart the No. 1 reactor in July but operational checks took two weeks longer than previously announced.

The company made no changes to the planned restart of the 890-megawatt Sendai No. 2 reactor in late September.

All 43 of Japan's operable nuclear reactors are currently offline. However, five of them have received basic clearance and are at varying stages of the review process.

© Japan Today/Thomson Reuters

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

29 Comments
Login to comment

Just because the gun is loaded doesn't mean it will be fired. There are legal hurdles yet to be climbed and moral, ethical and common sense components to be considered. No to nuclear.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

When the big cities have to be abandoned after the next major quake on a fault line (on which one of these NPPs sits), they'll STILL insist it's safe, couldn't have seen it coming, was no one's fault, shouldn't jump to conclusions on the safety of nuclear power, etc. They'll never learn.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

As usual, Zichi (above) comes through with a well-thought out piece on nuclear power. And "smithinjapan" brings home another moot point about what is happening. The only thing I can say at this point is that I agree with them ...

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"There was no "contamination" of the environment in Fukushima anywhere outside of the plant "

really? http://netc.com/

2 ( +2 / -0 )

It is clear that alternatives to fossil fuels must be developed on a large scale. However, nuclear power is neither renewable nor clean and therefore not a wise option. Even if one were to disregard the waste problems, safety risks and dismal economics, nuclear power is both too slow and too limited a solution to global warming and energy insecurity. Given the urgent need to begin reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the long lead times required for the design, permitting and construction of nuclear reactors render nuclear power an ineffective option for addressing global warming.

Taxpayer dollars would be better spent on increasing energy conservation, efficiency and developing renewable energy resources. In fact, numerous studies have shown that improving energy efficiency is the most cost-effective and sustainable way to concurrently reduce energy demand and curb greenhouse gas emissions. Wind power already is less expensive than nuclear power. And while photovoltaic power is currently more expensive than nuclear energy, the price of electricity produced by the sun, as with wind and other forms of renewable energy, is falling quickly. Conversely, the cost of nuclear power is rising.

When the very serious risk of accidents, proliferation, terrorism and nuclear war are considered, it is clear that investment in nuclear power as a climate change solution is not only misguided, but also highly dangerous.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@zichi - Again, if you have a problem or doubts about the accuracy of the Kiko Network's research or Bloomberg's reporting of the research, take it up with them. If I have reason to doubt that a report is accurate I will attempt to get more information, but I really don't spend my time personally verifying the accuracy of every piece of information I come across when I have no reason to question it. And I have no intention to.

Before a company can build a power plant it must apply for permission from the Tokyo and also local governments. Under environmental laws, Tokyo will make an investigation on the impact of building a power plant and on completion will issue a report and statement.

Possibly the reason you don't hear about it is that the environmental laws have been changed. Again, not something you will likely see in Japanese media, but it was covered by the Australian media a couple of years ago and the information can be easily found. Basically the environmental assessment process for new coal plants has been fast-tracked (aka gutted) and the time reduced by, I believe, 80%. A safe bet would be that the reports and statements you mentioned were among the things cut.

Promote a sustainable energy system that doesn’t depend on either fossil fuels or nuclear power

I would be more than happy if this objective can be reached. However it looks much more like a classic case of the perfect being the enemy of the good. The worst case scenario risks of this vision of the future being a pipe-dream are magnitudes of order greater than the alleged worst case scenario of the risks of nuclear. They don't belong even remotely in the same conversation. It is basically an insane bet and gamble, and we can only hope it wins.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

"When the big cities have to be abandoned after the next major quake on a fault line (on which one of these NPPs sits), they'll STILL insist it's safe, couldn't have seen it coming, was no one's fault, shouldn't jump to conclusions on the safety of nuclear power, etc. They'll never learn."

They will force what they want, regardless of consequences. Unknowingly "the old foundation is being setup for removal", cant stop it, just flee in time.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Fools

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Zichi,

Pollution from fossil fuels isn't just a problem for a country, it's a global problem needing a global solution and nuclear energy isn't the solution since it currently only generates about 10% of total global power demand.

A global power generation level which "Green" activists try to keep low through litigation, protest and misinformation.

That 15% of power from nuclear energy will not reduce the level of air borne pollution by very much.

PLUS

by 2030, the country could generate 30% of its power from renewables which would reduce the current level of air borne pollution.

Equals 45% low-carbon power, which would reduce the airborne pollution even more. Why stop at that though?

I'm opposed to the use of nuclear energy, too expensive and elitist and not a global solution and I'm also opposed to fossil fuels, especially coal.

Elitist? That's a new one! How about the well-off getting subsidies to put solar panels on their rooves and getting paid premium prices for the electricity they produce...something that the poorer off cannot do, but have to subsidize.

The future is about renewable energy.

Dogma.

In the IAEA report, it admits that radiation monitoring was not working properly in the days immediately after the Fukushima disaster began. Meaning estimates of the levels of radiation the people of Fukushima were exposed to cannot be trusted.

From the IAEA report:

"The early assessments of radiation doses used environmental monitoring and dose estimation models, resulting in some overestimations. For the estimates in this report, personal monitoring data provided by the local authorities were also included to provide more robust information on the actual individual doses incurred and their distribution. These estimates indicate that the effective doses incurred by members of the public were low, and generally comparable to the range of effective doses incurred due to global levels of natural background radiation. "

AND

"After the accident, monitoring was carried out on more than 200 000 residents in various locations within Fukushima Prefecture. The levels were generally lower than the very low detection limits of the whole body counters, indicating little or no intake of radionuclides into the body. As a result, it was neither possible nor necessary to undertake detailed statistical analysis of these data."

So, there were initial overestimations, but this was corrected using personal data. Residents were monitored using whole body counters, and little or no radionuclide intake was observed.

Greenpeace trying to spin things their way again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Guy_Jean_Dailleult and other educated guys, Glad to hear the rational voice here. Nuclear power is not prefect yet it's thousand time better than the fossil fuel. The fact is that no one died as a consequence of radiation in Fukushima.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@zichi - I have been respectful and stated my position quite clearly all along, but seriously, your refusal to deal with the questions raised about the increased use of coal in Japan is getting very boring. As for the alleged "real issues" of nuclear power well I didn't raise them, but I can only assume you are referring to the usual anti-nuclear propaganda talking points about waste, cost, time etc. Well, you know what Goebbels said about saying the same things over and over don't you?

Nothing I said in the previous comment was incorrect. It is not my job to verify the accuracy of reporting, and if you can find contrary evidence go ahead and send it along and I will then change my opinion. The environmental assessment process for coal power plants in Japan was changed so that plants can be built much more quickly, that is fact. And the worst case risk scenario of not using nuclear power is infinitely greater than the worst case risk scenario of using nuclear power. That is also a fact. Whatever people agree about the probabilities of those scenarios and the weight they give them is their business, but it doesn't change the scenarios. Your preferred option in the worst case is far more dangerous than mine. Have fun with your gambling.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

More idiocy

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

So again, if you have a direct link to a government statement I would like to have it.

No idea why you think the Japanese government would be issuing any statements on this topic or have any interest in it being publicized. If you choose to question the accuracy of Kiko Networks' research and findings regarding what is actually going on (as opposed to what is being promoted as going on) then that is your prerogative. However in my experience, those who oppose nuclear power never actually question anything that supports their worldview, as can be seen above in your citing of Greenpeace and ListenToTruth's recitation of the standard anti-nuclear talking points. But not surprised to see that the accuracy of information that does NOT support that worldview suddenly must be questioned and its accuracy verified.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

What I understand is that you, and many other people, want to have your cake and eat it too. You also don't want to consider the possibility that you won't be having your cake and eating it too, or the possible consequences of what that will mean. You also don't want to acknowledge that the Japanese government and Japan Inc. are actively working to make sure you don't.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Pollution from fossil fuel plants is a danger as well.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

Excellent.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

Zichi...not a person attack at all.

Just whenever anyone highlights fossil fuels in Japan. You talk about every other countries use of fossil fuels. Which is irrelevant and designed to deflect from the death and destruction that the switch to coal in Japan has caused. Not once have you said it's unacceptable that this happens. Ybut you do constantly claim that it doesn't happen in Japan.

The nuclear accident got into the ground. The ai and food. But at what levels. At what risl to health. Your statements are sweeping. Yes it's in the Pacific but it's 1 percent of the total radiation in that ocean. It's in the food but as has been proven numerous times before not at levels that are hazardous to health. And substantially lower than that is from your home country.

Your argument is nuclear is bad. It's on a par with saying per die when they fly.

Safest form of travel. Safest form of power.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

@zichi The figure of 43 new coal plants has been reported by a number of media sources, the one I referred to was from Bloomberg. If you don't trust them to give you the correct information about coal, then why do you think they are giving you the correct information about nuclear (and yes I know that works both ways)

As for contamination, I have learned since my last comment that the definition of "contamination" as used in nuclear safety is stretched so far from its actual meaning in the English language that the use of the word is useless and meaningless. But I have to go now, I just spilled coffee on my shirt, it is contaminated and I have to go burn it.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Guy, you have to remember that Zichi is of the belief that Japanese coal is different. Fossil fuels from other countries are dangerous but Japanese ones aren't. He also seems to be of the opinion that people don't die in Japan from fossil fuels. Therefore an increase in fossil fuels hasn't let to an increase in deaths. obviously this is different to the rest of the world but Japan is different. Apparently

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

About time, but turning on a few plants will never come close to compensating for the insane environmental damage done over the last 4+ years (and which will continue for decades), allegedly to protect people from "danger", but in reality to line a lot of pockets. Textbook disaster capitalism, and criminal.

-10 ( +5 / -15 )

Care to provide figures instead of emotionally charged statements?

Facts are not "emotionally charged statements". Japan is the only industrialized country in the world currently INCREASING its coal-generated electricity capacity. Most are actively working to decrease it.

From Bloomberg, April 9th, 2015: "New coal power projects planned for Japan could emit carbon dioxide equal to about a 10th of the country’s total emissions, an environmental group said in a statement Thursday. Japan has 43 coal power projects either under construction or planned, representing combined capacity of 21,200 megawatts, according to a statement from the Kyoto-based Kiko Network. “These projects, which may still be operating in 2050, run counter to Japan’s efforts to tackle climate change and should be quickly reviewed or stopped,” the group said."

That's right, there are 43 new coal power plants under construction or planned in Japan right now. Each of which will add to the pollution and CO2 released by the increased use of coal over the last 4 years. And each of which will individually cause far more deaths and negative health effects through normal operation than radiation from the DaiIchi accident itself caused (the health effects of coal, and in particular the health effects of living close to a coal power plant have all been scientifically and medically documented). An accident that by the way has caused ZERO deaths from radiation (fact) and never will (fact). And it's an accident that led to a "solution" that has, by some bizarre coincidence, led to trillions of yen / hundreds of billions of dollars finding their way to corporations in the coal and natural gas businesses. So everybody can just keep dreaming about the wonderful world of renewable energy that they know is just around the corner, but the big boys are quite happy to do their own thing.

The 2011 nuclear disaster also caused pollution and contamination of the environment and the displacement of 150,000 people with the lost of so many communities

There was no "contamination" of the environment in Fukushima anywhere outside of the plant itself, and no scientific justification for the displacement of 150,000 people for 4 years and 4 months. You are welcome to go and try to find any qualified radiation expert who will say otherwise. And by that I mean actually "qualified" not one of the many charlatans and fraudsters endlessly paraded out by the media.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

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