What happened on Nuclear Energy during these years? OHE, Toshiaki TOKAI University

What happened on Nuclear Energy during these years? OHE, Toshiaki TOKAI University

Outline of the presentation 1. Recent issue happened during 1995 to 2004 is presented and the influence of accidents or incidents is summarized. 2. The purpose of the introduction of nuclear energy is extracted from WHITE PAPER as a national policy. 3. Key issue for nuclear energy to survive next decades is discussed.

52 reactors in operation (Feb, 2004)

News around the islands Interim SF storage SF pool leakage Lost case of Monju MOX fuel Cracks in BWR Shuroud Influence of JCO criticality accident

Nuclear Energy for sustainability as a national policy Accidents or incidents happened timely!? Monju : Liquid metal (Na) leakage (1995) Accident small, Influence large. JCO : criticality accident (1999) Psychological Trauma MOX fuel : data fabrication (2000) Shuroud : hide information (2002) Reliability lost Only 3 reactors in construction cf. 14 reactors in 1989 Are nuclear industries themselves sustainable?

Nuclear still plays its role Geothermal Neo But not fully accepted Nat.gas electricity Nuclear Coal Oil Hydro

JCO criticality accident (1999) Largest tragedy : two persons died http://www.aip.org/pt/dec99/toka2.htm http://www.jsdi.or.jp/~y_ide/ide_day002.htm

Suffer from http://www.metro-hs.ac.jp/rs/matumoto/09.html more than 600 inhabitants exposed Larger influence is the damage due to rumor.

Information covered up (2002) Cracks around the Shuroud in TEPCO s BWR 4/15, 2003 17 BWR stop due to both inspection and social responsibility. Corresponding to 47% of total electricity generated by TEPCO s BWR in 2001

Unexpected experiments If nuclear power suddenly stopped, substitution by coal-fired power plant CO 2 emission 12.2% increase but 1.8% contribution to the total emission.

PWR MOX fuel Data Cooked up (2000) and spoiled Pu usage Send MOX back to BNFL (Sept. 2002) Pellet size has not actually measured. Pellet size distribution http://mdn.mainichi.co.jp/politics/ 0210/06mox.html http://www.kisnet.or.jp/~hanyu/page3.htm Size data can be re-measured but belief is completely lost.

LMFBR Monju is still asleep (1995~) http://www.atom.meti.go.jp/siraberu/recycle/03/main02s.html

Sodium leakage

Lost Case of Monju Jan.,2003 At Senior Court of Justice, Permission of Monju installation is Ineffective. Objection by Nuclear Safety Commission Still take a nap?

Commercial reprocessing plant again postpones Uranium test 1989 http://www.jnfl.co.jp/business-cycle/3_saisyori/saisyori_03/saisyori_04/saisyori_04_08.html Expected Sept. 2006 in operation Leakage in SF pool due to un-proper fabrication.

Spent Fuel piles up International commitment Japan will not have surplus Pu. We actually poses 38 tons (Sept. 2003). Surplus Pu Annual discharge : 900 ~ 1000 ton Rokkasho Domestic Plant capacity : 800 t/y Will consume as MOX fuel in 16 ~ 18 reactors by 2010. (both PWR & BWR) Approved by local government! in PWR by 2007. ( 13 March, 2004 last Saturday!) What about BWR?

SF Interim Storage A 5000~6000 t storage facility is planed. 130m 60m 30m(H) http://www.cnfc.or.jp/plutonium/pl43/j/infoclip.html

Nukes drift public ocean Restart of TEPCO s BWR operation Local government approved 14 Jan., 2004. Withdraw the approve due to the delay of information of water leakage incident 17 Jan., 2004 A 5000~6000 t storage facility is planed. But a local referendum will be carried out. minimum requirements : 800 inhabitants 5514 signed TEPCO (BWR) puts power to rebuild reliability lost in Shuroud problem.

Questionnaire Survey in ROKKASHO (2004) Against Pu production Expect another employment Ecomical advantage Give more information No more Radwaste Facilities makes pollution 0 20 40 60 80 Agree with, % They accept but not welcome

White Paper : Nuclear Energy Role of Nuclear Energy (1994) Long-term issue of energy demand due to population increase Nuclear energy has already become as a stable energy source from economical, technical view point. Role of Nuclear Energy (1998) Stable energy supply and improve the people s life Decrease of emission of the green house effect gas Position of Nuclear Energy (2003) Energy resource is an key issue to maintain the life of the people Japan has selected the challenge of the research and development of nuclear energy Now becomes to cover 1/3 of the total electricity

White paper looks like In the year 1998, focused on the sustainable development but not large differences from older version. Drastic change found in 2003. Economical advantage drawn back Environmental advantage also toned down

Movie film Nukes in TOKYO! runs

Film Story Tokyo metropolitan governor invites nuclear power plant mainly because of economical advantage. MOX fuel is high Jacked during transportation from Tokyo bay (why?) and explosives are installed in a vehicle. High Jacker threatened the governor to draw money. Accident pulls the trigger of the bomb. Time lefts only 1 hour. How tragic when explored inside TOKYO!

What will happen? Please go to a movie theater. The leakage of the final scene is out of gentleman-ship I haven t seen it yet. This film is - an irony of the social conflict - expression of unclear fear to radioactivity - the feeling that Nukes is just behind.

We are simply asked Q. Reason of Nukes? The advantage of Nuclear Energy from three reasons, Relatively Strong Energy securities Economical advantage Less Environmental impacts As already cited 10 years ago. Electric Power Utilities But the circumstances changed largely Another solution may arise when different boundary condition Alternatives must be indicated and always compared with

If we asked Q. Nuke is economically superior? Additional Backend costs 1.9 10 13 YEN Backend Cost (1YEN = 0.009$) 10 8 10 12 YEN 6 4 2 0 Operation Reprocessing HLW disposal SF Storage + 1.53 YEN / kwh

A. Backend cost depress down the economical advantage 16 14 additional backend cost Yen/kW h 12 10 8 6 estimate in 1999 4 In 1999, Nuclear costs 5.90 YEN/kWh Facility 40 years operation Utilization factor 80% 2 0 Nuclear Natural gas Coal Oil Hydro

If we asked Q. Nuke is environmentally attractive? The summer in 2003, most of the TEPCO s Nuclear plants stopped their operation. As substitution, fissile fuel power plants came in operation. Resulting CO 2 emission increase 1.8%. This doesn t fully support the advantage of environmental impact

Share of each Energy Resource 60 50 primary Energy Electricity 40 % 30 20 10 0 Nuclear Hydro Oil Coal Natural Gas Geothermal Neo

Technical reason not the only reason Opposed Decision by Experience Nuclear Energy In favor Decision by Experience Both experience socially technically Even emotion is one of the reason. is even.

Key issue Nukes survive next decades Responsibility never substitutes accountability Explanation after accidents may loose reliability Necessity of Nuclear Energy Not for the Necessity of engineers, scientists Necessity is the thing to be decided but not to be explained.

Japanese defeat Task >> Social Responsibility Alter Information Transfer Technology concerned Monju JCO Shuroud Safety Std d MOX

I ask to you! Recent 10 years, Japanese Nuclear Energy seems Stagnant Is this a quite JAPANESE defeat or a potential issue which might happen in everywhere? Have you any influence from the Japanese defeat?