September 21, 2012

Sep 21, 2012 | Fukushima Accident Updates

  • The chairman of the newly launched Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) said no idled nukes will be restarted until firm nuclear standards are set. NRA Chairman Shunichi Tanaka stressed “It is impossible to give the green light until we finish reviewing the current provisional standards (for reactivating reactors).” The timetable for the new standards could stretch well into the spring of 2013, meaning Japan will possibly face another winter of energy short-falls and mandated customer conservation. When asked about the restarts of the two Oi nukes this past spring, Tanaka essentially attacked the Prime Minister’s decision to restart them, “The Oi nuclear plant was restarted based on political judgment, out of consideration for energy supply and demand during the summer. The provisional standards are incomplete, allowing the plant to be restarted with no disaster-prevention measures in place.” Regarding whether the 40-year cap on the operation of reactors might be extended by 20 years, Tanaka said, “It will be considerably difficult.” In addition, he left the door open for restarting the three units already past the operational age of 40. When asked by the Press if the three nukes were going to be decommissioned, Tanaka answered, “I can’t make any prejudgment.” He also said the three unfinished nukes would be judged whether or not they are acceptable for completion and operation based on what he called a “backfit system”. Any nukes that meet the forthcoming standards will be allowed to operate. Those that don’t will have their licenses suspended. Tanaka pointed out, “The most important thing is to recover confidence in the nuclear safety administration, which has reached rock-bottom.” (Mainichi Shimbun)
  • The NRA is already being attacked as being nothing more than a “cosmetic change”. Critics say nothing substantive has been done to dismantle the old bureaucratic culture which has been judged as the main reason for the Fukushima accident. They feel the situation demands outside assistance to monitor the new system, and government-backed programs such as providing overseas training for staffing. “The most important point is that the secretariat that supports the highly independent five-member commission must have independence and expertise,” said Shuya Nomura, a member of the Diet’s Fukushima investigative panel. Nomura wants the NRA to be structured with America’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission as a model. It is also argued that the new “secretariat” is essentially the same staff the supported the now-defunct NISA regulators, meaning it could be a regulatory atmosphere of business as usual. “The secretariat under the commission that handles actual work is still pretty much the same as NISA, which means we can’t really expect the culture to be changed,” said Hiroshi Tanaka, who was a special adviser to former Prime Minister Naoto Kan. The critics also say the public’s apparent confidence in the new NRA is “misguided” because Chairman Tanaka was once part of Japan’s Atomic Energy Commission. They want the NRA populated with people that have no former nuclear ties whatsoever. They add that separating the agency from the ministry of the economy will be of little consequence. (Japan Times)
  • The NRA has announced that one of their first efforts will be to conduct an on-site inspection of the Oi nuclear power station for earthquake safety. The Oi units were restarted this summer to prevent power shortages. The NRA knows that their predecessor, NISA, has already made the inspection and found the geologic anomalies underneath and near the Oi complex to be a highly unlikely source of an earthquake. The new commission wants to re-analyze the prior work of NISA to either confirm or reject their findings. If the NRA rejects the NISA conclusion, Oi units#3&4 may have to be shuttered. (Kyodo News)
  • The Yomiuri Shimbun says the government must retract its zero nuclear targets for the good of Japan’s economy. Instead, Tokyo should come up with a feasible energy strategy. The Yomiuri identifies several gaping holes in the Tokyo proposal. First, the new energy strategy has drawn angry reactions from the business community and local governments that host nuclear power plants. Without easing the resentment of the business community it will be difficult for the government to implement its energy strategy. Next, the United States has also expressed strong concerns over the plan. In addition, the plan itself fails to identify how to implement viable alternatives to the operation of nukes. Without this, the “no-nukes” policy would threaten the stability of Japan’s future energy supply. The Yomiuri thus says “it was entirely appropriate for the Cabinet to refrain from quickly approving the new energy strategy.” In a strong final statement, Japan’s largest newspaper says future energy policy should not be set to garner short-term votes in impending elections. Although most polls show a strong desire to abolish nukes, the Yomiuri says, “We doubt whether there is a sufficient number of people who understand the risks of a zero nuclear policy–such as unemployment and poverty–and would be willing to undergo the hardships involved.”
  • A Mainichi Shimbun poll shows that there was already a strong national antinuclear sentiment before the Fukushima accident happened. Of course, national nuclear “insecurity” has risen since the crisis began. Nearly 50% of the Mainichi’s polled readers said they felt insecure before 3/11/11, and that has now risen to 79%. Also, where 80% the polled experts said nuclear energy was a valuable asset before the accident, it has now dropped to 50%. “Nuclear energy experts are upset after experiencing a nuclear disaster. They are apparently trying to rethink the safety and value of nuclear power generation,” said Kansai University professor Shoji Tsuchida. On a related note, the desire to prioritize renewables for future energy production was 59% prior to the F. Daiichi crisis, and has since risen to nearly 80%. Thus we find that Japan was already leaning toward a less-nuclear, more-renewable future before Fukushima ever happened. The poll results were released at the Atomic Energy Society of Japan meeting in Hiroshima on Thursday, Sept. 20th.
  • Above-standard levels of radioactive Cesium have been found in nine species of fish caught near Fukushima Daiichi. All nine exceed Japan’s limit of 100 Becquerels per kilogram. Only one, however, exceeds the international standard of 1000 Bq/kg – the greenling. Most of the eight species of fish below the international limit were between 390 and 540 Bq/kg. The fish samples analyzed were caught within 20 km of F. Daiichi between August 20th and September 5th. (Kyodo News)
  • Shizuoka governor Heita Kawakatsu has submitted a draft proposal for a nuclear referendum to the prefectural assembly. The proposal asks whether or not citizens want Chubu Electric’s Hamaoka power station restarted. The referendum will be held only if the assembly votes in favor of it. Most members of the group have not stated their position on the proposal. There are some problems in the draft ordinance that must be corrected before the assembly can legally address it, most of which are political requirements. Kawkatsu has said he supports the petition-driven referendum. The Hamaoka power station was closed in May of 2011 by then-PM Naoto Kan based on fears that a possible major earthquake and tsunami could cause another nuclear crisis. (Yomiuri Shimbun)
  • F. Daiichi’s host town, Okuma, has adopted a five-year no-return policy. Since so little of the town has been deemed to be suitable for immediate decontamination, it makes no sense to allow anyone home in the near term. Tokyo’s reconstruction plan says 95% of Okuma is unsuitable for people to live for a long time, and even if the remainder were decontaminated it would be difficult for repopulation. Mayor Toshitsuna Watanabe told reporters that his goal has been to quickly recover the town’s population, but he was forced to make this painful decision. (NHK World)