|
Post by kasuku on Mar 8, 2012 13:31:40 GMT 3
Japan's Tipping Point: Renewable Energy from Wind, Water, Biomass, and More...
Posted on: December 5, 2011 10:06 AM, by The Pump Handle
by Mark Pendergrast
This is my third and final post about the state of Japan's renewable energy efforts and other measures that are vital to prevent further climate change and to wean the country from fossil fuel and nuclear power. In my first post, I covered the public-health impacts of climate change and explained why Japan is good indicator of whether countries will be able to act quickly enough in the face of these threats. Japan's reliance on imported fossil fuels gives it a good reason to invest in alternatives, and its technological sophistication should help it develop renewable-energy technology. I investigated Japan's use of renewable energy for my recently published book, Japan's Tipping Point: Crucial Choices in the Post-Fukushima World, and what I found was that the country has made progress in some areas but hasn't realized much of its potential. In my second post, I discussed the country's limited progress with solar and geothermal energy. Here I will cover Japan's wind turbines, hydro-power, biomass, energy efficiency efforts, transit, food, lifestyle changes, and new feed-in tariff legislation.
The Winds of Japan Wind power accounts for only 0.37 percent of Japan's electricity, despite its potential to supply more than 10 percent. Wind is a challenge, however. Typhoons can rip off the gigantic 100-meter blades of wind turbines. Though they are meant to swivel ("yaw") to remain perpendicular to the wind, the yaw control motors of most European and American turbines (currently the majority of those functioning in Japan) sometimes can't react quickly enough, or are knocked out of service, when the eye of a typhoon sweeps through, with wind shifts up to 180 degrees. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries developed a weather vane that automatically turns the blades so that they face away from the wind during a typhoon - the safest position. MHI has also overbuilt its support towers to prevent their being toppled by typhoons.
During the winter, when the warm waters of the Sea of Japan meet the cold air coming down from Siberia, fierce lightning storms strike the western coast of Japan. This winter lightning can fry or explode a turbine. MHI's lightning rods are thus ten times thicker than European standards.
Japan's complex, mountainous terrain also offers challenges to inland wind turbines, while those built on the coast to take advantage of strong ocean winds must be capable of withstanding tsunamis. And because Japan's coastline has no continental shelf, off-shore wind farms are more difficult.
Local residents have opposed construction of nearby wind turbines out of concern that the low-frequency vibrations of turbine blades can contribute to headaches, dizziness, insomnia, and other ailments. While a component of low-frequency noise called "infrasound" has been suggested as a possible cause of negative health effects, there are few peer-reviewed studies about health effects related to wind turbines specifically. A recent summary article of peer-reviewed scientific studies, government reports, and popular literature/internet information, written by at a Canadian consulting firm with windpower clients and published in Environmental Health in September 2011, found no direct causal link between physiological health effects and living in proximity to wind turbines. The authors concluded:
In peer reviewed studies, wind turbine annoyance has been statistically associated with wind turbine noise, but found to be more strongly related to visual impact, attitude to wind turbines and sensitivity to noise. To date, no peer reviewed articles demonstrate a direct causal link between people living in proximity to modern wind turbines, the noise they emit and resulting physiological health effects. If anything, reported health effects are likely attributed to a number of environmental stressors that result in an annoyed/stressed state in a segment of the population.
Some in Japan have pointed out that after typhoons knocked out GE wind turbines on the Izu peninsula in 2003, many sufferers still did not recover from their reported health problems. Another concern about turbines is that the whirling blades can kill birds when placed in flight paths.
As with geothermal power, the best potential wind sites are in the less-populated north (Hokkaido, Tohoku) or south (Kyushu). Japan currently lacks a unified electric grid that can accommodate and distribute power to its large population centers. Because wind power is highly variable, a huge surge in power could knock out the system. The solution would be to monitor the turbines and stop the blades from turning if there is a danger of an overload. The best option, of course, would be to store the extra energy in huge batteries, but that isn't feasible except on a minor local scale.
Wind power could literally begin to replace nuclear power plants, which are all located by the ocean with a good infrastructure in place to deliver power to the grid. Why not build wind farms in the same location? In fact, there are some wind turbines already in those areas.
Offshore turbines could work in a relatively shallow area less than 100 kilometers from Tokyo. Floating off-shore turbines are an unproven but enticing possibility for the future.
Taking Advantage of All That Water Japan's large hydroelectric dams were built decades ago, but with heavy rains and rushing mountain streams and rivers, citizens could be taking advantage of multiple smaller hydropower opportunities. The 26 existing large hydro dams produce 4.6 gigawatts. Dams that generate less than one megawatt contribute only 203 megawatts, but there are possible sites for thousands of them.
Big flood control hydro dams could increase their output by using advanced weather forecasts, thus allowing them to fill their reservoirs more effectively. The electric utilities could build new dams in the mid-power range, around 200,000 kilowatts. And local communities could use existing sabo dams (built to prevent erosion) and other rivers to generate smaller amounts. Taken together, these projects could conceivably double Japan's current hydroelectric output.
But there are problems. Japan's older large dams are silting up and will require expensive dredging. Also, dams can displace entire villages, as Michiko Ishimure's 1997 novel, Lake of Heaven, depicted for a mountain community in Kyushu.
With careful planning, however, smaller hydro projects can contribute substantially to Japan's renewable energy future. People ingenious enough to divert water for their rice paddies can surely also use that flow to produce electricity.
Biomass: Getting Energy from Plants The magic of photosynthesis turns the sun's energy into biomass, and humans have developed many ways to get that energy back. The simplest way, of course, is essential to our lives - we eat it. Japan once grew all of its own food and could do so again.
The average age of a Japanese farmer is 65, though there are some idealistic, dedicated young organic farmers. There are a few other hopeful signs. Forty years ago, for instance, the oriental white stork went extinct in Japan, killed by the mercury in pesticides. Thanks to Tetsuro Inaba, a farmer in the small town of Toyooka, the storks (bred in captivity and then released) are back and thriving, and the organic rice of Toyooka is branded as "Stork-Nurturing Rice."
Yet 40 percent of Japan's rice paddies lie fallow because people eat other (often imported) forms of starch. The government pays the farmers not to grow surplus rice. Instead, some have proposed using them to grow Hokuriku No. 193, a hardy, prolific strain of rice developed as animal feed. In several pilot programs, bioethanol has been made from this rice, but without a subsidy, it can't compete with gasoline. It may suffer the same fate as plans to make bioethanol from Okinawan sugar cane - the powerful oil industry squelched it. Still, wouldn't it be a simple matter for sake manufacturers to modify their process slightly and produce bioethanol as a sideline?
And instead of incinerating 80 percent of wasted food, why not compost it at the household level for the family garden? Or biodigest it to produce methane to burn to make electricity? And why not make compost out of human waste, provided it is not too tainted with chemicals and pharmaceuticals? In traditional Japan, human waste ("night soil") was prized by farmers in outlying areas, who bought it to nourish their crops.
The Japanese government has unwisely subsidized about 100 factories to produce wood pellets out of the monoculture of spindly Japanese cedar planted after World War II. It requires a ridiculous amount of fossil fuel to turn the logs into sawdust and then compress them, and then no one buys them because wood pellet stoves are prohibitively expensive. Instead, why not use Japanese technological expertise to make small, inexpensive, energy-efficient wood stoves especially designed to burn cedar? True, it burns much faster than hardwood, but it splits easily, and when stacked and dried, it could provide cozy radiant heat (and local jobs) in rural areas. And it would smell wonderful while it waited. Such small stoves, placed at the heart of the home, would echo the irori, the traditional central firepit of the Edo-era Japanese home.
The Machiya With the Double-Glazed Windows Those homes would be a lot cozier if they were well-insulated and had double-glazed windows. In the wake of the 1970s "oil shocks," Japanese industries pioneered in energy efficiency, cutting their usage in half from their 1973 levels. Efforts focused particularly on the four sectors that were the biggest energy hogs - iron and steel, chemicals, cement, and paper. But over the ensuing years, even as energy consumption from industry declined, residential and commerce usage went up. In response, Japanese appliances such as air conditioners and refrigerators were improved to cut energy use. But no building codes encouraged better insulation, double-glazed windows, or passive solar design.
Japanese housing since World War II has been notoriously flimsy, shoddily constructed, constricted, and expensive. It is a myth that traditional Japanese housing was also poorly made. The old houses were solid and relatively well insulated by straw-mud walls, though they were dark. Why not renovate them? And why not learn from the past while applying modern wisdom? Instead, Japanese citizens live in poorly insulated condominiums incongruously called "mansions."
In four cities dubbed "Smart Communities," Japan is also experimenting with the smart grid, which attempts to predict and respond to demand, supply, and storage of electricity, encouraging off-peak usage and conservation. The smart grid concept makes great sense, but it should not be used to promote all-electric homes, and the piecemeal Smart Community approach isn't going to address the urgent problems facing Japan, its homes, or its electrical usage.
Read more...http://scienceblogs.com/thepumphandle/2011/11/japans_tipping_point_in_respon.php
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 9, 2012 11:55:12 GMT 3
Kasuku, From that article ...Wind power accounts for only 0.37 percent of Japan's electricity, despite its potential to supply more than 10 percent. Wind is a challenge, however. Typhoons can rip off the gigantic 100-meter blades of wind turbines. Try www.angelfire.com/mac/egmatthews/winam/windpower.htmlIf you need introductions revert as it is welcome way to make electricity now and in the future. It will complement the electricity from base (nuclear, coal and oil/gas).
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 10, 2012 0:51:25 GMT 3
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 10, 2012 8:14:04 GMT 3
Podp, John Ritch is being economical with the truth. German politicians & Merkl specifically were extremely pro nuclear but had to do a total 180 degree turn on the pro nuclear policies they advocated in the past due to pressure from the electorate. Being smart politicians they dropped the nuclear hot potato & kowtow-ed to the people's demands. That's democracy in action not a panic attack.
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 10, 2012 10:01:12 GMT 3
b6k,
What happened in Germany is when its Grand Coalition (Merkl's Conservative) and the Social Democrats collapsed after she cleverly called a snap election when some scandals rocked the latter, her party needed a coalition partner....the Greens. The latter are willing to go to bed with anyone as long as they say they will shut down nuclear power plant.
In a convulsive way it I 'democracy' I have to admit and how I wish our ODP, PNU etc would borrow a leaf from there instead of focusing on mortals. If tomorrow in Germany another Grand Coalition scenario emanates and the Greens are out of the Government I can assure (with high probability i.e. above 0.5) you the anti nuclear policies would be reversed.
But the quote was to try and open our eyes to the fallacy of allowing politicians to be incharge of our lives as if we were mindless. Not challenging democracy as you try to affirm.
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 10, 2012 10:43:14 GMT 3
b6k, What happened in Germany is when its Grand Coalition (Merkl's Conservative) and the Social Democrats collapsed after she cleverly called a snap election when some scandals rocked the latter, her party needed a coalition partner....the Greens. The latter are willing to go to bed with anyone as long as they say they will shut down nuclear power plant. In a convulsive way it I 'democracy' I have to admit and how I wish our ODP, PNU etc would borrow a leaf from there instead of focusing on mortals. If tomorrow in Germany another Grand Coalition scenario emanates and the Greens are out of the Government I can assure (with high probability i.e. above 0.5) you the anti nuclear policies would be reversed. But the quote was to try and open our eyes to the fallacy of allowing politicians to be incharge of our lives as if we were mindless. Not challenging democracy as you try to affirm. Podp, point noted
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 10, 2012 15:35:46 GMT 3
b6k, What happened in Germany is when its Grand Coalition (Merkl's Conservative) and the Social Democrats collapsed after she cleverly called a snap election when some scandals rocked the latter, her party needed a coalition partner....the Greens. The latter are willing to go to bed with anyone as long as they say they will shut down nuclear power plant. In a convulsive way it I 'democracy' I have to admit and how I wish our ODP, PNU etc would borrow a leaf from there instead of focusing on mortals. If tomorrow in Germany another Grand Coalition scenario emanates and the Greens are out of the Government I can assure (with high probability i.e. above 0.5) you the anti nuclear policies would be reversed. But the quote was to try and open our eyes to the fallacy of allowing politicians to be incharge of our lives as if we were mindless. Not challenging democracy as you try to affirm. podp Merkel never dissolved a government made of her party and Social democrats (which social democrat scandal you talking about?) and even more crap she never had a coalition with the green. But let’s hypothetically say it was true - merkel and the green party coalition - the green small as a mice compared to the elephant Christian democracy of merkel and you believe the mice would force the elephant to its knee?. For whom are you posting those nuclear pasted posts for? podp Let me tell you who made Germany decide to close the Nuclear power plants sooner than planned; The lies of the nuclear Villages has being lifted when the roofs of the fukushima plant blew off. That was the end of nuclear power plants, upende na usipende! Kenya is used to eating bones which others have thrown. This time we shouldn't for that would be the end of a East African people. Nuclear sio mitumba bwana. At least Mitumba you can wash with Jik to kill the germs.
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 10, 2012 19:37:42 GMT 3
Kasuku, Thank you very much for you en-lighting me on German. Much appreciated. This is what is more interesting for me though, from that latest post... www.standardmedia.co.ke/maddworld/?See the Parliamentary session caricature....check out the top where Lamu (LAPPSET) is comparing with the bottom reality! For whom are you posting those nuclear pasted posts for? Best you explain yourself first and probably it might interest me to respond too, or is there any why that does not have why not?
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 12, 2012 9:01:46 GMT 3
The accident was a jolt to the nuclear industry, regulators and governments. It was triggered by a massive force of nature, but it was existing weaknesses of design regarding defence against natural hazards, regulatory oversight, accident management and emergency response that allowed it to unfold as it did. For example: * The nuclear regulator was not sufficiently independent, allowing weak oversight of the operator, TEPCO, and regulatory requirements fell short of international best practice. * Not enough attention was paid to guarding against possible extreme events at the Fukushima Daiichi site, leaving critical safety functions such as cooling systems vulnerable to the tsunami. * Training to respond to serious accidents was inadequate, as were mitigation measures to prevent hydrogen explosions and protect the venting system. * Accident command lines were unclear and response plans not sufficiently integrated. "Human failings such as these are not unique to Japan," Amano said. "We humans learn from our mistakes. Countries around the world are searching out the weak links in their own systems, and taking action to strengthen them." www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/2012/prn201208.html
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 12, 2012 13:57:15 GMT 3
The Nuclear Lies continue..... Almost 67 years ago, President Harry Truman ushered in the nuclear age with a boast and a bunch of lies. On the first anniversary of the Fukushima disaster, they are more deadly than ever. In his first official statements about the bombing of Hiroshima, Truman carefully focused on his admiration of the bomb. It was a "marvelous" achievement that "harnessed the basic power of the universe." It was a lifesaver, he would say repeatedly, which prevented as many as a million American casualties (a claim his speechwriter, McGeorge Bundy, later admitted to pulling out of the air). And to ensure that no ugly images of death or radiation poisoning sullied our "greatest scientific gamble," nor our pride in winning it, the U.S. government confiscated video and photos of the atomic bomb destruction and classified information. The War Department put Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times reporter William L. Laurence on its payroll to deny the "lie" of radiation-related deaths, even as he was warned, while in Hiroshima, to be sure to wear heavy shoes. One year into the still-unfolding disaster in Fukushima, Truman's spin on nuclear power as "marvelous" and "life-saving" still shape our nuclear landscape. Japan -- the government of the country that suffered the bomb -- has developed its own version of Truman's lies. Bad news comes neatly packaged with the now-familiar assurance that there is "no immediate threat to human health." You've seen it everywhere. The air, the water, the soil, the spinach, the tea, the fish, the beef, the rain on the East Coast of the United States etc. -- all testing with increased levels of radiation. In many cases, higher than what used to be considered safe. And yet, there is not only no immediate threat to human health; too often the response is... to stop testing. Recently, I did a quick rundown about some of the lies, some of the safety issues, some of the consequences, of the Fukushima disaster, which was published and distributed by the Progressive Media Project. One can only include so much in 600 words. As March 11 approaches, there is a blossoming of reports and statements about the Fukushima disaster one year ago. The lies continue. The American Nuclear Society's report, for example, released yesterday observed that American nuclear plants are safe, and that "the off-site health consequences" of the Fukushima meltdown "may ultimately be minimal." This, despite the fact that, an Associated Press investigation in June found that three quarters of the U.S. nuclear plants were leaking radioactive tritium. The Fukushima reactors are still leaking in the air and water. Even as we are assured that the ocean will simply dilute the radiation, TEPCO plans to "contain" the radioactivity in the nearby bay by cementing it over with 73,000 square meters of cement. Computer models of radioactive plumes and tangible tsunami trash show it currently approaching the northern Hawaiian islands (Midway); indeed the trash has been spotted. As I have learned from the survivors of Hiroshima, the consequences of Fukushima may not be understood for decades, but they will still be felt. Whether it is dubbed "high" or "minimal" by the latest report, the inevitable and chronic contamination making its way through our shared environment (and compounding the unacknowledged fallout of more than 2050 nuclear tests and accidents since 1945) will take its perhaps-not-immediate toll on human bodies. J. Robert Oppenheimer, one of the leaders of the Manhattan Project that created the atomic bomb, knew this. He is famously reported to have said directly to President Truman, "We have blood on our hands." To which Truman famously responded, "Don't worry, it will come out in the wash." But radiation cannot be washed away, not even whitewashed as Harry Truman may once have wished. No matter how many new reports there will be on this anniversary, the facts remain the same. Nuclear power is far dirtier and far deadlier than anything man has ever created. It must be stopped. www.huffingtonpost.com/rahna-reiko-rizzuto/harry-trumans-lies-and-fu_b_1334896.html
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 12, 2012 14:00:34 GMT 3
Lesson One: Government lie As we approach on March 11 the one-year anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, it’s a good time to take heed of the lessons from that tragic event. Lesson one: Governments lie. Telltale signs that reactors had melted down in Fukushima were found within days, but the Japanese government did not admit it for months. It also withheld data predicting the path of airborne radiation, and did not warn the people taking refuge in the plume. One of the government’s first actions, within days of the tsunami, was to increase acceptable levels for radiation exposure to five times that in the United States. When radiation in spinach, milk and beef exceeded legal limits and were pulled off the shelves, the chief cabinet secretary said, “Even if people eat these products, there will be no immediate effect.” Months later, when high levels of radiation were detected in tea in Shizuoka, the governor of the prefecture declared the tea safe and refused to have it tested further because it might “confuse” people. The government was more intent on glossing over the truth than with leveling with its own people and with protecting them. The Japanese government even loosened the definition of “cold shutdown” in December in order to declare its still leaking and vulnerable reactor “stable.” There actually were 28 leaks in January and February alone. Lesson two: We are still gambling on nuclear power. More than half the world’s nuclear energy is produced in Japan, France and the United States. In Japan, 52 of 54 reactors are currently offline due to safety concerns. In the United States, where nuclear plants are between 30 and 40 years old with aging, analog technology, an Associated Press investigation found that three-fourths were leaking radioactive tritium. Spent fuel remains a huge concern. The United States has generated approximately 72,000 tons of waste and has nowhere to store it; three-fourths of it sits in overcapacity water-cooling pools like those in Fukushima. Japan is expected to run completely out of room to store its waste within 10-20 years. Radioactive waste cannot be neutralized. It is not only an immediate and deadly threat to human health, it also has a much longer lifespan than we do (from 500 to 500,000 years). Humanity has never built anything that has lasted as long as our radioactive poisons will. Rather than focus our efforts on cleaning up the mess we have, the United States just approved the first nuclear power plant since the 1970s, with an $8.3 billion federal loan guarantee for a plant in Georgia. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted the approval over the objection of its chairman, Gregory Jaczko, who said that the decision was made “as if Fukushima never happened.” Lesson three: The ocean cannot wash away our problem. Fukushima has released 168 times the amount of cancer-causing cesium as the bombing of Hiroshima in 1945. But the water — our ocean — is where the true disaster may lie. Water used to cool the fuel has been measured at up to 7.5 million times the legal limit for radiation. The Japanese government deliberately dumped 11,500 tons of radioactive water into the sea in April, calling this act “regrettable and unfortunate.” Its storage tanks — holding 100,000 tons — will max out this month. Meanwhile, radiation has been found in fish and water more than 400 miles away. A disaster of this magnitude is not just regrettable and unfortunate. It should never be allowed to happen again. We need to get off nuclear energy. That’s the most important lesson of all. progressive.org/fukushima_anniversary.html
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 12, 2012 18:10:44 GMT 3
Kasuku, As you feed on the 'lies' and attempt to win us to the same diet please take time when rested to follow up on experts versions too...or try it for dessert after the main meal please. www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2012/fukushima1yearon.htmlUpcoming Nuclear Safety Events Nuclear safety experts around the world are studying the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident. At international conferences, workshops and meetings, organized or co-organized by the IAEA, these experts will gather to discuss a broad array of issues and lessons learned from the accident. In March 2012, experts will discuss reactor and spent fuel safety in the light of the accident. The Contracting Parties to the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management will convene for the Convention's fourth review in May 2012. In Vienna, experts will consider best practices in enhancing transparency and communication effectiveness in the event of a nuclear or radiological emergency in June 2012. Seismologists and nuclear safety experts will meet in Vienna to consider protection against extreme earthquakes and tsunamis in August 2012. An extraordinary Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Nuclear Safety will also meet in Vienna, in August 2012. In Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, a Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety will be held in December 2012. In the following spring, international experts will consider remediation and decommissioning issues in March 2013. An International Conference on Effective Nuclear Regulatory Systems will be held in Canada in April 2013 hps.org/fukushima/hps.org/newsandevents/societynews.html#766
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 13, 2012 1:56:47 GMT 3
Japan barely improves nuclear regulatory system By YURI KAGEYAMA Associated Press Posted: 03/09/2012 12:25:47 AM PST FUKUSHIMA, Japan—Right after three reactors in northeastern Japan sank into meltdowns, the government vowed to sever the cozy relations between the nuclear industry and its regulators. One year later, it has yet to even appoint committee members to scrutinize the "revolving door" of officials landing jobs in the very industries they regulate. There is little to suggest that the world's worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl has brought substantially new thinking to nuclear regulation in Japan or stronger urgency to improving safety at its 54 reactors. Regulators are still part of the trade ministry, which promotes nuclear power, rather than the environment ministry, as the government proposed months ago. Only two plants have built up seawalls since the Fukushima Dai-ichi meltdowns, and one of them is Fukushima Dai-ichi. Only one plant has installed the kind of vents that could have prevented the hydrogen explosions that escalated the nuclear crisis. Officials are reviewing the chaotic evacuation of the radioactive zone to improve disaster response, but few concrete steps have been taken. One thing Japan has done with its nuclear reactors is keep them shut after they're brought offline for regularly scheduled inspections. The new regime of safety checks reactors must pass before they are restarted is one of the few measures regulators have introduced. So far, none has gotten the go-ahead to restart, leaving only two of the 54 reactors running, Advertisement and the last two are scheduled to go offline by late April. It's unclear when the reactors will restart, but even when shut down they're still vulnerable to a tsunami because the fuel rods must be kept cool. The safety checks use computer simulations to see if plants can hold up, or at least avoid a major crisis, if a big earthquake or tsunami hits. Critics say the tests should be more rigorous. "This is our fate as a nation with so many nuclear plants. All we can do is pray a tsunami won't come," said Hideyuki Ban, who heads the anti-nuclear research group Citizens' Nuclear Information Center and sits on a government panel on atomic energy policy. Japanese regulators have responded more slowly than their American counterparts did after the accident at Three Mile Island in 1979. Sweeping changes by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission included emergency-response planning, worker training and radiation protection. Some critics say the action wasn't enough, but the NRC got started on most of these measures within a year. And unlike Japanese regulators, the NRC was never part of a government agency charged with encouraging development of nuclear energy, the U.S. Department of Energy in its case. The March 11, 2011, disaster at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant prompted widespread calls to make Japan's nuclear safety agency more independent by taking it out of the trade ministry. A year later, a law to make the change still hasn't passed, and when it might pass is uncertain. The government also has yet to address the issue of officials who move back and forth between regulatory and industry jobs. The practice of doling out post-retirement jobs to government officials in many sectors is so common Japanese call it "amakudari" or "descent from heaven." An Associated Press review last year found that of 95 people at three main nuclear regulatory bodies, 26 had been affiliated with the industry or groups that promote nuclear power, typically with government funding. The government has found that 68 former trade ministry officials got jobs at utilities in the last 50 years. Among the regulators who landed such jobs was Susumu Nakamura, a former senior official at the government Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. He was hired in 2008 at Shikoku Electric Power Co., and was promoted to board member a year later—a job he still holds. "Our company will continue to aggressively hire talented people, including former ministry officials who offer appropriate character, leadership and abilities," the company said Thursday in defense of Nakamura's appointment. Kyushu Electric Power Co.'s Fukuoka city office chief Makoto Kakebayashi also once worked in the trade ministry setting policy. Kyushu Electric said his hiring was appropriate. The government is in no better position now to discourage the revolving door than it was a year ago, when it simply urged regulatory officials to use "self-restraint." Attempts to reform the bureaucracy date back decades. The latest campaign began in 2006 under the Liberal Democrats, but they were thrown out of power in 2009, putting change on hold again. Masashi Nakano, a professor at University of Hyogo who studies amakudari, said the cozy relationship between the government and private sector is so entrenched tough legislation and massive layoffs are needed for a proper fix. "One would need to wield a giant ax. Otherwise, amakudari is here to stay," he said. Amakudari is just one of the issues critics of Japan's nuclear regulators are pushing the government to address. Poor coordination between central and local governments has been identified as a major problem in the evacuation of areas near the Fukushima plant, but local officials say little has been done to fix the problem or develop better evacuation plans. Local officials say they learned of evacuation orders only when they saw them on TV. They received little or no information on the situation inside the plant. The central government had prediction data from sophisticated monitors that suggested certain towns were in the path of spewing radiation, but that information was not shared with residents. Around Japan, towns near nuclear plants say they are not confident their plans would work any better than those at Fukushima. The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency says it is reviewing contingency plans. The only seawalls built so far since the tsunami have been at disaster-struck Fukushima Dai-ichi and the nearby Fukushima Dai-ni plant, according to an AP survey of all Japan's 10 utilities. Fukushima Dai-ichi went into meltdowns because it had been prepared for only 20-foot (6 meter) tsunami despite warnings from experts that far bigger tsunami could strike—like the 46-foot (14-meter) waves that hit last March. Chubu Electric Power Co. is finishing the foundation for a 59-foot (18-meter) wall at the Hamaoka plant, which had to be shut down last year over estimates that that it faces about a 90 percent chance of being hit by a magnitude 8.0 or higher quake within 30 years. That wall won't be completed until next year. One utility said its tsunami wall won't be completed until 2016. Two utilities had no plans at all to build seawalls because the reactors were built on enough high ground. One of two safety reports the government requires to restart reactors was submitted this week for one of those reactors. Only one plant has added another key safety measure—new kinds of vents to allow hydrogen to escape from the reactors. At Fukushima Dai-ichi, hydrogen built up and exploded containment buildings. Utilities said they were making technical studies or considering the measure. Another plant has built new doors that will shut tight during a tsunami and keep delicate equipment dry. The government learns of such improvements only after they are made, and has no overall assessment on their progress, said Tomohiro Sawada of the government Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. "Their actions are not required by law and so we don't have a way of checking," he said. ——— Associated Press writers Eric Talmadge and Mari Yamaguchi contributed to this report from Tokyo. ——— www.marinij.com/business/ci_20136868/japan-slow-improve-nuclear-regulatory-system
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 13, 2012 2:02:01 GMT 3
Podp Fukushima’s nuclear disaster has just wakened the common citizen up to face the dangers being exposed to them by money sick cooperates and politicians. One wonders if they will get into rockets and fly to another planet after they blew this one apart.
There is an Interview (in German) with the Japans ex-premier minister who says he had being lied to too, by the people covering up the dangers within the nuclear plants –by the so called Nuclear Village ;( this include, politicians, cooperates, media etc.)
If a High Technology country like Japans Leadership behaves so irresponsible when it come to the safety of its people, how do you imagine Kenyan politicians (Aka Ruto, Uhuru, Kibaki and co) would take care of Wanjikus safety and welfare in case Kenya does go ahead and build Nuclear power plants?
The idea does sound like a April joke Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant although down is not save. If another tsunami runs into it and that could happen any day, then that would be the end of Japan…and the all world would be affected too as the radiation would cover the all planet.
|
|
|
Post by hannali on Mar 13, 2012 10:12:32 GMT 3
WACHA UONGO....STOP THE FEAR MONGERING, KENYA NEEDS A HELIUM REACTOR WHICH PROVIDES CLEAN NUCLEAR ENERGY
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 13, 2012 10:50:20 GMT 3
Podp, bad news for the pro nuclear lobby. The mighty red dragon, China, has had a change of heart regarding the priority of nuclear energy in her energy mix. This means the alternative sources they will support will benefit as China invests more in them bringing the costs down. Read more below: "In the wake of the partial meltdown of nuclear reactors at the Fukushima plant in Japan, China announced it would shelve plans for vast expansion of its nuclear power capacity, at least temporarily, until more stringent safety checks are performed. Construction will eventually resume, but with a potentially scaled-back role for nuclear power and with solar and wind energy picking up some of the slack. If nuclear remains a small fraction of China’s total energy mix (just 2 percent today, compared with America’s 20 percent), and Beijing looks to solar and wind for future energy growth in the era of climate change, the boost to those industries could make renewables cost-competitive with fossil fuels much earlier than previously projected." www.thenation.com/article/160095/china-rethinks-nuclear-power
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 13, 2012 13:04:00 GMT 3
WACHA UONGO....STOP THE FEAR MONGERING, KENYA NEEDS A HELIUM REACTOR WHICH PROVIDES CLEAN NUCLEAR ENERGY Hannali You are not alone with your way of reasoning. Unfortunately many Kenyans reason the same; Sit down and wait for others to deliver what you need. How it is gotten or where it came from, you don’t want to be bothered by the information. The day Kenyans will start taking responsibility for their own life is when they will test the fruits of freedom. But till that day, they will keep on complaining that others are to blame for their problems.
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 14, 2012 17:00:20 GMT 3
b6k, China slowed but did not stop its ambition to continue with nuclear build up for electricity. The Baltic States are hoping Poland also joins them so that they are 4 countries owning the nuclear power plants to be built...see Baltic PMs pledge nuclear support The prime ministerial trio formally welcomed progress since their last gathering in November 2011, and went on to reaffirm their support for Visaginas "for the security of power supply in our countries" and for the three energy companies involved in the project – Eesti Energia, Latvenergo and Visagino Atominė Elektrinė (VAE). The ministers said they would be encouraging the companies to finalise negotiations in a "timely manner" to ensure that the next milestone for the project - approval of a nuclear plant concession agreement by the Lithuanian parliament - is met by June 2012. www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Baltic_PMs_pledge_nuclear_support-0903128.html
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 14, 2012 17:15:34 GMT 3
Kasuku, How do you see Wind and Nuclear combining forces to be one company producing electricity? see Nuclear and wind to partner for Mexico The most pessimistic scenario for nuclear sees it meeting 2.5% of demand, which at about 11,991 GWh represents virtually no growth on the country's only nuclear power plant, Laguna Verde, which hosts two boiling water reactors producing about 800 MWe each and licensed to operate until 2029 and 2034. The middle scenario puts nuclear at 6.6%. This would be a tripling from current production to 31,656 GWh and would require a little over 4 GWe of nuclear capacity in total, assuming a capacity factor of 90%. The last scenario has 18.1% of power coming from nuclear plants - some 86,816 GWh and about equivalent to the output from 11 GWe of nuclear generating capacity. The new energy strategy document made note of last year's Fukushima accident and stressed Mexico's involvement in international forums to secure on-going improvement of nuclear safety. It said nuclear power 'continues to be a viable option to meet growing demand for energy' and noted it as 'among the best options' for power generation thanks to low external costs and minimal damage to public health and the environment. www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP_Nuclear_and_wind_to_partner_for_Mexico_0203121.html
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 15, 2012 13:04:14 GMT 3
podp
Mexico City is considered the 8th most earthquake-venerable city in the world – in 1985 there was a earthquake that was an 8.1 on the Richter scale.
Probably having this Historic Earthquake in mind, soon after the Fukushima savage earthquakes and Tsunami in Japan, Mexico officials were reconsidering whether they should further invest in nuclear energy.
But now with the Mexicos General elections and other significant election around the corner (In July 2012) and Energy (Environment in general) being a big issue, any politician will say anything at the moment to push their party or themselves forward as favorite candidates, as always.
For me those news aren’t anything new, but news from the Nuclear Village trying for Positive news where their lies have being bared naked.
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 15, 2012 16:11:33 GMT 3
Kasuku, Mexico has two operating nuclear power plants that produce a total of 1,600 MW (more than all that we produce from hydro, geothermal, diesel etc. now i.e. 1,400 MW). Imagine without being earthquake prone like them our sleeping potential? see Remembering Fukushima, Looking Ahead www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2012/fukushima1anniv.htmlThe Director General of IAEA who is Japanese says... "As a citizen of Japan, and simply as a human being, I was deeply shocked and saddened by the devastation and the great loss of life which the disaster inflicted on my homeland." While critical scientists from the same country say... www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120302083031.htm"Ultimately, the final outcome of studies of Fukushima Daiichi should be an intense effort to build up the resilience of the country, its organizations, and its people, so future disaster can be averted or responded to effectively," the authors conclude. But me and you are ....
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 15, 2012 18:53:51 GMT 3
Kasuku, Mexico has two operating nuclear power plants that produce a total of 1,600 MW (more than all that we produce from hydro, geothermal, diesel etc. now i.e. 1,400 MW). Imagine without being earthquake prone like them our sleeping potential? But me and you are .... Who says kenya isn't earth quake prone? As of the last Earthquake in Kenya ... It was in January 2012 in Lake Turkana earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/last_event/world/world_kenya.phpWhat do you know about the Rift Valley podp? The seismic activities in East Africa rift and the Kenya rift are concentrated along the Eastern and Western branch of the East Africa Rift System. Seismicity of the Kenya rift valley of the East Africa’s areas of active tectonics has been dominated by earthquakes of low to intermediate magnitudes originating along the two branches of the rift system. Past studies have revealed that the region has a relatively high activities and a stable recurrence relation of log (N) = a – b (Ms), where N is the number of events of magnitude equal to or greater than Ms per annum. Kenya rift system is thus capable of producing a regular pattern of earthquakes including an event of magnitude 6.9...... ........Much of the damage in earthquakes can be attributed to the behavior of the soils during earthquakes. Large settlements and differential settlements caused by compaction of loose soil, settlement and tilting of structures due to liquefaction of saturated granular soil, lateral movements of natural slopes have been observed during earthquakes. All these types of behavior are influenced by the intensity of earthquake shaking. Thus a determination of seismic risk for a particular facility must include an evaluation of the earthquake ground motions that are likely to be induced by future earthquakes at the site. The Subukia 1928 earthquake didn’t cause.......... www.seis.nagoya-u.ac.jp/kimata/jica/actionplan09/Joseph.pdf
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 16, 2012 12:16:37 GMT 3
Kasuku, Does it matter if Kenya is earthquake prone? It will not stop us building roads and driving on them. It will not stop us building skyscrapers and using them for office space, human habitation etc. Even when it comes to building nuclear power plants being earth quake prone never stopped Japan, Mexico, Turkey etc. building them. Why? One can design structures that can withstand earthquakes anywhere on earth. Or you advocate we continue living in mud huts because Kenya is earthquake prone? Try some other argument to dissuade us from marching on.
|
|
|
Post by kasuku on Mar 16, 2012 12:47:11 GMT 3
Kasuku, Does it matter if Kenya is earthquake prone? Try some other argument to dissuade us from marching on. podp you are perfectly right, earthquake would never have being my only argument against Nuclear power, but it was yours, when you said... . ...I thought i should teach you a bit about Kenya and Rift valley for you sounded as if you had no idea...
|
|
|
Post by podp on Mar 17, 2012 7:51:32 GMT 3
Kasuku, Last qoute is the clincher.....read on www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Longer_life_in_theory_for_Ikata_2_1603111.html16 March 2012 Amid controversy on the future of nuclear power in Japan, and while many reactors await permission to restart from inspection, authorities have nevertheless approved ten more years of operation for Ikata 2. Shikoku Electric Power Company owns the Ikata power plant and on 15 March it received approval for its strategy to manage ageing at Ikata 2. This came from officials at the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) as well as the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. However, Ikata 2's operation now or in the future is very much a political matter in post-Fukushima Japan. The reactor was shut down for mandated inspection on 13 January and, in common with all Japanese reactors, cannot be restarted until gaining approval for its stress-test analysis from NISA. First-stage stress test reports for several units have been filed with NISA, which has already approved the findings in some cases. However, none of these decisions has yet translated into formal permission to restart and at the same time some local politicians are seeking extra assurances such as the completion of the much longer second-stage of the stress test program. This customary deference to local leaders is not a legal requirement for utilities and it seems increasingly likely that the federal government will decide to explicitly encourage nuclear operators to forego that step for teh sake of national energy needs. Ikata 2 This 538 MWe pressurized water reactor was designed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and built in 42 months between February 1978 and July 1981. Commercial operation came on 19 March 1982 and the unit now has permission in to continue operating - subject to regular checks as well as the completion of Shikoku's maintenance plan - until 19 March 2022. Currently, the only two reactors in operation in Japan are Kashiwazaki-Kariwa 6 and Tomari 3 - both on the country's northern 50 Hz electricity grid. On the southern 60 Hz grid there are no nuclear power plants operating. Nuclear generation has been replaced by fossil fuels, of which Japan imported some ¥4.3 trillion ($55 billion) extra during 2011 compared to the year before. This was enough to tip its trade balance into the red for the first time since 1980. Last month, Makoto Yagi, chairman of the Federation of Electric Power Companies, said: "Japan must avoid overdependence on fossil fuels and secure a well-balanced combination of diverse energy resources. We believe that Japan must continue to utilize nuclear power generation as an important power source to sustain its stable energy supply." The government is still engaged in a 'from-scratch' development of an energy policy. Researched and written by World Nuclear News
|
|