Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumMayday for Japan's nuclear industry
by: Rick Wallace, Tokyo Correspondent
From: The Australian
April 21, 2012 12:00AM
...This week, Industry Minister Yukio Edano admitted the government had lost its battle to find a municipality willing to restart reactors in time for the scheduled shutdown of the last plant to remain online, at Tomari in the northern island of Hokkaido.
Since the 1970s, nuclear energy has underpinned heavily industrialised Japan's power-generation system. Before last year's tsunami and Fukushima nuclear disaster, it accounted for almost 30 per cent of the nation's energy needs.
But after the March 11 catastrophe 11 the country's 54 reactors were closed on government advice amid safety fears in the event of new quakes or tsunamis. Gradually, over the course of more than a year, the rest of the nation's reactors, all of which are on the coast, have been mothballed as their inspection intervals have fallen due.
Despite increasing pressure from industry and the cabinet, local authorities have been resisting pleas to allow the restart of reactors amid a nationwide backlash against nuclear energy....
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/mayday-for-japans-nuclear-industry/story-e6frg6so-1226334685674
April 19, 2012|Izumi Nakagawa and Tetsushi Kajimoto
TOKYO (Reuters) - Nearly three-quarters of Japanese firms want safety guaranteed before idled nuclear reactors in the country are restarted, seeing no need to rush the process despite the impact the loss of the power source could have on their businesses.
Japan is set to have no nuclear power within weeks for the first time in over 40 years following last year's crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, which crushed public trust in nuclear power and prevented the restart of reactors shut for regular maintenance checks.
The poll, taken alongside the monthly Reuters Tankan company sentiment survey, showed only 15 percent of firms want an early restart for idled reactors, while 72 percent said safety should be the key priority.
Sixty-five percent of firms think the loss of all nuclear power would hurt their businesses...
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-19/news/sns-rt-us-japan-economy-pollbre83j050-20120419_1_fukushima-daiichi-nuclear-plant-nuclear-power-nuclear-reactors
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)No. It will take at least 10 years for these plants to be off.
The spent fuel pools will have to be baby-sitted for at least that long to keep them from following the Fukushima lead.
The Japanese have learned a hard, awful lesson.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)With 54 reactors to decommission and dismantle if they completely 'de-nuclearize' this is going to take a very long time.
What struck me was the attitude of businesses - contrary to the way it is portrayed in articles like the first one, they are in no hurry to restart the reactors either. I guess when you live on an island it is easier to understand that money doesn't mean a lot if you lose everything you value.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)n/t
kristopher
(29,798 posts)As Abbott notes in his study, global power consumption today is about 15 terawatts (TW). Currently, the global nuclear power<2> supply capacity is only 375 gigawatts (GW). In order to examine the large-scale limits of nuclear power, Abbott estimates that to supply 15 TW with nuclear only, we would need about 15,000 nuclear reactors. In his analysis, Abbott explores the consequences of building, operating, and decommissioning 15,000 reactors on the Earth, looking at factors such as the amount of land required, radioactive waste, accident rate, risk of proliferation into weapons, uranium abundance and extraction, and the exotic metals used to build the reactors themselves.
A nuclear power station is resource-hungry and, apart from the fuel, uses many rare metals in its construction, Abbott told PhysOrg.com. The dream of a utopia where the world is powered off fission or fusion reactors is simply unattainable. Even a supply of as little as 1 TW stretches resources considerably.
...Of course, not many nuclear advocates are calling for a complete nuclear utopia, in which nuclear power supplies the entire worlds energy needs. But many nuclear advocates suggest that we should produce 1 TW of power from nuclear energy, which may be feasible, at least in the short term. However, if one divides Abbotts figures by 15, one still finds that 1 TW is barely feasible. Therefore, Abbott argues that, if this technology cannot be fundamentally scaled further than 1 TW, perhaps the same investment would be better spent on a fully scalable technology....
http://www.scribd.com/doc/55418743/Nuclear-Power-and-World-Energy-by-Derek-Abbott-Professor
Bennyboy
(10,440 posts)it is worse than it appears.
http://enenews.com/msnbc-fukushima-radiation-higher-expected-biologist-negative-effects-happen-quicker-chernobyl-be-worse
worse for all of us.
http://enenews.com/japan-govt-monitoring-indicates-relatively-high-radiation-dose-rate-in-chiba-tochigi-gunma-200km-from-fukushima-daiichi-it-is-necessary-to-confirm-the-status-on-accumulation-and-migration-o
getting worse quickly. even they won't be able to hide from reality for long.
and it isn't going anywhere anytime soon. if you care about your longterm health you will avoid foods from japan, alaska, the western US, china, and most other places in the northern hemisphere. it takes more work but it is worth it. but it is only a passing concern i suppose. everywhere will be contaminated soon. they fucked around too long. and so did everyone else with the real power to do anything about it. that site makes it pretty clear what is happening. if you have time and are into horror stories just browse the headlines on there.you will get scared fast. californians are fucked. they basically truck zero food into the state. everyone else can try for awhile but everything has west coast produce in it. not a rant, just some information.
live while you still can. and pray for the children. we kind of deserve it for being complacent. they certainly do not.
FROM HERE: http://phantasytour.com/bands/1/topics/3012015/posts probably one of the best sites on FUKU news. Our 10th thtread since it all started...Couple of nuke engineers on it too.
bananas
(27,509 posts)I'll have to look at them closer later on,
they look important.
Bennyboy
(10,440 posts)Doomsday is inevitable it look like there. Once the building collapses it is game over.
madokie
(51,076 posts)Safety should have been first priority from the get go but its obvious that wasn't the case. Right now Tepco has no idea as to how to deal with reactors 1-4 at Fukushima
I was reading at this link that they're talking 50 to 100 years out still dealing with this monstrosity trying to make it safe. 50 to 100 years. Think about that for a while,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371793/Japan-nuclear-crisis-Fukushima-plant-entombed-concrete-radiation-leak.html
kristopher
(29,798 posts)Or haven't you been paying attention to the information provided by Areva? Their stock price is in the tank and they would really appreciate it if you'd just BACK OFF!!!