Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 12:10 AM Jan 2012

New information comes to light about the failed nuclear recyling program in Japan.

Energy agency boss told subordinate to cover up estimated costs to dump nuclear fuel

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

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
New information comes to light about the failed nuclear recyling program in Japan. (Original Post) kristopher Jan 2012 OP
How is that "new information"? FBaggins Jan 2012 #1
This was actually a good thing as I understand it GliderGuider Jan 2012 #2
There isn't a good solution to the waste. kristopher Jan 2012 #4
And if they had gone the low-cost route, and just dumped it? GliderGuider Jan 2012 #5
"Just dumped it"? kristopher Jan 2012 #7
Editorial: Cover-up of estimated costs to dispose of radioactive waste raises serious questions kristopher Jan 2012 #3
I have a hunch that a lot of nuclear waste is making its way to the oceans madokie Jan 2012 #6
I don't think so. kristopher Jan 2012 #8
Not all of the waste is recyclable though madokie Jan 2012 #10
Good hunch, madokie BeFree Jan 2012 #9

FBaggins

(26,696 posts)
1. How is that "new information"?
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 01:15 AM
Jan 2012

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)
2. This was actually a good thing as I understand it
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 01:50 AM
Jan 2012

Presumably dumping un-reprocessed fuel is more harmful than reprocessing it?

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
4. There isn't a good solution to the waste.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 08:18 PM
Jan 2012

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)
5. And if they had gone the low-cost route, and just dumped it?
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 08:35 PM
Jan 2012

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)
7. "Just dumped it"?
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:39 PM
Jan 2012

Well that is also our plan so far; build massive dumps like Yucca Mtn and hope for the best.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
3. Editorial: Cover-up of estimated costs to dispose of radioactive waste raises serious questions
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 12:13 PM
Jan 2012
Cover-up of estimated costs to dispose of radioactive waste raises serious questions

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)
6. I have a hunch that a lot of nuclear waste is making its way to the oceans
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 09:08 PM
Jan 2012

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)
8. I don't think so.
Wed Jan 4, 2012, 11:46 PM
Jan 2012

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)
10. Not all of the waste is recyclable though
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 08:49 PM
Jan 2012

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)
9. Good hunch, madokie
Thu Jan 5, 2012, 07:37 PM
Jan 2012

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.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»New information comes to ...