Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Below: Article from the March 27^th, 2016 edition of the Asahi Shimbun newspaper

 Mr. Ryoichi Wago is a high school teacher and a poet.
Born and raised in Fukushima, he suffered in the East Japan Earthquake of 2011. Mr. Wago has been expressing, through his poetry, what goes on in the minds of  Fukushima residents. Today, five years after the catastrophe, he described his thoughts on the Asahi Shimbun webpage. I, Fumi Kawamori, found his thoughts quite amenable, so below I share some them with you.

“When the meltdown began, I despaired that Fukushima might become a ghost prefecture, with no humans living there. So, I decided to remain here in Fukushima till I die. It was then that the poem “Radiation is coming down. A silent night,” came to my mind.

The 2011 earthquake shook and broke something within me. By then, I had already been creating poems for more than two decades, questioning the irrationalities of the human world. Still, all my creations were useless before the seismic catastrophe. Everything I saw was irrational. My imagination was unable to say anything. What we had taken for granted as “the daily” was so fragile. I was terrified!

Before the 2011 disaster, my direction in writing poems was, “let those who have ears listen and understand.” That catastrophic experience changed my direction to “let more hear of this.” Now, I want to describe the irrationalities right in front of my eyes as they are, and I want to make this post-meltdown world known to as many people as possible. What is happening here in Fukushima is an issue for the whole society. It affects individual lives as well. So, I now use very plain words. I also use some words I never used before the meltdown, such as “sorrows” and “tears.”

In the minds of many people in the affected areas, there are still some dark things remaining, left unattended—just like those black vinyl bags containing contaminated soil, piled up here and there in Fukushima. Reading a poem can expose such “dark matter.” A reader of my poems wrote to me, saying “Your poems describe precisely my resentments and sorrows, and brought me to tears.” Such dark matter must be exposed and spat out, to create some space in the mind to accommodate something new. So, our fears, anxieties and sorrows should be given shapes and shared by many. For that reason, I keep to my music and theater activities as well.

Also, presenting the same old things in the same old language will make the messages stale. Bringing up the disaster again using new language that has never been used before can make people think about it once again. For instance, I want to see as many people as possible visit and see the hard-hit areas. Still, I need a word other than “tourism.”

“Reconstruction” is a word that sounds brutal to me. It implies that the acceleration of work and good results are what is wanted. So, all our tragedies and our agonies are measured by work and results. Here in Fukushima, some 100,000 people have evacuated. Many children who lost their homes to the tsunami only recently have been able to visit the beach. So, I intend to find words to describe their current feelings and thoughts fully, day in and day out.”

---

 

The Japanese author’s feelings
Once you have decided to keep living here in Fukushima, radiation is something you just have to learn to live with. Year after year, living in this desperate situation, it has grown harder and harder to talk about radiation with people here. Thus, we have anxieties, sorrows, etc. that we cannot let out of our mouths. They are piled up in the dark of our minds.

Such “dark matter” must be spat out one way or another—shared with others. Such sharing purifies my mind—this I can say for sure, out of my own experiences.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Below: Articles from the March 26^th, 2016 editions of the Fukushima Minpo and Akahata newspapers

▼Click each image to read an English summary of the Japanese article.

On March 25^th, 2016, Shikoku Electric Power decided to decommission Unit 1 of its Ikata Nuclear Power Plant (located in Ikata, Ehime Pref., some 250 miles WSW of Osaka) this coming May. The unit would be into its 40^th year of operation in 2017. The power company has submitted a notice of the decision to decommission Unit 1 to Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. The residents around the nuclear power plant (NPP), however, are raising their voices: “The decision has come much too late. The remaining units should be decommissioned as well.”

Goliath money for Li’l David power
If Shikoku Electric wished to extend Unit 1’s operation, it would have to meet the legal requirement of submitting an application to the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA), by this September, a year before the reactor reaches its legal life of 40 years. The power company has been considering such an extension of Unit 1. However, this unit has a small power output (566,000 kW) and the extension work is estimated to cost more than JPY170 billion. Thus, the company has given up on the extension. Following the meltdown of TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi, the Japanese government set up a new regulation, stating that a reactor can operate only for up to 40 years. Under this new regulation, last spring five reactors received the verdict of decommissioning. Ikata Unit 1 has become the sixth.

Feeding 30 Goliaths—would it make sense?
The government is proposing a mix of power sources (“best mix”), which says nuclear power should supply 20 to 22% of the total power demand in FY2030. This means some 30 reactors would need to be operating then. Still, the safety measures for them are monstrous, which could prevent many reactor restarts. Consequently, this “best mix” will be nothing more than a castle in the air.

The other units
At the same time, Shikoku Electric, on the same day, March 25^th, submitted to the NRA an application for a pre-use inspection for Unit 3 of Ikata. This inspection is the final procedure to be taken before restarting a reactor. This unit “met” the new safety regulations last July. Those regulations are part of the requirements for a reactor restart. Its owner, Shikoku Electric, plans to restart Unit 3 late July, this year. The company is also considering a restart of Unit 2 as well.

After the Fukushima Daiichi meltdown, Japan’s government amended the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law and set the basic operation period of a reactor at 40 years. An extension of up to 20 years might be granted, provided the mandatory safety measures, such as flame retarding of power cables, are correctly taken. The NRA examines if such measures have been appropriately taken, in compliance with the amended legal standard, before the reactor in question can be restarted.

Money, or life?
Many of the NPP’s equipment and facilities run under severe conditions of high temperatures and pressures. Also, vibration-induced metallic fatigue and thermal fatigue make them fragile. Moreover, close to the Ikata NPP runs the “median tectonic line,” one of Japan’s greatest active faults. Its Unit 1, almost 40 years at work, simply has to be decommissioned.

Yet there is a deeper issue. Shikoku Electric decided to decommission Ikata Unit 1 for business reasons—the extension cost exceeds the estimated profit from the extended operation. It was not a safety decision. The company plans to restart Ikata Unit 3, which has “met” the amended national standard, this July.

The Japanese author’s concerns and wish
The Ohtsu District Court, listening to the plaintiff residents, made a court decision to stop Units 3 and 4 of Kansai Electric’s Takahama NPP, which were only recently restarted. The court’s decision pointed out a crucial issue about the amended national standard, which provides the justification for a reactor restart: “Though the amendment was made in response to the Fukushima Daiichi meltdown, we have yet to identify the very causes of the meltdown.” In a situation like this, restarting Ikata Unit 3 would be a downright folly. I sure hope Shikoku Electric will decommission all the units.

 

 

 

 

Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Article from the March 25^th, 2016 edition of the Asahi Shimbun newspaper

This April marks the 30^th year since one of worst nuclear power plant (NPP) accidents in history hit the Chernobyl NPP, in Ukraine. On March 23^rd, 2016, the “new shelter” (new safe confinement), currently under construction, was shown to the press.

The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), which is financing the new confinement construction, showed it to media people from many nations. The new “shelter” is expected to contain radiation for 100 years to come. Still, no one knows when the decommissioning work, including dismantling of the sarcophagus, will be done. There also are worries over how to finance ongoing maintenance and control.

Thirty years since one of the worst NPP disasters ever, at Chernobyl, the “new shelter,” now in construction, was shown to the press.

A gigantic arch standing over —
Unit 4 of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Station (NPP) exploded on April 26^th, 1986, during a test run. The explosion caused fires at the plant. During the 10 days that followed, the NPP released almost six times more radioactive substances than did TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi meltdown. The firefighting that followed the Chernobyl disaster killed more than 30 firefighters. The NPP’s surroundings are a no-go zone, even today.

Unit 4 was then sealed with a sarcophagus. The sarcophagus, however, has aged and some decay and structural collapses are presently visible in some of the walls and roof; this can result in radiation leakage. Therefore, the “new shelter”, a gigantic arch in shape, is supposed to cover the entire sarcophagus in order to contain radioactive substances. By the end of this year, the plan goes, the new confinement structure should be moved above the sarcophagus via a railway. Then, at long last, the reactor decommissioning work can begin.

A millennium to go
The new confinement, whose construction began in 2012, is estimated to cost some 1.5 billion euro. It is designed to withstand earthquakes and tornados, and to contain radioactive substances for a century to come. The specifics of the decommissioning, however, such as how to break down the sarcophagus, have yet to be determined. Another headache is how to finance the maintenance of such a gigantic structure. Moreover, the radioactive substances inside the sarcophagus, judging from their half-lives, will remain a serious threat for at least another millennium, which means they will have to build a new confinement structure at least ten times.

Thus, the decommissioning is a long and winding way, extending way far beyond the horizon.

---

 

40 years? Really??
Meanwhile, some people say decommissioning Fukushima Daiichi will take four decades or so. Is that really possible?

Mr. Hiroaki Koide, formerly an associate professor at Kyoto University’s Research Reactor Institute, says, “The most crucial issue is to how to collect the melted down nuclear fuel. Currently, we have yet to find out the condition of the fuel since neither a human nor a robot can get close to it. Probably, the only ultimate solution will be to confine the fuel under a sarcophagus.” (quoted from the Chunichi Shimbun, December 9^th, 2015)

Also, how much time, money, and how many workers will be necessary before the decommissioning is done? God alone knows.

No-human lands?
Now’ Japan’s government is lifting the evacuation orders on more municipalities around Fukushima Daiichi. Yet most of those “returning home” are elderly people. Few young ones are going home. Many are concerned, therefore, that when the decommissioning is done at long last, the surrounding areas could turn out to be empty places with no inhabitants.

The Japanese author’s concerns and wish
I am a resident in (a less contaminated area of) Fukushima. Ever since March, 2011, I have witnessed, with my own eyes and ears, how much harm radiation does.

The meltdown and its aftermath are still right here. I hope more readers will become serious about these issues. Also, I hope more people will visit Fukushima and see what is happening here.

 

 

Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Below: Article from the March 20^th, 2016 edition of the Fukushima Minpo newspaper

Experts’ opinion
Kyodo News conducted a survey with researchers in the fields of seismology and volcanology, and they discovered that almost 90% of the respondents thought Japan’s national disaster countermeasures “have not changed substantially” since the March 2011 earthquake. According to those respondents, the nation has yet to learn the lessons from the 2011 devastations.

More than 60% say it can happen again
Taking advantage of this fifth annual commemoration of the East Japan Earthquake, the questionnaire was sent to 120 researchers in the areas of seismology, active faults, and/or volcanology. Only 27 researchers responded. More than 60% of the respondents (18) said that we could have another “nuclear-earthquake complex disaster,” which is to say that a devastative complex disaster including an earthquake, tsunami, and a nuclear reactor accident could happen again someday. Also, 26 of the respondents (96%) replied that an earthquake or another disaster that far exceeds our assumptions “will happen again someday.” Some of the respondent admitted that researchers can make wrong judgments. Some respondents thought that researchers should be more involved in the general society.

---

 

The Japanese author’s concerns
Another thing worrying me about this survey is the low response rate—only 20%. The remaining 80% who received the survey did not respond—why? These researchers are expected to make scientific contributions to disaster prevention. If they avoid commenting on issues related to nuclear power, it is a serious problem.

Many people most likely think of the tragedies of Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi when they hear about “nuclear power plant accidents.” The plain fact, however, is that globally many such accidents have taken place so far, and Japan is no exception. In September 1999, at JCO’s nuclear fuel plant in Tokai Village, Ibaraki (some 60 miles NE of central Tokyo), a “criticality accident,” something theoretically impossible, did happen and killed two employees. In August 2004, the secondary piping fractured—an accident that could have been easily prevented—at Unit 3 of Kansai Electric Power’s Mihama Nuclear Power Plant (NPP), killing five subcontract workers. Moreover, criticality incidents have hit the Shika NPP and Fukushima Daiichi in the past, yet were covered up. Thus, NPP accidents are actually quite frequent. This is a plain fact that citizens should be well aware of.

Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Articles from the March 7^th, 2016 editions of the Fukushima Minpo and Akahata newspapers and from the March 9^th edition of the Asahi Shimbun newspaper)

Fukushima Daiichi workers facing fatal risks
Of the workers counteracting the meltdown at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi, a total of more than 32,000 have been exposed to 5 mSv or more of radiation, as of the end of January 2016, according to a recent finding. 5 mSv is the criterion set up by Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare for registering a worker as a victim of work-related leukemia. Anyone can tell that those workers will be exposed to even more radiation in the months to come than workers at other nuclear power plants, since they have highly dangerous jobs to do, such as inspecting the reactors’ insides, carrying used nuclear fuels out of the storage pools, etc. Since 2012, employees of TEPCO’s subsidiaries and subcontractors have been exposed to more radiation than TEPCO’s own employees have. And this gap has been ever expanding.

 

“Deadly dangerous — you go first”
Yet another fact discovered is that those non-TEPCO workers, who come to Fukushima Daiichi from TEPCO’s subcontractors and subsidiaries, have been exposed to radiation almost 4 times greater than the overall average exposure. Since almost 90% of all the workers are from outside TEPCO, their total exposure dose together reached some 30 times above the average. This is obvious evidence that the power company pushes more dangerous jobs to non-TEPCO workers.

 

Needed yet mistreated
Ever since Fukushima Daiichi began to melt down, countless workers have come and gone. Especially, in those areas with high radiation, many workers reach their legal limit of accumulative exposure in only three months of work or so and leave the nuclear power plant (NPP). Furthermore, those workers, exposed to all the dangers, are not receiving compensation worthy of their risks. On the average, they receive only JPY 200,000 or so, which is below what some of the decontamination workers outside the NPP receive. Thus, many NPP workers are voicing their dissatisfaction. Now, experts say that decommissioning Fukushima Daiichi will take four decades or so. Where can a sufficient workforce come from to handle 40 years of highly dangerous work?

 

In conclusion
Fukushima Daiichi is currently cooled and quiet, but only because workers there are risking their health and lives to keep it cooled. All of us must show our gratitude and respect to them.

At the same time, the Japanese government should establish a decent compensation system for all those workers who risk their own health to save the rest of us. Such a compensation system should cover the years following those workers’ retirements as well.

Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Articles from the March 10^th, 2016 editions of the Asahi Shimbun, Fukushima Minpo, and Akahata newspapers

Sorry, no English summary of the Japanese articles is available.

The court’s ruling
29 residents of Shiga Prefecture, right next to Fukui Prefecture where Kansai Electric Power’s Takahama Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) is located, filed an appeal at the Ohtsu District Court to suspend the operation of Units 3 and 4 of the NPP which were restarted in January and February of this year. The chief judge, Yoshihiko Yamamoto, gave a provisional ruling, suspending the two units’ operations. The judge brought up questions concerning the NPP’s countermeasures to protect against earthquakes and tsunami. He also questioned the escape plans for residents in the NPP’s vicinity, pointing out that the causes of the Fukushima Daiichi meltdown have yet to be identified. He judged that Kansai Electric’s proof of the NPP’s safety is insufficient.

 

The result
The ruling took effect immediately. Of the two units in question, Unit 4 was already out of operation due to a technical problem. Thus, Kansai Electric has to stop the operation of Unit 3 on March 10^th. At the same time, the power company plans to file an objection to the ruling and request a stay of execution at the same court. Unless this objection and/or the request are admitted, the court’s ruling to suspend the two units’ operations will remain legally valid.

 

Responsibility of the operator
The court’s ruling holds that the operator of a NPP has the responsibility to prove its safety, since the operator possesses the relevant data. If the operator is unable to give sufficient proof of safety, one can justly suppose that the operator’s judgments may be faulty.

 

The judge said —
The judge also pointed out that, considering how serious the meltdown of TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi has been, a major NPP accident can cause environmental disasters whose affects go beyond national borders. This can more than offset any energy efficiency a NPP might produce. Thus, according to the judge, NPP safety standards should be strict enough to prevent an accident, even if some safety measures are considered extreme. The judge went on to say that the starting point of future safety standards, i.e., the causes of Fukushima Daiichi’s meltdown, “have yet to be identified.” In spite of this, the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) has set up new safety standards for NPPs. The judge said that he was “seriously worried” about the NRA’s attitude and “reluctant to believe that the NRA’s new safety standards and examinations are good enough to secure the peace and safety of society.”

 

Safety measures declared insufficient
Then, the judge described the court’s decision with respect to the severe accident prevention measures at the Takahama NPP. As a power company designs earthquake-proof buildings, it assumes standard earthquake motions. With respect to such motions, the judge decided that the active fault lengths that Kansai Electric Power assumed were inaccurate. This inaccuracy led to insufficient earthquake-proof designs, according to the judge. He also brought up, as a piece of evidence throwing doubt on the sufficiency of Kansai Electric’s countermeasures, literature reporting on the Tensho Earthquake of 1586, which caused devastation from a tsunami to the Wakasa Region, which includes Takahama, The judge went on to say that, even under the new safety standards, the cooling systems of water pools storing used nuclear fuel are more vulnerable to earthquakes than reactors are. Thus, the judge claimed, Kansai Electric did not have good countermeasures to protect against damage to such a pool which could lead to the leakage of cooling water.

 

A brave judge
The judge also brought up the escape plans prepared by the municipalities around the Takahama NPP and said that, “We have an urgent need to prepare specific escape plans under the initiative of the national government.” He also said, “We need a more comprehensive regulatory standard that covers such new escape plans as well. Japan’s national government today has the obligation, under the principle of faith and trust, to define such a new standard.” Thus he criticized the national government, which has been promoting NPP restarts under the existing safety regulations – something unusual for a court judge to do.

 

Right to live in peace
The plaintiffs in this court case, who live within 30 to 70 km (19 to 44 miles) of the Takahama NPP, claimed that a serious accident at the NPP would violate their personal right to live in peace and with good health. The court ruling agreed that such a violation would be highly probable in the case of a serious accident.

 

Takahama’s own weakness
As you know, at Fukushima Daiichi, they cooled down the reactor cores with a gigantic volume of water, and stored the contaminated water in tanks within the NPP’s premises. In contrast, Takahama has very limited premises, which cannot accommodate many huge water tanks. In the case of a meltdown or another serious accident, how can they take countermeasures given the limited premises? To aggravate the matter, there are not many escape routes available to the residents around Takahama. If a major earthquake hits, rescue vehicles would experience difficulties reaching their destinations.

 

The Japanese author’s wish
Now, five years after the meltdown began at Fukushima Daiichi, the Ohtsu District Court’s ruling precisely pointed out deficiencies in existing safety measures of NPPs. We must not let another Fukushima tragedy happen. I am convinced, therefore, that the NRA and the power companies have to face the problems pointed out by the court and respond with integrity.

Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Articles from the March 4^th, 2016 editions of the Asahi Shimbun, Fukushima Minpo, and Akahata newspapers

▼Click each image to read an English summary of the Japanese article.

Faulty faults
Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority’s Survey Team of Experts has concluded that “the geological fault right under Unit 1 of Hokuriku Electric Power’s Shika Nuclear Power Plan (NPP) should rationally be considered as an active fault.” Last summer, the team’s draft decision said that the possibility of it being active could not be ruled out. Thus, the team’s final decision has been made.

In the coming months, the Authority’s examination meetings should discuss the decommissioning of Shika’s Unit 1. The Survey Team’s decision is to be treated as “an important expert opinion” and, unless Hokuriku Electric Power disproves it with sufficient new data, Unit 1 should be decommissioned.

Right below the NPP —
Especially problematic are three geological faults on the premises. Fault S-1, which runs right under Unit 1, has finally been determined to be an “active fault that can possibly move the ground.” As for the other two, named S-2 and S-6, which run right under the turbine buildings of Units 1 and 2, the Team determined that “though their gaps do not reach the surface, there is a possibility that they were active some 120,000 to 13,000 years ago.”

And faulty examinations
The Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) has been examining the sites of six NPPs, which its predecessor, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, asked it to continue, with expert examination of the active faults existing on the NPP premises. The NRA pointed out that one or more active faults could exist on the premises of Shika’s Units 1 and 2, Unit 2 of The Japan Atomic Power Company’s Tsuruga NPP, and Unit 1 of Tohoku Electric Power’s Higashidori NPP. These problems should have been discovered before those NPPs were built. We can naturally assume that the pre-construction examinations were faulty.

The safety examinations of Shika’s Unit 1 were conducted in 1987 and 1988, by the former Ministry of International Trade and Industry and the former Nuclear Safety Commission. Hokuriku Electric Power then conducted its own additional examination for geological faults. The Survey Team used drawings prepared by that additional examination to detect active faults. Some sections of the survey showed a suspicion of active faults. This suspicion, however, seems to have been ignored. We can therefore question whether or not the safety examinations were conducted fairly and correctly. It is noteworthy that the former Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency remained reluctant to verify the safety examination results.

～Comment by Dr. Kazuya Kodama, secretary general of “Genpatsu Mondai Jumin Undo Ishikawa-ken Renraku Center (Ishikawa Prefecture Communications Center, Citizens’ Anti-Nuke Movements)”～ This conclusion explicitly states that the faults in question can be active, and describes the Survey Team’s examination in detail. Hokuriku Electric cannot disprove the possibility of active faults, even if it provides more data. The power company has no other choice but to accept the conclusion and decommission its Shika NPP. The conclusion declared Unit 1 to be inoperable since it has an active fault right below it. Unit 2 has active faults as well, running below its turbine building and the piping that collects cooling water, two important facilities. Repairing them to restart the unit would be a waste of money. Instead, Hokuriku Electric would better spend its money and technologies on the development and spread of natural energies. Hokuriku Electric is advised to go nuclear-free, becoming the first company to do so among Japan’s nine power companies with a NPP. That is the wisest choice. I am determined to let the citizens of Ishikawa know the Survey Team’s conclusion in order to accelerate their call for NPP decommissioning.

The Japanese author’s wish
Units 1 and 2 of the Shika NPP have been out of operation since shortly before the meltdown of TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi. So far, however, Hokuriku Electric has experienced no major problem in supplying power. Also, the company owns huge hydraulic power plants. Therefore, spending more money on the Shika NPP, whose restart is now very questionable, would be nothing but a waste of money.

I also hope the NRA will make correct and fair decisions based on scientific knowledge. If it allows a restart that ignores an active fault on the very premises of the NPP, the safety regulations of NPPs will be rendered meaningless.

Shika NPP This NPP was built by Hokuriku Electric Power in the town of Shika, Ishikawa Pref. (160 miles north of Nagoya), on the Noto Peninsula facing the Japan Sea. The NPP accommodates two boiling water reactors (BWRs), the type of reactors also employed in Fukushima Daiichi. Unit 1’s operation began in 1993, with an output of 540,000 kW, followed by Unit 2 in 2006, whose output was 1,358,000 kW. In 1999, Unit 1 experienced a critical accident caused by an operational error. The power company concealed it until 2007, when the accident was discovered. Even after that, at Unit 1 some accidents involving the control rods occurred. The whole NPP has been out of operation since a regular checkup in March 2011. This plant’s premises are surrounded by many active faults. One of them, named “Fukura Fault,” is around 1 km (0.6 mile) away from the NPP. The power company refused to admit that Fukura is active, until 2013.

Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Article from the February 28^th, 2016 edition of the Asahi Shimbun newspaper

▼Click the image to read an English summary of the Japanese article.

The power companies do not disclose the cost of “uranium oxide fuel” (as distinct from mixed oxides [MOX]) either, yet the same calculation described above obtains an average uranium fuel cost of JPY 118.73 million in July, 1998. The average price slightly diminished to JPY 102.59 million in October, 2013. The MOX imported in June of the same year carried a price tag almost 9 times larger.

MOX as a luxury
Japan’s Ministry of Finance’s trade statistics and some other sources have shown that a mixed oxide (MOX) fuel of plutonium and uranium, made by reprocessing used uranium fuel, is almost nine times pricier than a uranium-only fuel. Kansai Electric Power recently restarted Units 3 and 4 of its Takahama Nuclear Power Plant (located in Fukui, Japan, some 45 miles NNW of Kyoto), using MOX fuel. Takahama’s MOX fuel cost some JPY 900 million apiece.

 

Makes no economic sense
Japan’s government is insistent on its nuclear fuel cycle policy, which reuses plutonium extracted from used uranium fuel. One major reason for this is to stop the buildup of plutonium generated in reactors. Japan possesses some 47.8 ton (105,381 lb.) of plutonium, which can be used to build nuclear weapons. The nation’s nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities are underdeveloped, however, and now it has become evident that nuclear fuel recycling makes no economic sense.

 

Broken scheme
No single MOX fuel consumes much plutonium, therefore, MOX production is not an efficient way to consume our abhorrent stock of plutonium. Also, pricey fuels certainly increase the power bills we pay. Prof. Ken’ichi Oshima of Ritsumeikan University, an expert in ecological economics, points out, “Recycling should bring down the cost. The plain fact with MOX fuels is just the opposite. They are a luxury and make no economic sense. In short, the Japanese government is insistent on a policy that is bankrupt both economically and technically. And the people will eventually have to pay for it.”

 

Doomed fuels
Originally, MOX fuel was meant for use in a fast breeder reactor (FBR). Yet the prototype FBR, Monju (also located in Fukui Pref.) has never run successfully long enough to make sense. Thus, the national government has switched to using MOX fuels in thermal (common) light water reactors. Japan’s major power companies estimate that using MOX fuels at 16 to 18 NPP reactors should consume some 6 tons (13,228 lb.) of plutonium each year. Still, the used nuclear fuel reprocessing plant and MOX fuel processing plant, located in Rokkasho, Aomori Pref. (some 406 miles NNE of Tokyo) are way behind schedule and have yet to operate. To aggravate the issue, the fuel processing plant is incapable of processing used MOX fuel. Thus, no one knows what to do with such used fuel.

 

Recycling plutonium – and wasting money
The Japan Atomic Energy Commission of Japan’s Cabinet Office, in 2012, announced an estimated cost for the nation’s nuclear fuel recycling. It admitted that the “once through” system, which buries used nuclear fuels without reprocessing them, costs less money than does recycling used fuel’s plutonium, regardless of the ratio of nuclear power in the future power source portfolio.

---

 

Article from the March 3^rd, 2016 edition of the Asahi Shimbun newspaper
▼Click the image to read an English summary of the Japanese article.

Burial in the US
The US government has decided to give up on the building of the MOX fuel plant, which had been underway in South Carolina. Though the plan originally meant to use plutonium collected from discarded nuclear weapons in power generation, the plan costs some USD 40 billion, which is a terrible economic burden. As an alternative, the government is now considering a “water down and bury” disposal plan, which first mixes plutonium with some other substances and then buries the mixture.

And in the UK too?
The tough issues the US experienced shows that plutonium is too expensive for any commercial use. The US government’s decision to bury plutonium underground for cost savings should affect the rest of the world. The UK, which possesses some 100 tons (220,462 lb.) of plutonium, is actually considering such burial as well, though it claims to be using the plutonium in MOX fuels.

 

Hanging on to the dead —
Thus, the world stands at the threshold of an “age of burying plutonium.” Japan, running against the trend, is trying to build a reprocessing plant to use plutonium. The nation already has almost 50 tons (110,231 lb.) of the deadly element, while its FBR (fast breeder reactor) dream has already proven to be nothing but a fancy. What we really need to do now is to look straight at the fact that the planned nuclear fuel recycling makes no economic sense, and then reconsider the nation’s nuclear power policy.

Nowhere to pull out to?
One reason why Japan cannot pull out of the proposed nuclear fuel recycling is, once the recycling is given up, no NPP in the nation can work. Under the recycling plan, the used fuel, currently kept in water pools within NPPs, is treated as a “resource.” If recycling is abandoned, such fuel simply turns into “garbage.” Unless some new places for the disposal of used fuel are found, the water pools within NPPs would soon be full of such garbage. This disposal problem makes the government hold on to the fancy of “recycling all used nuclear fuel.”

Still, the plain fact, proven worldwide, is that such recycling is simply not feasible. Every citizen should be concerned with energy issues. The nation must find the right way to deal with existing nuclear fuel and reduce the risks and burdens accompanying such fuel.

Original Japanese written by  staffer
The English below written and arranged by Heeday, based on the original Japanese
The English edited by Rev. Dr. Henry French, ELCA

Article from the February 23^rd, 2016 edition of the Asahi Shimbun newspaper

▼Click the image to read an English summary of the Japanese article.

Almost five years have passed —
Today, here in Fukushima, we see more parents and children than before at supermarkets buying food produced in Fukushima. We see children’s clothing swinging and drying beside windows. (Hanging washed clothes to dry them is a common practice in Japan.) Still, some 70,000 people, by government order, are living as refugees. For many of them, life is simply not the same since the meltdown. Moreover, troubling issues experienced by the citizens of Fukushima never seem to be resolved.

A mother in agony
Such an issue that causes real agony for a 40-year-old mother, who moved with her husband and child into Koriyama from a coastal region of Fukushima shortly after the meltdown began, has to do with school lunches. Her 11-year-old daughter, a fifth grader, has to take her packed lunch out of her school bag, while some of her class mates serve other children the school provided meal (a common practice at many elementary schools in Japan). Even though the ingredients used in the meals provided by the schools, if they are produced in Fukushima, have passed radioactivity inspections, her mother is deeply worried over the daughter’s health and prepares a packed lunch for her every day.

Issues in the daughter’s class
The daughter has learned to eat the lunch prepared by her mother, saying “I don’t mind having a lunch different from that of my classmates sitting next to me.” Still, she knows that some of her classmates are whispering among themselves: “Is she emotionally sick, avoiding the school meal?” Her classmates used to be good friends, but they will not speak to her now. Says her mother, “Someday, my daughter might fall sick. I am overwhelmed by fear.”

One staffer at Fukushima Prefecture’s board of education has said, “Some, not many, school children carry their packed lunch to school. Some kids wear a mask when they run at a school athletic festival. Different people have different ideas about radiation, and we cannot push our beliefs onto them.”

 

Article from the February 21^st, 2016 edition of the Fukushima Minpo newspaper
▼Click the image to read an English summary of the Japanese article.

Worries still persist
As the chart in the article above shows, since shortly after the 2011 disaster, school meals in Fukushima Prefecture have gradually been using more farm products from the prefecture. Still, a certain mother of an elementary student, resident in Koriyama, has never bought any food produced in Fukushima since the 2011 disaster. She is even hesitant with foods from northern Kanto (just south of Fukushima). Though she lets her child eat school meals, it is simply because she cannot find a practical alternative. Today, five years after the meltdown began, this mother is still worried over food safety. She said she is determined to avoid made-in-Fukushima foods.

She is not alone
Here in Fukushima, countless mothers are worried about radiation, with no one to talk to about their worries. One way or another, a mother’s anxiety will inevitably affect her family and children. Using ingredients from Fukushima can show the world that the prefecture is rebuilding, yet the worries of countless mothers must not be ignored.

Fukushima Minpo has reported on many other troubles caused by the meltdown. Some couples broke up when the mother and her children evacuated alone. Some mothers received compensation for damages suffered, while some of their neighbors did not. Naturally, those neighbors express their anger at those who received compensation.

Professor Sung Won-Cheol of Chukyo University and his fellows have continuously conducted a survey, targeted at mothers having a child between 1 and 2 years of age, since shortly after the meltdown began. The survey covers 9 municipalities in Fukushima Prefecture, including Fukushima City.

In the 2015 survey, almost a half of the respondents, some 1,200 in number, said they were worried over their children (living in Fukushima). Some 30% of the respondents replied with either “Applies” or “Somehow applies” to the question, “Do you avoid foods produced in Fukushima Prefecture?” This ratio shows a sharp decline from the more than 80% who responded that way half a year after the 2011 disaster. About governmental compensation for damages, more than 70% replied that they have experienced some unfairness. Says Prof. Sung, “Everyone has his/her own response to radiation anxieties, and it is hard to counteract. There should at least be some measures to prevent the complaints of some victims from turning into insults directed at those who have received compensation.”

 

The Japanese author’s wish
Childhood experiences play a crucial role in the development of a child’s mind. In Fukushima and vicinity, radiation is badly affecting the childhoods of many children. Before it is too late, we need to restore an environment wherein parents can take care of their kids in peace.