Skip to main content

Japan to Exit Nuclear Energy – Maybe – Maybe Not

This is from the New York Times:

In an abrupt turnabout, the Japanese government on Wednesday stopped short of formally adopting the goal it announced just last week — to phase out nuclear power by 2040 — after the plan drew intense opposition from business groups and communities whose economies depend on local nuclear power plants.

Color me – surprised? The decision made last week had the political benefit of not impacting most of the officials who supported it and seemed to split the difference between business interests and people wanting to move away from nuclear energy. No one had to think very hard about it because nothing drastic was going to happen for quite awhile.

It turns out a lot of people gave it some thought.

But business groups criticized any move away from nuclear power as impractical and a death knell for Japanese manufacturers, which have already lost much of their competitive edge to cheaper rivals elsewhere in Asia. And communities across Japan that host nuclear facilities feared losing government subsidies, tax revenues and jobs.They also worried that they would become the final dumping ground for spent nuclear fuel stored at their plants.

I’m sure the plants weren’t planning leave fuel rods along the side of the road as they sped out of town, but the overall point seems about right – nuclear energy facilities can be very strong economic engines in their communities and shutting off those engines can have a terrible impact. (I think the 2040 date was meant to soften any such blow, but people clearly aren’t buying it.)

The role of business here was very strong:

A day earlier, the chairmen of Japan’s most prominent business associations, including the influential Keidanren group, called a rare joint news conference to demand that Mr. Noda abandon the 2040 goal. On Wednesday, they praised the cabinet’s decision.

That’s bringing to bear a heck of a lot of pressure. Business often gets a bad rap, but they are employers, too, so trying to rescue themselves means rescuing a lot of workers, too.

There’s a lot more to Hiroko Tabuchi’s story. Do read the whole thing.

---

To be fair, the story referenced above, or rather its counterparts in the Japanese press, has gotten some pushback from the government.

"Don't get me wrong," [Prime Minister Yoshihiko] Noda said Friday. "We did make a cabinet decision" on the nuclear phase-out policy on September 14.

"Japan will seek a no-nuclear society in the 2030s and will realize it.

"With an unwavering attitude, we will implement various policies based on this principle. This is a huge policy change that we have made with a genuine determination."

My guess, and it has to be a guess, as relevant cabinet documents have not been translated yet, is that the government is keeping things very ambiguous to try to keep different constituencies content. If I’m right, it appears not to be working.

In any event, this is still a decision that will not have an impact until many of the politicians involved have left office and the Japanese government will have changed parties a few time – maybe more than a few, given recent history. A lot could still happen.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …