International Nuclear Watch & Discussion

[Amber G.]

A Rising Sun for Renewable Energy

apan is desperately trying to replace its nuclear-power capacity with renewables. It still has a long way to go.
<snip>

[chaanakya]

Back to selective quoting

from above article quoted by AG

Japan is a laggard on renewable energy, ranking well below the top 10 countries in both annual installations of renewable equipment and total renewable generating capacity. That, however, is set to change under a new energy policy that's been taking shape since last year's meltdowns at Fukushima.

Some major projects are being planned. Among them are a 200-megawatt solar installation that Tokyo-based Softbank announced late last month. Meanwhile, Japanese nuclear-reactor supply and service firms such as Toshiba, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, and Hitachi have stepped up their renewable energy sales targets and investments.

The changes are happening because all but one of Japan's 54 nuclear reactors are off-line. And they are not coming back soon, because municipal and provincial authorities—facing strong anti-nuclear sentiment—must approve the restart of reactors following safety tests. "The Japanese central government has essentially thrown in the towel on getting nuclear restarts," says Andrew DeWit, an energy policy expert at Rikkyo University.

Whether the country will be able to progress as fast as many would like remains to be seen. Government-mandated premium prices for renewable energy, set to go into effect in July, have yet to be disclosed. Another open question is whether Japan's electric power sector, including its grid, is prepared to support a massive scale-up of highly variable renewable energy.

The ministry estimates that 150 gigawatts of solar could be installed on public, commercial, and industrial buildings and on low-value urban lands such as capped landfills and abandoned farmlands. That alone is equivalent to nearly three-quarters of Japan's current power-generating capacity. Wind power potential, meanwhile, was estimated at 280 gigawatts onshore and 1,600 gigawatts offshore. Geothermal and small-scale hydropower could generate 14 gigawatts.

The Japanese government is also funding development of novel options for renewable energy. Those include floating offshore turbines adapted to Japan's deep coastal waters. Marubeni and Tokyo University are leading an industrial consortium funded by the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry that plans to install three floating wind turbines totaling 16 megawatts in capacity some 20 to 40 kilometers offshore of Fukushima Prefecture, as well as the world's first 66,000-volt floating power substation.

Well Japan is a late entrant to the field of Renewable Energy. And things would look up only after sometime. Anyway NPPs remain offline unlike the impression being created by AG in above post.

[Sanku]

Well Japan is a late entrant to the field of Renewable Energy. And things would look up only after sometime. Anyway NPPs remain offline unlike the impression being created by AG in above post.

Japan has learnt its lesson, it is now unlikely to make the same mistakes that it made before viz

1) Placing shoddy LWR based NPPs on highly seismically active areas.
2) Allow the perfidious nuclear energy companies to also own the debate on nuclear safety issues by appealing to their "higher knowledge" (in reality no higher knowledge, they in fact knew less than others in many cases but just blustered their way through)
3) Lack of separation of Govt/Industry and regulators, leading to a massive conflict of interests, coupled with a Japanese political structures which would just bend over double when Americans asked them to follow a path.

---------------------------------------

The Americans who made a living by palming of dicey and shoddy tech on to others, methods which they wont use themselves, are the ones who are in real soup though --> I am sure Japan will bounce back, they will opt of a judicious mix of energy saving, alt sources and more gas/coal coupled with the classic Japanese single minded focus on doing something once they are convinced that it is the right way.

I do not think they will be fooled by American snake oil sellers any more (at least in this regard)

[amit]

A Rising Sun for Renewable Energy

apan is desperately trying to replace its nuclear-power capacity with renewables. It still has a long way to go.
<snip>

And in Germany reality beings to bite and Merkel is being criticised by, guess who? The environmentalists!

Germany's nuclear power phaseout turns off environmentalists

Shills may label the report "snake oil". However, there are some interesting bits of statistics in the report which stand unless they are refuted with other credible stats:

To make up for the lost nuclear power, which supplied 22% of Germany's electricity before the phaseout began, the country has increased its reliance on brown coal, a particularly high emitter of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and a major contributor to global warming. Brown coal now supplies 25% of Germany's electricity, up from 23% a year ago.

Amber, if you remember I had predicted in the other thread that Germany's nuclear shut down will only increase consumption of coal. So much for all this talk about "protecting the environment" and "leaving the world a better place (environment-wise) for our children". Bull crap is less polluting.

Previously a net exporter of electricity, Germany now imports as much electricity as it sells abroad. Removing so much German electricity from the market has benefited power companies in neighboring countries that rely heavily on coal and nuclear power, thereby undermining Germany's environmental goals and its nuclear safety concerns.

The irony of the bolded part above would be lost on anti-nuclear jihadis. [Disclaimer: No need for any worthies on BRF to think I'm referring to them]

Last year's shuttering of eight of the country's 17 reactors has led to an increase in carbon dioxide emissions of 25 million tons annually in Europe, said Laszlo Varro of the International Energy Agency, a European intergovernmental organization.

It's now pretty apparent, at least to me, that the anti-nuclear chant has nothing to do with the environment.

Finally, the Unterweser complex was Germany's biggest - and one of the world's biggest - nuclear energy complex. Funny isn't it the folks who live around the complex, those who are in the danger zone so to speak, are opposing the closure. Seems the "snake-oil salesmen" have done a very good job in convincing them. [It could also be argued that the other snake-oil, that is the type distributed by the German Greens have had no effect on these folks.]

"Our facilities were serviced every year; they're in perfect shape," said Maik Otholt, a Kleinensiel resident. "Nothing ever went wrong. And so now what are we doing? We're buying nuclear energy from France. Their plant is just over the border. And now we're buying that expensive electricity. It's crazy."

I like to see Germany hit its 23 per cent renewables target by 2022, by which they are supposed to close all their plants. Anyone up for a wager?

[Sanku]

It is now a full year since the multiple meltdowns happened at Fukushima, and a series of stories in Japan are covering the continuing horror of its impact. (Not funnily, the pain and struggle that Japanese are being freely mocked "did any one die?" by the high and mighty, however those who have to live with the disaster have a very different take (have people died? yes actually suicides have increased post the devastation, the only course available to those who lost everything including any hope of a life by the sad events.)

I post some here

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/eo20120418a4.html

Fukushima: Probability theory is unsafe

As a nuclear core designer and someone who earned a Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in nuclear engineering, I volunteered to look ....
{as we see real engineers and scientists are grappling with the problem and not treating it like a H&D circus}
....................

They continue to claim that the magnitude of the earthquake and tsunami was a natural disaster far beyond anything anyone could have imagined or planned for. But is this true? Was it a catastrophe that could not have been avoided?

My analysis takes a totally different point of view. It shows in documented detail (pr.bbt757.com/eng/) that if you want to operate a nuclear reactor, then you should not assume anything about potential disasters — be they earthquakes, tsunamis, terrorists or a plane crash. No matter what happens, if you are operating a nuclear reactor, you must find a way to bring it down to a cold shutdown in any type of emergency
.......................

But there is also another important lesson to be learned, and it applies to all operating nuclear facilities around the world: If you have to assume something, then you are not prepared.

We must show how we can avoid core meltdowns under any circumstance. The challenge is no longer just the gaining of public acceptance but to realize that we are being tested by nature, and that God will keep testing us, checking to see if we are ready to ask the right questions.

A meaningful mature scientific and engineering response from a honest person.

===================================================

Another physicist and a engineer, honest one. Read it and weep (if you still have a heart and are not completely sold to commercial interests that is)

http://japanfocus.org/events/view/136

—I hear that in Koriyama, people who call themselves advisors have been instructing groups of ten or more people saying, "We radiation specialists are here, so you need not worry." When people are totally exhausted, many feel "that's enough". Fukushima mothers say that they are utterly exhausted. May I have your message for them?

I'm not qualified. I'm at one end of the spectrum of the group of criminals. I'm among the criminals who made them shoulder a heavy weight. I can only say that I'm very sorry. It's impossible to keep facing fear forever. That is exhausting and people want to forget if possible. How are we to handle such a heavy burden? If you speak of monetary calculation, individual suffering and sorrow can't be translated into money and there is already a huge amount of sorrow. It's hard to know what to do. As long as one lives, there is no choice but to live with this reality. I'm very sorry. I don't know how to apologize. But apology doesn't allow one to take responsibility. I have long been thinking about what I can do to reduce radiation exposure in children, if only a little. And I would like to continue to do so.

Interviewer: Watanabe Taeko (editorial board, Shukan Kinyobi.)

Koide Hiroaki, b. 1949, assistant professor, Kyoto University, Nuclear Reactor Experiment Research Center.

Clearly the above person still has a heart, and a brain, and ethics.

=======================================================================================

A horrible thought from Japan to all the "economy or bust" folks -- an editorial by a reputed newspaper.

http://mainichi.jp/english/english/pers ... 2000c.html

In light of further nuclear risks, economic growth should not be priority

In the three weeks after the Independent Investigation Commission on the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident's report became available to the public, 95,000 copies had been sold; this, despite the fact that they run 1,575 yen a piece. It's a testament to the public's thirst for a systematic explanation that is not affected by appearances or interests.

Earthquakes in the neighborhood of level-5 on the seismic intensity scale continue to occur even now in the Tohoku and Kanto regions. We cannot accept the absurd condescension of those who fear the worse-case scenario, labeling them as "overreacting." We have no time to humor the senseless thinking that instead, those who downplay the risks for the sake of economic growth are "realistic." (By Takao Yamada, Expert Senior Writer)

[Sanku]

If anyone thought that Germany and Japan's walking away from Nuclear would be a walk in the park, they were clearly either fooling themselves or the others

If some one thought those who took this step were unaware of the challenges, well then for them I can only

The point remains Japan and Germany will walk away despite the hiccups and issues, and are well on their way --> takleef to the nuclear lobby withstanding.

Yes, this will in a very very shortsighted calculation (not including mining, building and decommissioning) also seem to suggest to those who dont have a handle on long term views, that Carbon emissions have gone up --> but when a plan over a 50 year period is decided and there are good capable administrators at the country's helm who care about their countries interests --> they will take a 50 year view as well.

Thank god for those who can see ahead.

[amit]

If anyone thought that Germany and Japan's walking away from Nuclear would be a walk in the park, they were clearly either fooling themselves or the others

If some one thought those who took this step were unaware of the challenges, well then for them I can only

The point remains Japan and Germany will walk away despite the hiccups and issues, and are well on their way --> takleef to the nuclear lobby withstanding.

Yes, this will in a very very shortsighted calculation (not including mining, building and decommissioning) also seem to suggest to those who dont have a handle on long term views, that Carbon emissions have gone up --> but when a plan over a 50 year period is decided and there are good capable administrators at the country's helm who care about their countries interests --> they will take a 50 year view as well.

Thank god for those who can see ahead.

My Sanku, I'm impressed by your passion. So what's your advice for India. We should follow the example set by Germany and Japan and close all our nuclear plants?

It's about time you came out of the closet and showed the world your true feelings!

PS: I find it very interesting you, along with various sections of the German Greens, have no problems with Germany buying nuclear power generated in French nuclear power plants just a walk down the border between the two countries!

[Sanku]

My Sanku, I'm impressed by your passion. So what's your advice for India. We should follow the example set by Germany and Japan and close all our nuclear plants?

Dear Amit, considering that I have shared exactly what I think I am continually amazed by your ability to miss the very thing I have said so many times.

It's about time you came out of the closet and showed the world your true feelings!

Unlike some others my true feeling are worn on my sleeves. However those who play these games just cant get the clear cut "true feelings when openly displayed"

You keep trying to interpret my posts to figure out my true feelings, but stop your trolling with personal posts and attacks.

If you have something to say on the topic of international nuclear, say it. Dont discuss Sanku. Last post on this.

[amit]

^^^
Must be too much radiation.

[Sanku]

^^^
Must be too much radiation.

Archiving this for posterity.

[amit]

^^^
Must be too much radiation.

Archiving this for posterity.

While at it please have a banana.

[Sanku]

[quote="amit">>^^^
Must be too much radiation.

Archiving this for posterity.

While at it please have a banana.

Thank you, saving this too.

[chaanakya]

People file suit opposing reactivation of Niigata nuclear plant
Looks like TEPCO troubles are far from over.
NIIGATA, Japan, April 23, Kyodo

More than 130 people filed a suit Monday calling for a court judgment against reactivation of Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant due to safety concerns following the crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

The plaintiffs, including residents near the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in Niigata Prefecture, filed the suit with the Niigata District Court, saying the safety of nuclear power plants has no longer been guaranteed in the wake of the Fukushima accident and therefore they cannot live in peace.

Since the No. 6 reactor began regular checkups on March 26, all seven reactors at the plant on the Sea of Japan coast have been under suspension. The operator is aiming at reactivating the plant in fiscal 2013 at the earliest.

[chaanakya]

Nuclear plant utilization rate hits record low

Jiji Press

Japan's nuclear plant utilization rate slumped to 23.7 percent in fiscal 2011, the lowest level since the country's first commercial nuclear plant began operations in fiscal 1966, according to industry data released Monday.

The figure dropped from 67.3 percent in fiscal 2010 due to the country's inability to restart nuclear reactors that have been suspended for regular inspections following the crisis at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant in March last year.

The previous record low was 41.5 percent in fiscal 1967, the Federation of Electric Power Companies said.

In March, the utilization rate fell to 4.2 percent, the lowest monthly figure since comparable data became available in April 1977. The rate declined from 6.1 percent in February due to the suspension of the No. 3 reactor at Kansai Electric Power Co.'s Takahama plant and the No. 6 reactor at TEPCO's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant for regular maintenance on Feb. 20 and March 26, respectively.

Of Japan's 54 reactors, only the No. 3 reactor at Hokkaido Electric Power Co.'s Tomari plant remains active. The reactor is scheduled to go offline on May 5.

Although the government is working to restart the No. 3 and 4 reactors at KEPCO's Oi plant, industry minister Yukio Edano indicated Sunday it is highly likely there will be a period in which there are no active reactors, raising the possibility that electricity supplies will be tight this summer.

When Japan Atomic Power Co. opened the first commercial nuclear power plant in Ibaraki Prefecture in fiscal 1966, the plant utilization rate stood at 49.2 percent.

The rate topped 80 percent between fiscal 1995 and 2001, but has dipped below 70 percent since fiscal 2006 after a scandal erupted over TEPCO's attempts to cover up problems at nuclear plants.

[amit]

I find it interesting how "alleged" bad management by Tepco is being equated to nuclear industry is bad. This == is very similar to fashioning the entire debate as being one between renewables and nuclear as if the latter is a highly pollution source for electricity that needs to be replaced by "cleaner" power generation sources. And the 800 lb gorilla in the room, coal remains smugly perched on its pedestal.

There's another interesting point. I see that Germany and Japan's move to a nuclear free world is being cheered and meticulously documented by some posters on BRF. I assume that they are supporting this move in both countries because they have concluded that being nuclear free is to the best interests of the Germans and the Japanese. Well that's good and noble and epitomises all that is good in our gentle hearts.

However, what I find disturbing is that when I ask these same posters on whether India should also totally abandon nuclear on account of the many "environmental" aspects of nuclear, things start to become very coy and lot of Ho, Hum noises are made. It's a simple question which should elicit a simple reply. Yet we hear stuff like India needs "some nuclear" and things like latest imported nuclear reactors are unsafe and our local PHWRs are earthquake, tsunami and "throw everything at it" proof. (This is despite the fact that it has been pointed out that the latest generation reactors have 100 hours of passive cooling capacity while the PHWRs have around 60 hours).

I would think what's good for the Japanese and Germans should also be good for Indians, so why not say so loud and clear? Is it because there's an understanding that what's good for the natives of those two developed and stable countries is not good for a growing India which needs massive increases in power generation capacity or is it because Indian lives are more expendable?

Maybe its none of the above. The opposition is political in nature. "Man mohan" diatribes pretty much prove that. Come a govt change in 2014 then all will be bliss on the nuclear front and coal will start to look black again.

[amit]

Japan power companies warn of summer shortages

TOKYO: Japanese power companies are warning a hot summer could bring blackouts for some areas unless nuclear plants are re-started.

Kansai Electric Power, which supplies mid-western Japan, including the commercial hubs of Osaka, Kyoto and Kobe, said Monday it could face an electricity shortfall of almost 20 percent if temperatures soar in July.

And the utility said it could remain up to 16 percent short in August as increased air conditioner usage zaps the electricity produced by its thermal fuel plants.

Kyushu Electric Power, covering an area further west, as well as Hokkaido Electric Power in the north also said they will not be able to meet summer demand without nuclear energy.

The warnings came during the first meeting with a government panel of experts and officials looking into what could happen to the power supply amid a debate over whether to bring idled nuclear plants back online.

The power industry, government and many businesses are pushing for atomic plants to be fired up again, but a lingering public distrust of the technology after last year's tsunami-sparked crisis at Fukushima has polarised opinion.

Last week Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda's government gave the green light to restarting reactors at the Oi nuclear plant, run by Kansai Electric, but regulators still have to convince those living near the plant.

Public opposition to nuclear energy has intensified since the meltdowns at Tokyo Electric Power Company's Fukushima Daiichi plant when cooling systems were swamped by surging seawater in the worst atomic disaster for 25 years.

Since then, no power plant that has gone offline for regular safety checks has been permitted to restart.

Of Japan's stable of 50 reactors, only one remains in action, and that is due to be shut down on May 5. The four crippled units at Fukushima are no longer classed as reactors.

Supporters say without nuclear power, energy-hungry and resource-poor Japan cannot continue to function normally.

This should be an interesting summer in Japan. Let's see if the opposition to nuclear stays after a summer of shortfalls. Remember in Germany during winter they had to re-start a nuclear plant because of power shortages.

More importantly I'd like to see what effect power shortages have on Japan's semicon, electronics and car manufacturing industries.

[amit]

While at it I might as well share some taza khabar about the German post nuclear future.

According to this Reuters report:

German utilities and private investors have plans to construct or modernise some 84 power stations, energy and water industry association BDEW said on Monday.

The planned projects were equivalent to an installed power generation capacity of 42,000 megawatts (MW), the Berlin-based group said in a statement issued on the first day of the Hanover industrial fair.

Impressive right? However, the report gives a partial break up of the 84 plants. That's where it gets interesting.

Of the total number counted by BDEW, 23 units were to be driven by offshore wind, 10 were pumped storage plants, 29 gas-fired and 17 coal-fired generation plants, it said.

So out of the 79 plants in that list as many as 46 would be either gas or coal thermal plants.

I guess it just reinforces the view that nuclear is not being replaced by renewables in Germany. It's being replaced by gas and coal.

Now I hope folks understand why the actual equation is nuclear vs gas and coal and not nuclear vs renewable, even in Germany.

The report also says this:

The plans this year reflect over a year of debate on how to best replace Germany's nuclear power stations, which must be closed faster than planned in light of the nuclear disaster in Japan in March 2011.

BDEW's managing director Hildegard Mueller said that the plans' realisation mostly hinged on the German government clarifying the future power market design. If this was not done by 2015, especially the would-be investors in thermal power stations might get cold feet and withdraw, it said.

[Gerard]

Exclusive: North Korea's nuclear test ready "soon"

[Amber G.]

Folks - I shared a news item from prestigious MIT's technology review. I gave the link, original title and tag line, so that, any one interested can read the original and draw their own conclusion..

A Rising Sun for Renewable Energy

apan is desperately trying to replace its nuclear-power capacity with renewables. It still has a long way to go.
<snip>

Now I see that it caused a major takleef to Chaankaya who sees that it is a grand conspiracy theory by me.

But I don't know, if it was a freudian slip or a rare case of honesty, that he , in his own words went to

Back to selective quoting

article posted by me. Not only selective quoting but alos selective coloring...
(Not to mention, his constant refrain, to accusing others of nefarious motives)

[chaanakya]

Well you needed to be corrected as you twisted the article to generate impression not intended therein. But that is your wont.

[Amber G.]

Well you needed to be corrected as you twisted the article to generate impression not intended therein. But that is your wont.

Arre baba, my WHOLE post consisted of the title of the article (and embedded link ) and the top tag line of the original article ..Since it is so small, let me quote the whole post again...

A Rising Sun for Renewable Energy

Japan is desperately trying to replace its nuclear-power capacity with renewables. It still has a long way to go.
<snip>

One really have to have quite a twisted mind like a Jalebi to accuse me of twisting

But then didn't you accuse me sir, as pointed out before, radiation-poisoning brf members by, highly dishonest and misleading characterization of my effort of education brf on radiation doses, as [1000 mSV's "dined to brf members"

Folks, one can't even make such things up, so let me put the link and quote and repeat my request again: Link: link

Folks, please do look at the link above, I promise you, it will give you quite a bit of insight .. how Chaanakya is constantly and desperately trying all sort of things to personally attack me.

Meanwhile keep in mind what GuruPrabhu said a year ago, still holds ...

Before folks feel like attacking me, please think about the simple * rational* fact: nuclear power has *still* not killed anyone in Fukushima.]

[Amber G.]

OECD chief: Japan needs nuclear power

The head of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development urged Japan on Tuesday to resume nuclear electricity generation despite public opposition.
<snip>

[Sanku]

OECD chief: Japan needs nuclear power

The head of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development urged Japan on Tuesday to resume nuclear electricity generation despite public opposition.
<snip>

Seriouly the gall that these people have to casually dismiss an entire countries democratic consensus as some random "public opinion which needs to be thrown into the dustbin" is amazing. Absolutely amazing arrogance coupled with lack of care about people.

Something like "What do people know, they are morons only. After all its only their lives that are destroyed, and what is the their miserable life worth anyway. The corporates and the scientists on their payroll will tell these morons how to live."

Lets see how the repression of Japanese peoples interests and opinions works out.

[chaanakya]

Well you needed to be corrected as you twisted the article to generate impression not intended therein. But that is your wont.

Arre baba, my WHOLE post consisted of the title of the article (and embedded link ) and the top tag line of the original article ..Since it is so small, let me quote the whole post again...

One really have to have quite a twisted mind like a Jalebi to accuse me of twisting

But then didn't you accuse me sir, as pointed out before, radiation-poisoning brf members by, highly dishonest and misleading characterization of my effort of education brf on radiation doses, as [1000 mSV's "dined to brf members"

Folks, one can't even make such things up, so let me put the link and quote and repeat my request again: Link: link

Folks, please do look at the link above, I promise you, it will give you quite a bit of insight .. how Chaanakya is constantly and desperately trying all sort of things to personally attack me.

Meanwhile keep in mind what GuruPrabhu said a year ago, still holds ...

Before folks feel like attacking me, please think about the simple * rational* fact: nuclear power has *still* not killed anyone in Fukushima.]

You perhaps failed to read the reply post there?? Your attempt to mislead was checked and why were you so desparate to close that thread was obvious to all.

[chaanakya]

Highly radioactive areas may not receive clean-up

The Japanese government says NOT carrying out decontamination work may be an option in areas near the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant where radiation readings are likely to stay high for at least a decade.

The government is drawing up plans to clean up radioactive substances in areas near the nuclear plant so that residents who have been forced to evacuate can return.

It said for the first time on Sunday that atmospheric radiation levels may remain higher than 20 millisieverts per year in some areas even 10 years from now, a level the government considers difficult for people to go home.

Some officials argue decontamination would not proceed smoothly in such areas, and that a significant reduction of radiation levels is difficult with existing technology.

Others say money should be spent supporting long term evacuees rather than on costly decontamination efforts.

The government says it will consider the opinions of evacuees and affected municipalities in deciding which areas to decontaminate and scheduling the work.

It has already announced plans to clean up areas with current radiation readings of up to 50 millisieverts per year by the end of March 2014.

[chaanakya]

Osaka presents proposals for restarting reactors

Osaka prefecture and city have jointly submitted an 8-point proposal to the central government listing conditions that should be met before the first reactors are restarted following the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

Osaka governor Ichiro Matsui and Osaka city mayor Toru Hashimoto held a meeting with Chief Cabinet Secretary Osamu Fujimura on Tuesday. They discussed the government's plan to turn reactors at the Ohi nuclear power plant back on.

Hashimoto said that a system should be put in place so that power companies form safety agreements with prefectural governments that are located within 100 kilometers of nuclear plants.

The Osaka region is Japan's second largest business and industrial district and is about 80 kilometers south of the Ohi nuclear plant.

Hashimoto said the safety standards should be completely rewritten and full safety tests carried out based on the new standards.

Hashimoto said that it would be wrong for the government and politicians to declare a nuclear power plant safe while scientists and the Nuclear Safety Commission have still not expressed an opinion.

He also said it's unacceptable that the process is going ahead under procedures that were in place before the Fukushima accident.

Fujimura replied that the government will consider the 8-point plan in the future but that it intends to go ahead using the current procedures.

[Sanku]

To downplay the huge impact of Fukushima disaster, including the surge in suicides in the evacuees whose life has been destroyed and are now dying due to sheer hopelessness, is frankly inhumane, boorish and in my view "criminal"

[chaanakya]

Experts urge review of decontamination priorities

A group of researchers says decontamination should begin with households to reduce the impact of radioactive fallout from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant on children.

The group led by Tohoku University Graduate School lecturer Hiroko Yoshida, who specializes in radiation measurement, recently completed its study.

The researchers checked radiation exposure levels of 125 people in 31 households since September in southern Miyagi Prefecture and interviewed them about their daily activities.

The group found individual radiation exposure increases commensurately with radiation levels inside homes, but radiation levels outside homes were not so relevant.

The group concluded decontaminating the interior of houses would be most effective in reducing exposure.

Municipalities with high radiation levels in northeastern Japan plan to launch decontamination work with an emphasis on schools and public facilities.

But Yoshida says small children in particular spend long hours at home, and that decontaminating their homes should take precedence.

The group plans to release its findings in June in Nagoya at an academic conference of the Japan Health Physics Society.

[chaanakya]

Troubled TEPCO to submit restructuring plan to gov't on Fri.

TOKYO (Kyodo) -- Tokyo Electric Power Co. will submit to the government on Friday a comprehensive restructuring plan featuring the injection of 1 trillion yen in public funds into the utility facing massive costs in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster, sources close to the matter said Tuesday.

In line with the plan, the company known as TEPCO is also expected to seek permission from the government, possibly on May 10, to raise household electricity rates by 10 percent from July, the sources said.

TEPCO will announce its financial 2011 business results after Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Yukio Edano approves the restructuring plan, crafted jointly with a state-backed bailout fund, the Nuclear Damage Liability Facilitation Fund.

TEPCO needs to win approval of the plan to receive the capital injection. Electricity rate hikes for households require separate permission from the minister.

The rate hike is a key measure for TEPCO to increase its revenue, but the utility may trim the requested household rate increase because it is already under fire for raising power bills for companies in April.

In addition to trillions of yen in compensation payments for the nuclear accident, the once blue-chip company faces a heavy financial burden paying for all the fuel now used for thermal power generation, to make up for the sharp drop in nuclear power generation following the accident.

It also is looking at massive costs for the decades-long process of scrapping four reactors at the Fukushima plant, three of which experienced meltdowns following the huge earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011.

[Amber G.]

{ Clutter removed so as not to clutter the thread }
You perhaps failed to read the reply post there?? Your attempt to mislead was checked and why were you so desparate to close that thread was obvious to all.

THANK YOU! chaanakyaji, I was originally going to refer to your reply but I did not want to embarrass you unnecessary. The reply in your link sums it up better than anything else. Of course, I am not responsible for what you think, or your absurd conspiracy theories, but I wasn't desperate to close that thread, any more than I was trying to poison brf members with radiation as you have repeatedly implied.

To point out the obvious, I simply explained, (actually summarized what is known to scientific world) the effects of various doses of radiation in layman's language. I am simply not responsible for you foolish arrogance.

Have a nice day. Over and out.

P.S. Folks, this may look like a clutter, but please do read the link provided by Chaankaya. Trust me, it will give quite a bit of insight why people like Busby have their own true believers. The link also points to a very nice post by me explaining the effects of radiation in practical terms. The knowledge every citizen should have. (There was co-60 incident in Delhi, and it is a dirty bomb scenario in not impossible - such knowledge is a must).. I put the link to that post again here, for convenience.

Please keep this for your reference

pps - As I said in the original post, "please don't take a pot-shot at me, but I will be more than happy to discuss those numbers. Also, unlike Busbys, as a nuclear physicist I do know about such things.

[Amber G.]

Recently I saw a news item about PMANE's claim about towns becoming inhabitable for 20,000 years ..so this recent news item caught my eye...
Most Chernobyl towns fit for habitation

Ukraine is making plans to rebuild civil society in the areas affected by the Chernobyl accident, as the man responsible for the Exclusion Zone announces most of the affected towns could be resettled.
<snip>
At the same time, Vladimir Kholosha, chairman of the State Agency for the Exclusion Zone (DAZV) gave a briefing at Government House. He gave the results of radiological surveys carried out last year in 2155 of the 2293 settlements in the Exclusion Zone. It revealed that 'most of these towns can function without restrictions due to radiation'.
He said this is because time, natural processes and countermeasures have significantly reduced radiation hazard compared to the time immediately after the accident some 26 years ago.
Approaches to evacuation

Some interesting data point from above for people who are interested in quantitative numbers ..

Approaches to evacuation

The Exclusion Zone around Chernobyl was drawn to limit additional radiation doses from the accident to 1 millisievert per year, compared to the 2.4 millisieverts per year people receive from all sources. This resulted in a very wide evacuation area, affecting hundreds of thousands of people.

By contrast, radiation experts in Japan have said that Fukushima residents should be able to return home to areas where additional doses would be up to 20 millisieverts per year, although their wish is for additional doses to be as low as possible. Some areas have already been opened during daylight hours for residents and workers to make repairs ahead of a permanent return.

[chaanakya]

THANK YOU! chaanakyaji, I was originally going to refer to your reply but I did not want to embarrass you unnecessary. The reply in your link sums it up better than anything else. Of course, I am not responsible for what you think, or your absurd conspiracy theories, but I wasn't desperate to close that thread, any more than I was trying to poison brf members with radiation as you have repeatedly implied.

To point out the obvious, I simply explained, (actually summarized what is known to scientific world) the effects of various doses of radiation in layman's language. I am simply not responsible for you foolish arrogance.

Have a nice day. Over and out.

Well you might not be desparate but you certainly are responsible for your foolish arrogance.

[Amber G.]

Ignoring vuvuzellas ...

While many (most, it seems, if one go by main stream media) scream 1,400,000 deaths, deadly radiation, atomic explosions etc without a single shred of data, responsible scientists patiently look at data, analyze, draw conclusion based on facts and learn.

Lot of data is still being collected, even after a year at Fukushima.. this one after a year about torus suppression chamber of Fukushima Daiichi-2.

Inspection sheds light on Fukushima torus[/b]

24 April 2012
The torus suppression chamber of Fukushima Daiichi 2 appears to be intact, ending speculation that it ruptured during the height of the accident sequence

[Amber G.]

Sentiments similar to OECD's OECD chief: Japan needs nuclear power

Are also expressed by World Economic Forum (WEF)'s recent meet ...
WEF warns of break with nuclear

GENEVA — The World Economic Forum warned Monday that Japan would put its energy security at risk by quickly turning away from nuclear power, and called instead for strengthening the safety of its atomic plants over the long term.
<snip>

The same story with little more details
Japan needs nuclear, says World Economic Forum

A new report on the world's changing energy architecture from high-level policy organisation the World Economic Forum (WEF) warns Japan risks jeopardising its energy security if it turns its back on nuclear power.

[Amber G.]

Also some minor routine headlines ...(Other than Fukushima and Kundankulam)
An Ohio-based public power supplier is now interested in taking a minority interest in Santee Cooper's share of the two new reactors under construction at the VC Summer plant in South Carolina.

**

Ameren Missouri and Westinghouse Electric Company are to collaborate to secure federal funding for the development and licensing of Westinghouse's Small Modular Reactor (SMR).
**
Shaw, Westinghouse win notice to proceed on V.C. Summer Nuclear Power Plant

The Shaw Group Inc., along with its AP1000 Consortium team member, Westinghouse, today announced it received full notice to proceed from South Carolina Electric & Gas, unit of SCANA Corp., on its engineering, procurement and construction contract for two Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear power units and related facilities.

(The new notice gives the companies full authorisation to provide EPC services for the new units)

**

The qualification testing of the reactor coolant pump (RCP) for the first Westinghouse AP1000 reactor, under construction in China, has been successfully completed in the USA. The first two such pumps will now be shipped to the construction site for installation.

***
Construction projects in China have moved forward with the dome of unit 1 of the Fangchenggang plant being lowered into place and heavy components for the primary reactor coolant system of the first EPR at Taishan have been delivered from France.

Not everyone is paralyzed by irrational fear ...Not everyone is fooled by Busbys ...

[amit]

More on the rosy future of coal in nuclear-free Germany.

Coal's future suddenly looks brighter in Germany

The public debate over an accelerated phase-out of Germany's nuclear energy program has pushed the nation's domestic coal industry back into the spotlight. Nuclear energy provides over 23 percent of Germany's electricity, and if nuclear plants go offline soon, renewable energy sources are not going to be able to completely cover the shortfall.{this is something I've been saying all along and, till recently, this POV was ridiculed. Sigh!}

"In the short run, we cannot do without conventional energy generation," said Franz-Josef Wodopia, managing director of the German Hard Coal Association (GVSt). "Both in terms of the power supply itself as well as far as its role in stabilizing the power grid."

He said coal will now have to play the "bridge function" that nuclear technology was once meant to as the country transitions to renewable energies.

A few years ago, Wodopia said, imported coal in the harbors of Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Antwerp cost 40 euros per ton. "Now we pay over 100 per ton," he added. "A lot has happened."

In addition, Germany is rich in coal types that are much desired on the world market, that Wodopia says could be competitively mined even today. Private investors have already shown interest in a deposit of more than 100 million tons of coking coal located near the city of Hamm in North Rhine-Westphalia. High-quality coking coal is in high demand among steel manufacturers and is not often found in such large quantities.

So while there is light at the end of the tunnel for the German coal industry, much remains to be done, especially in the area of emissions and the modernization of coal-fired power plants.

Beginning in 2013, emissions trading schemes are set to get tougher and any return to coal will have to take environmental concerns into account.

The last part in bold nicely links up with the next piece of news:

Germany to fund new coal plants with climate change cash

The German government wants to encourage the construction of new coal and gas power plants with millions of euros from a fund for promoting clean energy and combating climate change.

Finally a follow up to a report I linked here a few days earlier:

Germany Building 17 New Coal, 29 New Gas-Fired Power Stations

It’s a real paradox: As a result of Germany’s green energy transition, nuclear power is on its way out, but coal, Germany’s dirtiest resource, has become the most important energy source again. Brown coal (lignite) in experiencing a renaissance in Germany. Last year, about a quarter of the electricity generated used this most environmentally adverse resource. Its consumption grew by 3.3 percent. This has made lignite the number one energy supplier. The Government’s planned energy transition was supposed to, among other things, produce environmentally friendly electricity. It turns out, however, that the power gap, which was created by the shutdown of eight nuclear power stations, will be largely filled by brown coal.

Until recently we thought that conventional gas was going to run out and the most plentiful supplies of the stuff were in Russia or the Gulf. Now that we realise the rocks under our feet may hold supplies that would last for generations, the world has changed and the greens haven’t caught up. I detect something else behind the “shale rage” of the European greens. They got too close to the present renewables industries and let governments hand out subsidies without enough competition over price. They thought gas would get so expensive that renewables would look cheap by comparison. They were wrong. Instead of getting angry with the frackers, they should adapt their thinking to a world in which gas prices could fall, and persuade governments to spend some of the money we will save on a generation of renewables that might actually solve our problems.

The EU member states’ energy ministers remain opposed to binding energy efficiency targets and a freeze on CO2 emissions allowances. The debate at an informal Energy Council, on 19 April in Horsens, Denmark, gave them the opportunity to confirm their positions on this issue. Without going back over all the different points of the directive, the ministers reiterated their total opposition to the inclusion of binding targets in the text, as demanded by Parliament. They could nevertheless agree to an indicative target of 1.5% energy savings, to be achieved gradually by 2020.

[Amber G.]

Amit et el -
Recent Washington Post Editorial: (generally WP, NYT are a little anti-nuclear as US really does not need nuclear as much as some other countries)

Phasing out nuclear

Excerpts:

Phasing out nuclear

By Editorial Board, Published: April 23

CAN THE WORLD fight global warming without nuclear power? One major industrialized country — Germany — is determined to find out, and another — Japan — is debating whether to try. Both illustrate how hard it would be.

To date, nuclear is the only proven source of low-emissions “baseload” power — that is, electricity that’s always on, day or night, powering round-the-clock elevators in Tokyo or office buildings in Munich. Yet both Germany and Japan are poised to prematurely shutter their large nuclear sectors, giving up all of that guaranteed, low-carbon electricity generation in an anti-nuclear frenzy, on a bet that they can multiply their generation of renewable electricity within a decade or two.

Before the Fukushima Daiichi disaster last year, Japan derived a third of its electricity from nuclear power. Now, with all but one reactor offline, the country’s consumption of crude and heavy fuel oil for power generation has roughly tripled. Even with that backup fossil-fired power, though, the government worries that the electrical system will fail during peak summer demand if utilities don’t switch on reactors. The Financial Times’ Gerrit Wiesmann reports a similar situation in Germany, which has committed to closing all of its reactors, even as its power grid teeters and its electricity sector emits more carbon than it must after eight reactors shut down last year.

With both countries making the paths to their emissions goals more difficult, anti-nuclear activists justify this mess by insisting that renewable energy sources will pick up the slack. But that raises major questions of feasibility and cost.

Perhaps, a Japanese government report claimed, Japan could still reduce carbon emissions by 25 percent of its 1990 levels by 2030 without nuclear power. Yet even if that’s true, it’s hardly a reason to let all of that existing nuclear infrastructure and know-how go to waste. The report also notes that the country could cut emissions 33 percent if nuclear accounted for a fifth of the country’s generation, or even as much as 39 percent if Japan continued to derive a third of its electricity from nuclear.

It’s also far from clear that cutting Japan’s emissions will be as easy as those numbers suggest. A separate government analysis indicated argued that the country would actually fall well short of 25 percent without nuclear. Not content to rely on optimistic predictions about renewables, Japanese utilities are already investing hundreds of millions of dollars in projects to promote fossil- fuel imports.

Advocates of green energy point out that Germany already derives more of its electricity from renewables than Japan because of hefty government subsidies. But making up for the loss of that country’s reactors and meeting ambitious emissions goals would still require a veritable revolution in its electricity generation on a scale not seen since post-World War II reconstruction, Bloomberg reports. Critics reasonably predict that the country will instead rely on electricity imports from neighbors running old, reliable coal, gas and, yes, nuclear plants for years to come.

Following the scary but ultimately non-catastrophic Fukushima nuclear crisis, every country with a reactor had reason to review the safety of its existing facilities and the integrity of its regulatory systems. But prudence demanded then and now that they not abandon the power source precipitously. Maintaining existing reactors — and, we would argue, including next-generation nuclear technology as a component in forward-looking anti-carbon policies — doesn’t rule out a promising future for renewables, too. But it does make it much more likely that emissions goals can be met or exceeded.

[chaanakya]

Well looks like Downhill Skiing started. While Unkil at <20% , now, does not seem to need NE and His maters voices recommend India go all the way to 100% without safety consideration, cost consideration, reprocessing issues ans storage issues and local consent be damned and buy Unkil reactors since 123 is a goldmine for them.

[Amber G.]

Amit - WSJ article
Merkel Looks to Map Out Nuclear Exit

BERLIN—German Chancellor Angela Merkel has invited the country's four main utilities to a May 2 meeting to begin hashing out how best to fill the void in its future energy capacity, a year after she decided to rapidly shift away from nuclear power in the wake of the Fukushima disaster.

At stake is how Germany will finance its transformation from primarily fossil-fueled and nuclear power generation to become more reliant on sustainable forms of energy such as offshore wind and solar power.

<snip>
"After the Fukushima incident, the German government acted frantically and didn't have a dialogue with the utilities," Mr. Wulf said. Now, "the main challenge is the lack of sufficient network capacities for transmitting the power generated in the North Sea to the large industrial consumers in southern Germany."
<snip>

"The supply of renewable energy is fluctuating as the sun doesn't always shine and wind isn't always blowing, so fossil-fuel plants are needed as backup," said Macquarie analyst Matthias Heck. "Conditions have to be designed in a manner which makes investments attractive."

A comment posted ..

The only decision the people of Germany will eventually have to make, along with the rest of us is - will the breeder reactors be IFRs of LFTRs? -

[Amber G.]

SWITZERLAND: BUT WHAT IN PLACE OF NUCLEAR POWER?