Pro-Nuclear Party Wins Big in Japan

More than 20 months after a catastrophic nuclear disaster that triggered massive protests against atomic energy and fueled public opinion polls backing the phase-out of reactors, a pro-nuclear party won Japan’s parliamentary election.

The result left anti-nuclear proponents in shock Monday, struggling to understand how the Liberal Democratic Party not only won, but won in a landslide.

Japan has a parliamentary system. This election was for the lower chamber, like ours called the House of Representatives, and elected by direct vote. The upper chamber, the House of Councilors, has a rather complicated system for election (part proportional based on party, part direct based on candidate). The House of Representatives will select a new Prime Minister later this month.

In any event, you might wonder if this means that the accident at Fukushima Daiichi has receded as an issue. Probably not – the Japanese national paper the Asahi Shimbun, polled the attitudes of voters and came back with interesting if not very heartening results:

The Asahi Shimbun approached voters nationwide who had cast their ballots in the Dec. 16 Lower House election to find out if they supported "scrapping nuclear power immediately, "gradually phasing out nuclear power altogether" or "not pursuing zero nuclear power."

Fourteen percent chose scrapping nuclear power immediately, and 64 percent picked gradually phasing out nuclear power altogether.

…

Fifteen percent of the respondents said they do not want to pursue zero nuclear power.

An explicitly one-issue, anti-nuclear energy caucus, called the Tomorrow Party, fizzled almost completely, winning nine out of 480 seats. To me, that suggests that Japanese voters are not one-issue partisans – the economy no doubt weighs as heavily there as here, for example. Beyond that, despite a multi-party system, the Japanese tend to favor the centrist Liberal Democratic Party (the big winner this time and most of the time), with opposition coalitions sometimes taking the reins of power.

So this is what one might call a status quo election. The Prime Minister selection will be worth attending, as Japan burns through PMs alarmingly fast, whichever party is in charge. That can lead to a vacuum where policy should be.

“I really wonder if the people who voted for the Liberal Democrats really know what their policies are,” said Kawakami, who along with other skeptics fears the Liberal Democrats will boost hawkish nationalism, raise taxes and favor big business over the little guy.

That sounds like one of our Presidential elections, with different issues. The opposition party always thinks the winning party will destroy the nation and that the foolish electorate didn’t understand the foul villainy it unleashed with its votes.

Most of all, they fear the Liberal Democrats will restart the nation’s 48 working nuclear reactors that are still offline, except for two that are back up, since the disaster.

Well, that’s how it goes. Elections have consequences and all that. Not to be too airy: I cannot guess what Japan will do with its nuclear plants and it would be presumptuous to try. However much it would be good for Japan to bring them back online – and it would be - it’s something that has to be left to them.

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog