[Skybird]

ENERGY TRANSITION IN JAPANESE

published 10/15/2022 https://think-again.org/energiewende-auf-japanisch/

For a decade now, nuclear energy in Germany has been committing a slow, agonizing suicide, which came to a miserable end in the haggling over the continued operation of two or three reactors for the winter period. The reason for the nuclear hara-kiri was supposedly the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan.

At that time, Japan had also shut down all its nuclear power plants, but not for good. In the meantime, the country is systematically rebuilding its nuclear power supply and planning the construction of new, improved reactors.

Nuclear power in Japan

Japan's annual electricity consumption is about 1000 terawatt hours; with 125 million inhabitants, this results in an annual per capita consumption of 8000 kilowatt hours. For comparison the figures for Germany: 570 TWh, 83 million inhabitants and 6900 kWh per capita and year. A modern nuclear reactor generates around 10 terawatt hours per year, older ones considerably less.

The first nuclear power was fed into the grid in Japan in 1966, and by early 2011 the contribution had grown to 30%. And it was planned to increase to 50% by 2030. The thinking was that Japan would need to reduce its heavy dependence on imported oil to be less exposed to global crises.

Everything changed with the Fukushima disaster. In the 15 months that followed, all 50 reactors in the country were gradually taken offline. There was a strong anti-nuclear sentiment and demands were made to keep the nuclear power plants shut down forever. The government and the operating company TEPCO were accused of having criminally neglected the protection of the population during the operation of their power plants.

Energy transition in Japanese

The government responded by commissioning an independent authority, the Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NRA), to subject existing power plants to a rigorous safety review. The criteria were to be tougher than in pre-Fukushima times. 33 reactors passed the test. The Fukushima 1 power plant, with formerly 6 reactors, is obviously not among them, but neither is Fukushima 2, located 12 km to the south, with four reactors in which there were no meltdowns.

Of the 33 candidates that were found to be good, ten are currently operating, with the remainder awaiting clearance to resume production. However, in light of the war in Ukraine and gas supply problems, the approval process is to be accelerated. The prime minister called for nine more power plants to come online by winter, plus seven in the summer of 2023, which would make 10 + 9 + 7 =25 reactors in operation.

While Germany has systematically destroyed its fleet of nuclear power plants since Fukushima and is facing a huge problem just in time for winter 22/23, Japan has done exactly the opposite.

This political masterstroke cannot be overestimated. We must keep in mind that Japan was not only the scene of the Fukushima disaster, but that only two or three generations ago the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed more than 100,000 people there in a terrible way. Therefore, there is strong resentment in the population against everything nuclear and thus easy game for the opponents of nuclear power. But among the population and the government, reason triumphed over propaganda; in the end, green populists were not given a chance. What a difference to Germany!

And the future?

Japan is also planning for nuclear power in the long term. It has decided to build a new type of reactor that will not harm the environment even in the event of a meltdown. To this end, parts of the plant are being relocated below the earth's surface. The machine itself, however, is a conventional pressurized water reactor. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Hitachi are pursuing this development, which is expected to be completed in the 1930s.

You may now ask why Japan is relying on these old-fashioned monsters, when today there is talk everywhere of new generations of reactors that are supposedly safer, produce hardly any radioactive waste, and which, on the contrary, either use the long-lived radiating legacies of the old reactors as fuel or at least render them harmless.

These models exist today primarily on paper, and the road from paper to a functioning and producing behemoth of steel, concrete, uranium, plutonium and 1000° Celsius, that road is paved with surprises. The country of Japan, in the aftermath of Fukushima, would certainly be the wrong place and it would be the wrong time to risk nuclear surprises there now.


It would not be the first time such a project has caused trouble. Half a century ago, France built and operated such an advanced type of reactor, a "fast breeder" that was supposed to breed more fuel than it consumed and deliver 1200 megawatts of electricity. It was inevitable that there would be a glitch or two, although the population was never endangered. Nevertheless, the project - dubbed "Super Phoenix" - was abandoned in 1997.

The big question

Japan and Germany both look back on a long history with very sophisticated cultures. Both nations are or were parallel, for decades, pioneers in natural sciences and technology. Why do these two nations arrive at completely different strategies in the same situation? Why does Germany opt for nuclear hara-kiri while Japan pursues a proactive, long-term policy? Perhaps there are political scientists or sociologists who have an answer to this question.
-------------------
The author is Hans Hofmann-Reinecke. He studied physics in Munich and earned his doctorate in nuclear physics.

I add a reader'S comment to one of his other blog posts, becasue it fits here as well: A certain "Majestyk" wrote:

However, current events are illogical only until one accepts that these are almost all social weapons and the supposed collateral damage is the real purpose.
The rest is then criminalistics: who has the motive, the opportunity and the means.