Y800 bil needed to scrap nuclear reprocessing plant


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


©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

--"the cost, which will be shouldered by taxpayers,"

See, nuclear power really is cheap. For its producers.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

No mention at all of the abysmal safety record at Tokaimura? No mention of the 1999 Criticality Accident where workers were carrying uranium oxide in buckets? Two dead and dozens exposed....

"The town has witnessed three other accidents in the past four years: a radiation leak at another plant in 1995, a fire and explosion at a nuclear-waste treatment plant in March 1997 and the discovery of 2,000 drums leaking radioactive waste in August 1997. But Tokaimura seemed to have learned little from those earlier experiences as it fumbled to deal with last week's crisis. The government's response was child-like, said Takashi Hirose, an anti-nuclear activist.",8599,2054365,00.html

"According to the IAEA, the accident "seems to have resulted primarily from human error and serious breaches of safety principles, which together led to a criticality event". The company conceded that it violated both normal safety standards and legal requirements, and criminal charges were laid. The fact that the plant is a boutique operation outside the mainstream nuclear fuel cycle evidently reduced the level of scrutiny it attracted. The state regulator had visited the plant only twice per year, and never when it was operating"

Criminal management, criminally lax oversight from the government but it's the tax payer that ends up footing the bill. Exactly the same as Tepco and Fukushima....

4 ( +5 / -1 )

They are supposed to include this cost in the running of the plant, and save up for it during the working life of the plant. From experience in the UK, estimated costs to decommission plants have ended up at five times their initial estimate, and the duration of decommission doubled.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Ah, but, nuclear power is cheap and efficient, isn't it? If it is going to cost so much to decommission the old plant, how much will it cost to build a new one? Nuclear power is not cheap, efficient or safe! How much money and how many nuclear disasters will it take to get these fools to realize this?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It is surprising that clever, ingenious Japan hasn't embraced renewables.

Every building should be cloaked with solar panels. Every river fitted with a HEP plant. Tidal lagoons and windfarms out at sea. All are better than nuclear.

Fukushima was a wake up call. Nuclear is so last century and once again we see how expensive it is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ah, cheap, cheap nuclear power!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

CHA-CHING! Well, everybody, these are certainly tax dollars and they will certainly be going to companies that are ready to solve the problem. So, I see a lot of good news here.

If for some reason you don't like it or have something negative to say, consider this. If nuclear really were too expensive or dangerous or just not green enough, then why is China, the world's green technology leader, moving straight ahead with nuclear development? If you want to say that they are wrong, be prepared to say that they are wrong about wind, solar, hydro, and EVs and everything else. Or maybe, just maybe, the Chinese know what they are doing.

And if you just don't want to pay the taxes, just consider that it did not have to be this way. Development of reactors and power plants and facilities like Tokaimura could have been supported by nuclear power plants that could be generating electricity and paying their own way for better R and D in the area. Unlike China, Japan has been gripped by anti-nuclear hysteria that has destroyed the industry, the R and D, and has only served to make Japan dependent on fossil fuels and contractors paid with your taxes.

Japan has made its choice. Why all the frowns?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

"According to law, the nuclear power companies included in their monthly charges a proportion of it to cover the full cost of decommissioning its nuclear reactors and they are also required to set aside those funds to be used only for decommissioning. "

I remember the VERY DAY when Naoto Kan stood up and told the nuclear plant operators to shut the plants down, with NO compensation, no justification, and no due process. On that day and on this site, I predicted that bad things would come from such nationalization. Not one person agreed with me. And six years later. Here we are. Time for payback.

I think every utility in Japan can point to their records and show that if they had been allowed to operate their plants as promised by regulators and due process under the law, they would have been able to have sufficient funds to take care of decommissioning. Unfortunately, nuclear hysteria pushed the national government of Japan to interfere with the plans that the utilities had and forced them to buy fossil fuels at high prices. At that point, the government, and YOU the taxpayer, took full responsibility for the utilities. The government, without authority, evidence, or process COMPELLED the fiduciaries of the utilities to abandon their responsibilities to rate payers and shareholders.

This issue will not go to court because Naoto Kan's government had no legal, scientific, or procedural leg to stand on. The government will be lucky not to be sued for punitive damages. We can all feel lucky that the utilities will not go bankrupt, and that they will manage the decommissioning. But make no mistake. Taxpayers will be footing the bill.

It did not have to be this way, and I warned all of you. You did not listen. Hysteria is not harmless. Now get ready to pay up.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

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