national

Kyushu Electric to halt 2 reactors due to delay in anti-terrorism step

9 Comments

Kyushu Electric Power Co will halt two reactors next year due to a delay in implementing anti-terrorism measures required by regulators, in the first such suspension under stricter rules set after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear crisis.

The power company said it will shut down the Nos. 1 and 2 reactors at the Sendai nuclear power plant in Kagoshima Prefecture in March and May and plans to restart them in December and January 2021 respectively after the installation of necessary facilities.

Under tighter requirements introduced in 2013 by the Nuclear Regulation Authority, nuclear plant operators are required to build facilities that are able to maintain nuclear reactors cooling via remote control and prevent the massive release of radioactive materials, even if the units come under terrorist attacks such as planes being flown into them.

In April the regulator had refused the company's request to postpone the deadlines for the completion of the facilities' construction -- March 17 for the No. 1 and May 21 for the No. 2. The two units will be temporarily closed the day before the deadline dates.

Kyushu Electric estimates the suspension of the two reactors will raise costs by 8 billion yen a month, since the company would need to offset the resulting shortage of power generation with gas-fired power plants.

The No.1 reactor has been temporarily halted for regular inspection. Kyushu Electric plans to reboot it in early November, before halting it four months later.

All reactors in Japan were suspended after the Fukushima disaster in March 2011. The government introduced the new rules to resume nuclear power generation, as it aims to have nuclear power provide 20 to 22 percent of the country's electricity in 2030.

© KYODO

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

9 Comments
Login to comment

Where are the measures to introduce solar panels on office buildings?

Kyushu has almost unlimited potential for geothermal energy-Why isn’t it being exploited?

Mitsubishi has already developed tidal power generation-why is it not being utilized?

Costs of 8 billion yen a month will be passed to the end user.

What a complete ripoff is the energy business in Japan!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

kurisupisuToday  06:56 am JST

Where are the measures to introduce solar panels on office buildings?

Because it is NOT profitable for shareholders and top executives.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The energy business is for profit — not for the public good.

TEPCO offers salaries much higher than even top-tier companies, and enjoys a monopoly. Kyushu Electric is no different. Retirement packages are multiples of ordinary companies.

The ¥8 billion is inflated 10x reality, assumes a premium on everything bought, and more than likely to include executive bonuses and other perks. Nuclear energy is an easy out for power generators, and after the not guilty vote in Tokyo last month, a safe one for them.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Kyushu Power are also required to improve their nuclear plants against the volcanic ash from an eruption. Like other power companies they have invested in renewable energy but does not equal to the output of two reactors at 2GW.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@ kurisupisu Where are... Why...?

There are many more texts by scientists who now what there are talking about but here's the gist:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciStnd9Y2ak

0 ( +0 / -0 )

On a roadtrip (you know, no destination, no maps) I came across the Sendai Plant and drove around a bit to check it out. Within seconds, I was shadowed by a police car.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Since1981, yes you are right, though the “profits” are illusory as the real long term cost of the current version of nuclear power is borne by the public purse (in every country not just Japan). If the company had to bear the cost of decommissioning and long term storage and safe disposal, even at the current inflated prices they would go bankrupt. If they had to compete in an open and unsubsidised market they would never get built.

If you want to decarbonise your electricity supply then nuclear does have a place, but not the intrinsically unsafe antiquated 1950/60’s technology currently being used and built which was primarily designed to produce weapons grade materials for bomb making. The alternative tech, known at the time, was ignored or had its budgets cut so we are only now starting to re look at them.

The other problem with current reactors is they are inefficient, they only burn about 5% of the fuel leaving a very high and long half life residue (if 95% can be called a residue) for untold generations to come to deal with.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Since1981, yes you are right, though the “profits” are illusory as the real long term cost of the current version of nuclear power is borne by the public purse (in every country not just Japan). If the company had to bear the cost of decommissioning and long term storage and safe disposal, even at the current inflated prices they would go bankrupt.

What you point out is true of just about everything - from plastic bottles and straws to solar panels. The costs of disposal, or environmental recovery in some cases, is simply passed on to the public. It should be priced in at sale, and reverse logistics that address the disposal and handling after use should be mapped out. It's one of the few places where I think regulation can help - if the people who made the regulation weren't mostly crooked.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If the company had to bear the cost of decommissioning and long term storage and safe disposal, even at the current inflated prices they would go bankrupt. If they had to compete in an open and unsubsidised market they would never get built.

The total costs of decommissioning a reactor have to be paid by the power company under international law and agreements. About 20 reactors will be licensed for decommissioning. Before a license is issued the power company must show the total funds needed to complete the work and the funds placed into separate accounts so even if the company were to go bankrupt the funds for the decommissioning would still be available. This law/rule applies to all countries.

The cost of storage must also be paid by the power company and they pay a fee for the reprocessing plant in Aomori which is reaching near capacity, 80%.

The country must decide about the long term storage.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites