CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world. Subscribe today!


Green Economy Japan mayor wants reactor near Tokyo decommissioned

Published on October 13th, 2011 | by Charis Michelsen

8

Shut It Down — Mayor Calls to Decommission Tokaimura Reactor

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

October 13th, 2011 by  

In the wake of public protests opposing nuclear energy, at least one elected official has joined the cause. Tokaimura Mayor Tatsuya Murakami called on the federal government to decommission the nuclear reactor in his town 68 miles northeast of Tokyo. The reactor, which has had some problems in the past, has been shut down for routine maintenance since the tsunami and resulting nuclear incidents of March 11 this year.

Tokaimura is at the heart of Japanese nuclear history, where its commercial nuclear power industry got its start in the late 50s, and its Tokai Daini reactor has seven years left on its 40-year operating license. Because of its proximity to Tokyo, TEPCO had been counting on its 1,100mW capacity to help make up for the power lost from the non-operational Fukushima Daiichi plant after its scheduled maintenance cycle ends in August of 2012.

The future of the Tokaimura plant remains unclear as Murakami, the first local official to insist on scrapping a reactor altogether, remains firmly opposed. He stated that if the tsunami had been slightly higher, the Tokai Daini reactor could have affected the far greater number of people in its 30km radius. Its proximity to Tokyo, he pointed out, is what makes it dangerous.

Murakami’s calls to action are not limited to the reactors. He has also called on his fellow citizens to better care for those displaced from Fukushima because of the crisis.

While only 10 of Japan’s 54 commercial reactors remain operational after routine maintenance shutdowns, no other elected officials have called for their removal. Prime Minister Noda, less harsh than his predecessor (who supported abolishing nuclear power entirely), wants local authorities to confirm the safety of the deactivated reactors and then switch them back on.

Reactors are currently undergoing stress tests, which will then be reported before local authorities can approve them for restarts.

Source: Reuters

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.



Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


About the Author

spent 7 years living in Germany and Japan, studying both languages extensively, doing translation and education with companies like Bosch, Nissan, Fuji Heavy, and others. Charis has a Bachelor of Science degree in biology and currently lives in Chicago, Illinois. She also believes that Janeway was the best Star Trek Captain.



  • Pingback: Germany vs. the UK on Nuclear Power | CleanTechnica

  • Pingback: Tokyo's Solar-Powered Christmas Lights | CleanTechnica

  • Anonymous

    Rather than a nuclear renaissance it looks like we’re getting a nuclear die-off.

    Better them than us….

    • Anonymous

      Haha, nice wordsmithing :D

    • Tom Garven

      Bob:

      So many people are in agreement with you that nuclear power seems to be dieing a very slow death, and you are probably right. I subscribe to many industry and public utility trade magazines and almost every issue they talk about some nuclear plant shutting down for re-licensing or some construction plans being cancelled.

      I once thought the traveling wave reactor was the ticket and so did Bill Gates. However I now believe it will never see the light of day. I then became interested in the high temperature gas cooled reactor and the only commercial plant we ever built in Colorado was shut down 20 years ago so that is probably not going to happened. Then everyone started talking about the liquid metal and molten salt reactors and even the Google execs spent some time and money promoting those reactors. They are also probably never going to be build.

      I think were we went wrong was about 30 years ago when we completed the construction of 100+ Gen III PWR and BWR reactors. We STOPPED doing research and development on the NEXT generation and failed to look towards the future. Now here we are 30 years later trying to sell slightly modified Gen III+ reactors whose designed are 30 years old. Is it any wonder utility executives aren’t buying that sales pitch.

      Had we paid attention to our energy needs back then we might NOW have safer and far more efficient reactors ready to be built. A few problems seem to exist for the industry but will only mention 4.

      1. Our National Labs are still working on reactor designs that were proposed 10 years ago.
      2. We are at least 10 years away from having even a prototype of a new design approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
      3. No one wants one in their backyard, and
      4. Current designs are too expensive to build.

      By the time the next generation of reactors are ready to be built, solar panels will probably be 40% efficient. We will also see hundreds of micro water/river turbines in place. Most homes will be built with solar PV built in during construction. We will most likely have more wind turbines in the the great plains, Great Lakes and East and West coasts. We will have a more fuel efficient automotive and trucking fleet running on electricity and maybe natural gas. And I haven’t even talked about geothermal or wave power. So many possibilities.

      In short what I guess I am saying is that our mandated regulatory structure is so cumbersome and slow that some nuclear plant designed today will be outdated before the first load of concrete is ever poured.

      Have a great day
      Tom G.

      • Anonymous

        I think the other practical consideration that has to be made by anyone considering building a new reactor is what would happen if they were billions of dollars into the project and another reactor melted down.

        It wouldn’t matter if it were a tired old beast that had been pushed past its prime and the plant under construction would have never failed for that reason. All that would matter is that almost all backyards would be unavailable. In any country where it was possible to publicly protest the pressure to quit and desist would be enormous.

        Who’s going to invest billions over a decade and take the chance that something far from your control could stop you dead in the water? It’s not like there aren’t alternative ways to make carbon-free electricity and those alternatives are getting cheaper and cheaper.

        If someone gets the price of large scale batteries down below the cost of pump-up hydro it’s all over for nuclear. There’s no way to compete with $0.04/kWh wind and storage around a nickel. No one predicts nuclear for less than $0.12/kWh (plus subsidies) that I’ve seen.

        Even if storage was a dime nuclear would be in trouble. Solar will soon be under $0.12/kWh. Wind and solar, without storage would eat up large portions of the 24 hour market, causing nuclear to sell at a loss. Then nuclear would have to sell at, perhaps, $0.20/kWh to survive and renewables plus storage or natural gas would eat the rest of their lunch.

        Too many risks. Smart money is not likely to hook up with nuclear.

        I’m looking for China to announce a scale back in the coming months. They’ve sort of signaled one already. Once they get a bit more experience with wind and solar I suspect they’ll come out with revised five year programs.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Eric-de-Haan/1126607781 Eric de Haan

    News via unexpected corners of the World (US and Reuters)

    but Tokaimura is the center of Japans Nuclear Research and Industry. Would One Power Reactor down make a difference while the many RR’s and Spent Fuel Processing Plants are still active ?

    • Anonymous

      One step at a time :D

Back to Top ↑