Science/Environment Japan Prime Minister vows nuclear-free future

[Dont be a lemon]

After the March 11 quake and tsunami triggered the nuclear accident that left radiation leaking into air, soil and sea, Mr Kan said the country must reduce its reliance on atomic power with the goal of eventually becoming nuclear-free.

"The large-scale, long-running nuclear accident has triggered radiation leakage, causing serious concerns not only in Japan but also in the world," Mr Kan said at a memorial ceremony in Hiroshima's Peace Park.

"I will deeply reflect on nuclear power's 'myth of safety', investigate thoroughly the causes of the accident and fundamental measures to secure safety, as well as reduce the dependence on nuclear power plants and aim for a 'society that does not depend on nuclear power plants," he added.

More: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-06/japan-pm-vows-nuclear-free-future/2827338

What a pinko.

 

[Fire]

Whilst I found the wave of misinformation spread by the right that downplayed the danger of this nuclear incident disgusting, I think those on the green left should be shitting themselves with this news.

I suspect a case of 'be careful what you wish for' comiang up.

 

[rayven]

You don't know what your talking about fire, it would appear you don't know what anti nuclear protestors have been saying for decades, therefor your high horse mentality is actualy quite silly.

They actualy wished against the position we find ourselfs in with our reliance on fossil fuels.

 

[Fire]

You don't know what your talking about fire, it would appear you don't know what anti nuclear protestors have been saying for decades, therefor your high horse mentality is actualy quite silly.

They actualy wished against the position we find ourselfs in with our reliance on fossil fuels.

Against Hydro, against nuclear, for nothing.

The green position on energy has always been a substances contrary "no", of the like that would make Tony Abbot look like a visionary.

 

[blackcat]

does Japan have the largest energy deficit in the developed economies on % and numerical metric? I thought they did, so this rhetoric is just politics, til there are genuine alternatives.

I may be personally against nuclear, but I well understand the practicality and this tension that exists.

 

[jonoman89]

Cool, more global warming.

Hope the greenies are happy.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Cool, more global warming.

Hope the greenies are happy.

This comment makes no sense whatsoever.

I suspect in the short term Japan may try to bolster their energy requirements with coal or gas which are both associated with various negative environmental impacts.

Hopefully though this can be seen as an opportunity for Japan to truly embrace renewable resources and perhaps begin to truly exploit current technologies that are available.

 

[Saints_Supporter]

This comment makes no sense whatsoever.

I suspect in the short term Japan may try to bolster their energy requirements with coal or gas which both have negative environmental impacts.

Hopefully though this can be seen as an opportunity for Japan to truly embrace renewable resources and perhaps begin to truly exploit current technologies that are available.

I certainly hope that Japan keeps it nuclear power and that Australia adopts nuclear power in the near future.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

I certainly hope that Japan keeps it nucleus power and that Australia adopts nucleus power in the near future.

The word is nuclear.

You are definitely a troll.

 

[Saints_Supporter]

The word is nuclear.

You are definitely a troll.

Whoops spelling mistake!

 

[Breeder Reactor]

This comment makes no sense whatsoever.

I suspect in the short term Japan may try to bolster their energy requirements with coal or gas which are both associated with various negative environmental impacts.

Hopefully though this can be seen as an opportunity for Japan to truly embrace renewable resources and perhaps begin to truly exploit current technologies that are available.

I laughed out loud and continue to do so.



"renewable energy"

Look up the total power consumption that Japan uses and ask yourself if it can be replaced with "renewable" energy? Then weep.

I'm still laughing.

Edit: Perhaps google the following.

EIR The Astounding High Cost of `Free' Energy.

Being this is Chief's play pen, i will not post the link. I'm not allowed based a past experience.

Advantage per unit weight of Uranium ...[4]
... over Wood: 11.5 million times
... over Coal: 3.0 million times[5]
... over Petroleum: 2.2 million times

 

[DivideandMultiply]

I laughed out loud and continue to do so.



"renewable energy"

Look up the total power consumption that Japan uses and ask yourself if it can be replaced with "renewable" energy? Then weep.

I'm still laughing.

Edit: Perhaps google the following.

EIR The Astounding High Cost of `Free' Energy.

Being this is Chief's play pen, i will not post the link. I'm not allowed based a past experience.

Advantage per unit weight of Uranium ...[4]
... over Wood: 11.5 million times
... over Coal: 3.0 million times[5]
... over Petroleum: 2.2 million times

Piss off twit.

I am well aware of Japans energy requirements, the historical economic factors that drove the usage of nuclear energy in Japan and why it is probably still the best option (excluding the potentially severe safety and political hazard it poses) and never claimed they could replace all or even close to their total needs via renewable resources. At least in the short to mid term.

What it may mean is that the "construction state" turns some of the vast resources it spends on public infrastructure projects (many unneeded or unnecessary) towards an area which may have a positive impact not only internally via helping to create an internal market which may drive innovation and therefore have a bleed on effect into exportable technologies, potentially helping their economy in the long term but also the world at large.

Heck no country, including China has really even fully exploited many current technologies we have at our disposal.

If any country outside of China has the capacity to really drive "green" energy technologies it is Japan.

 

[Breeder Reactor]

Piss off twit.

I am well aware of Japans energy requirements, the historical economic factors that drove the usage of nuclear energy in Japan and why it is probably still the best option (excluding the potentially severe safety and political hazard it poses) and never claimed they could replace all or even close to their total needs via renewable resources. At least in the short to mid term.

What it may mean is that the "construction state" turns some of the vast resources it spends on public infrastructure projects (many unneeded or unnecessary) towards an area which may have a positive impact not only internally via helping to create an internal market which may drive innovation and therefore have a bleed on effect into exportable technologies, potentially helping their economy in the long term but also the world at large.

Heck no country, including China has really even fully exploited many current technologies we have at our disposal.

If any country outside of China has the capacity to really drive "green" energy technologies it is Japan.

"Twit"

Good day to you sunshine

What are Japan's energy requirements? You didn't answer? You claim you to be aware. Let's use them as a benchmark to factor in "renewable" energy potential.

Read the article i posted via google.

Then tell me these wonderful almighty "green" technologies that should be worthy of consideration?

 

[jonoman89]

This comment makes no sense whatsoever.

I suspect in the short term Japan may try to bolster their energy requirements with coal or gas which are both associated with various negative environmental impacts.

Hopefully though this can be seen as an opportunity for Japan to truly embrace renewable resources and perhaps begin to truly exploit current technologies that are available.

In the short term? Yes. You keep telling yourself that.

 

[blackcat]

question should be about the mitigation of economic externality, and to funnel this insurance cost, into alternative energy research. The Danish speaker who came out here to shill a book, had a simple plan, which on the surface seemed logical. That is a one minute soundbite, not 36 months of economic research drilling. I know it aint zero sum, well, not in the way that if they decommission a reactor, the insurance [externalities]costs persist with live spent fuel, promising to melt down. So cant just throw all the money at alternative research and picking nose, err, mean picking winners.

But u cant insure reactors. U cant insure for terrorism.

Pretty clear, the "greatest policy challenge of our time" cya later heavy kevvie, will be solved by Wall St bankers and Chinese instos, and the big ReInsurers. On that level, it will be solved, but not before a bit of pain like of pain like Richie ArtnCraft's HellFire club.

Dont know why Rudd could not see it and communicate it on a political level, and still define it as the greatest challenge. Hubris I presume.

Hey Meds and the neoLibs and Austrians, how do you like the Gov't underwriting reactor insurance, and the potential writ large decommisioning of the Fukushima precinct for 50 odd miles radius? Massive cost borne by taxpayer.

How is this different from non-user pays, fuzzy economics of a program like the NBN. Note: I did refrain from using Nation Building buzzword. I think there needs those IPA w***ers talking about nuclear in externality costs also. Those IPA mupppets pick and choose their externatilities and cost benefits when it suits.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

This comment makes no sense whatsoever.

I suspect in the short term Japan may try to bolster their energy requirements with coal or gas which are both associated with various negative environmental impacts.

Hopefully though this can be seen as an opportunity for Japan to truly embrace renewable resources and perhaps begin to truly exploit current technologies that are available.

Wishful thinking.

Solar thermal is the most promising renewable technology, not something Japan can really invest a whole lot of money into. Wind, photovoltaic Solar, Tidal can't replace fossil fuels and nuclear. Their best bet is geo thermal.

 

[Qsaint]

Wishful thinking.

Solar thermal is the most promising renewable technology, not something Japan can really invest a whole lot of money into. Wind, photovoltaic Solar, Tidal can't replace fossil fuels and nuclear. Their best bet is geo thermal.

Solar thermal is rubbish they can't stabilize the salt at 300 Degrees and the pipes corrode very quickly they can't get a working prototype, the latest attempt in Spain is not looking promising. Nuclear hot rocks may work in Australia but I don't think Japan has any viable sites, Japan does have a few other geothermal sites but nothing that will replace a nuclear generator. They will have to replace the nuclear power with Russian or Australian gas , or god forbid coal

To the joker who think renewables can replace any major proportion of the Japanese power supply they have no space or technology.

 

[Saints_Supporter]

Nuclear power is an option all countries should begin to adopted.

 

[blackcat]

If Japan was not under the yoke of the yanks, then perhaps they would shift the default fissile material to thorium? boffins?

but my very superficial understanding of it, yanks = depleted uranium stock for arms industry -> defacto mineral = uranium.

Thorium is not considered because of its inability to create the by-product for the weapons to kill some iraqi on the highway of death. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death

 

[DivideandMultiply]

To the joker who think renewables can replace any major proportion of the Japanese power supply they have no space or technology.

Now I didn't say that, at least not in the short term.

Gas as I already said would be the most likely.

As for the last part how would you know?

Currently 38 of Japans 54 reactors are still off line.

Power conservation being the main contributor to maintaining this situation.

As for the "no space or technology" for the last half a decade researchers have been designing and testing hybrid offshore platforms combining wind, solar and in some cases tidal generators.

For an example:

http://www.renewablesinternational.net/japan-develops-hybrid-offshore-platform/150/537/31524/

TEPCO is planning to test a new design for a 2,000 kilowatt floating turbine next year off the coast of Chiba.

There are currently a few off shore wind farms, which notably fared very well during the tsunami.

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110412f3.html

Wind power itself only accounts for approximately 2.19 million kilowatts of Japans overall power consumption. Not much, but government plans before the disaster in Fukushima were to augment the once 23.5% of power generated by nuclear power with some 10 million kilowatts of wind generated power (much of it off shore) by 2020. This is the equivalent of about 10 of the currently 38 off line reactors.

Now nothing specific but I expect one possibility is that they will push forward the timetable and expand the scope somehwat.

In the interim, if gas takes up the slack then sadly so be it.

But for you and the idiots above, who argue they have no options, means or space to augment their current power needs with renewables in the future, do your research before mouthing off.

 

[Qsaint]

They have no options because currently

1 wind and solar cost north of $200 kwh to generate

2 unreliable renewables can only make up 15% of power generations as they fluctuate wildly in actual power generated

So Japan is left with coal, gas or nuclear

 

[DivideandMultiply]

They have no options because currently

1 wind and solar cost north of $200 kwh to generate

2 unreliable renewables can only make up 15% of power generations as they fluctuate wildly in actual power generated

So Japan is left with coal, gas or nuclear

Oh really?

Well according to the Tokyo Metropolitan Governments - Tokyo Renewable Energy Strategy (authored in 2006), over this current decade they are transitioning from sub 5% levels (as low as 2.7% in 2003) to 20% by 2020.

Tokyo Metropolitan Government has a constituency of nearly 40 million people, roughly 1/3 of Japans population (though I suspect would account for far more than 33% of Japans total power consumption).

So that is an increase to 20% of total power generation via renewables finished over the next 8 and a half years for the Tokyo Metropolitan Area (nuclear only accounts for 23% nationally).

The point was to decrease reliance on imported fossil fuels/gas and to reduce emissions. If LNG use increases in the short term (TEPCO has increased usage by 18.7% since this time last year), then over the next decade as nuclear power is phased out there is no reason, at least in Tokyo, why renewables cannot take up a substantial part of the slack.

The federal government also have a marine renewable energy strategy which encompasses (as mentioned in my previous post) a substantial increase in the usage of off shore wind power, that would account for 10 of the off line reactors by the end of the decade.

This stuff about "no options" is absolute bullshit. Not only do they have options, but the means of augmenting their additional power requirements via renewables (substantially) was already under way. Though for different reasons.

What I would expect is that a) they push forward the timeline and scope of these projects, b) increase LNG usage and c) keep many of the reactors that are off line now, off line permanently. The Japanese public, Tokyo in particular, has proven very adept at power saving.

There are also proposals being put forward by serious academics/former members of cabinet etc., for ideas such as a solar economic zone which would see the energy mix transfer to 10% nuclear, 25% coal and oil, 15% LNG and 30% renewable by the end of the decade.

As for costs per megawatt hour, wind power usually has lower costs than nuclear power (off shore is comparable depending on country). This does not even include the ridiculous initial outlay costs (due to inflation) and insurance requirements that new nuclear power plants currently incur.

 

[Qsaint]

No wind or solar is cheaper than nuclear ever that's a guava myth. With hydros they could go to 20 % very expensivelybut the question as always to the misguided renewable energy proponents, what is the baselOad provider and what is providing the other 80%? So really all Japan will do is increase emissions with greeny toys.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

No wind or solar is cheaper than nuclear ever that's a guava myth. With hydros they could go to 20 % very expensivelybut the question as always to the misguided renewable energy proponents, what is the baselOad provider and what is providing the other 80%? So really all Japan will do is increase emissions with greeny toys.

The only recent study that agrees with you was a UK study by Parsons Brinckerhoff which ignored government subsidies, outlay and insurance costs (for nuclear power).

This is opposed to several other studies where the costs have been found to be comparable (offshore wind power) or cheaper (onshore).

All this BS about "baseload" etc. is not relavent to the issue. What the Japanese need to do over the next decade is account for some 20% of their annual requirements, which is well within their capacity. They will always take a multi pronged approach, preferring diversity over one source or solution which is why this is do-able.

As I have clearly outlined, even before the Fukashima disaster they were looking to drastically increase power generated from renewable sources to near the required levels, unfortunately keeping the reactors offline means a continued dependence on LNG in the short term.

Based on the comment above though it seems you have nothing to add except for poor grammar and hot air.

 

[rayven]

What the Japs doing to reduce there need for energy? surely thats the cheapest and most sensible option to adress the problem they have?

What are they also doing to curb there population, again another viable option?