Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumNew information comes to light about the failed nuclear recyling program in Japan.
A division head at the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy instructed a subordinate in April 2004 to conceal the estimated costs for disposing of spent nuclear fuel without reprocessing it, sources involved in the case and a memorandum have revealed.
Two months later, a government advisory panel proposed a system under which electric power consumers would be required to foot approximately 19 trillion yen for the costs of operations at a spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture.
Under the current government policy, all spent nuclear fuel is supposed to be reprocessed. However, if the data had been disclosed, it would have revealed that dumping nuclear waste is far cheaper than reprocessing it and could have spurred calls on the government to review its so-called nuclear fuel recycling policy.
It earlier came to light that top officials of Tokyo Electric Power Co. and the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry had considered withdrawal from the nuclear fuel reprocessing project since 2002.
Masaya Yasui was ...
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/national/archive/news/2012/01/02/20120102p2a00m0na014000c.html
FBaggins
(26,696 posts)There isn't any question that a once-through model is cheaper than a recycling program. Nor is nuclear power unique in that regard. You rarely recycle to save money (absent an intelligent incentive program).
This is like "covering up" the fact that burning lots of coal without pollution controls is by far the cheapest way to produce lots of reliable power. It isn't exactly a secret.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)Presumably dumping un-reprocessed fuel is more harmful than reprocessing it?
kristopher
(29,798 posts)The reprocessing program has been a dismal failure and wasted a huge amount of money. It also created a climate where goal of internal energy security was supposedly able to be met most economically with a closed nuclear fuel cycle; a fact that certainly did nothing to encourage the nation to investigate and develop the renewable alternatives that could have actually delivered on the promise of domestic energy security..
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)The core issue seems to be a natural outcome of a culture of egoism, self-deception and lies - the same egoism, self-deception and lies that led to the consideration of nuclear power in the first place. The nuclear waste problem and the lies surrounding it is just one more inevitable piece of toxic cultural waste.
This happens in every nation where nuclear power is seen as technically feasible.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)Well that is also our plan so far; build massive dumps like Yucca Mtn and hope for the best.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)Revelations that officials from the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy concealed the estimated costs of disposing of spent nuclear fuel highlights the distorted logic of government officials who stick to reprocessing radioactive waste even by lying.
The cover-up is essentially similar to a case in which some high-ranking government officials hid a 2002 Russian diplomatic document in which Moscow offered to accept spent nuclear fuel from Japan, in that both helped promote the reprocessing of radioactive waste at a plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture.
The government's panel on energy and environmental policies is under mounting pressure to hold thorough and transparent discussions on Japan's new energy policy.
The matter is serious all the more because Masaya Yasui, who was director of the agency's Nuclear Power Policy Planning Division when he instructed his subordinate in April 2004 to conceal the data, currently serves as counselor in charge of reform of nuclear power safety regulations. In other words, the official who ordered the cover-up of the data is now responsible for working out safety measures at nuclear plants following the accident at the tsunami-hit Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant.
Moreover, Yasui is deeply involve...
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/perspectives/news/20120102p2a00m0na001000c.html
madokie
(51,076 posts)dumped overboard, sunk with the ship. The oceans tell no tales
I don't trust the operators nor the watchdogs supposedly watching over them. It seems to not matter the country either.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)They've been investing very heavily in the recycling program with a view towards eventually getting the majority of their electric supply from nuclear. What they've done to date would have been far less expensive if they'd adopted the once through fuel cycle as a premise on which to build their future, and it would have lowered the financial commitment in infrastructure that they are now looking at walking away from.
As it is, since the nuclear industry told the lies about the relative costs of waste disposal strategies, as they debate their energy future they have a far larger "sunk cost" than would otherwise be the case. This is a huge factor that nearly always clouds clear decision-making.
In any case I think they have been waiting for the reprocessing system that will never emerge and thus still sitting on all of their waste.
What happens next however...
madokie
(51,076 posts)What're they doing with that? I still say I think a lot of nuclear waste is making its way to the oceans, maybe not by us but we're not the only ones with nuclear reactors.
BeFree
(23,843 posts)That is what they have done in Fuku. Too bad for them it's not legal. Of course that never really stopped the 1%ers much.