Japan to open 19 reactors...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,888
Location
'Stralia
http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/07/japan-likely-to-restart-19-nuclear.html

Quote:
Seven Japanese nuclear power reactors are likely to be in operation by the end of next March and 12 more one year later, according to an estimate by the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan (IEEJ). Judicial rulings and local consents will influence the rate of restart, it notes.

In its Economic and Energy Outlook of Japan Through 2017, the IEEJ has considered the economic and environmental impacts in financial years 2016 and 2017 (ending March 2017 and 2018, respectively) of various scenarios for the restart of reactors in Japan.

The organization estimates that if restarts take place according to the current schedule - the "reference scenario" - seven reactors could restart by the end of FY2016 (ending March 2017). By the end of FY2017, 19 units could be restarted, generating some 119.8 TWh of electricity annually, compared with total nuclear output of 288.2 TWh in FY2010, the year prior to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

Under this scenario, compared with FY2010, total spending on fossil fuel imports in FY2017 decreases by JPY4.7 trillion ($45 billion), while the electricity cost - including fuel costs, feed-in tariffs and grid stabilization costs - increases by about JPY100/MWh. Relative to the same period, energy-related carbon dioxide emissions to 1094 million tonnes CO2. According to the IEEJ, energy-related emissions reached a historical high of 1235 million tonnes CO2 in FY2013.
 
At the current rate of .9913 dollars to 100 JPY the marginal increase in electricity price for the "reference scenario" is rather small for that nice decrease in CO2 emissions. I wonder the ramifications of that $45 billion US dollars in reduced oil imports.
 
You know *I* consider that to be a move in the right direction, but I'm sure there'll be whinin' and hand-wringin' from some quarters.
 
Originally Posted By: Joshua_Skinner
At the current rate of .9913 dollars to 100 JPY the marginal increase in electricity price for the "reference scenario" is rather small for that nice decrease in CO2 emissions. I wonder the ramifications of that $45 billion US dollars in reduced oil imports.


Yeah, 0.1c/KWh wholesale.
 
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
You know *I* consider that to be a move in the right direction, but I'm sure there'll be whinin' and hand-wringin' from some quarters.





I think it is one of the best moves in the right direction but that is my opinion.

Nuclear energy still has a decent EROI and engineering gets more and more sophisticated. And finally the Wind Industry is trying to solve the bat crisis as thousands are being killed because of the wind farms.
 
A modern economy MUST HAVE CHEAP electricity. Don't put your cooling pumps in the basement, and don't build them on fault lines.
 
Last edited:
Is it just me, or do these numbers not make any sense?
A 45 billion dollar reduction in fuel imports brings a small increase in the cost of electricity generated using existing facilities the capital costs of which are sunk and with which there are considerable upkeep costs even when idled?
One hope that the Japanese have learned the hard lessons of their last major failure and have retrofitted better redundancy into those plants set to be brought back online.
 
Oil is not going to stay cheap forever. It is near record lows right now which is not realistic to use as a basis for long-term policy.
 
Oil is only cheap if you have a military power to keep it that way. US, Europe, and China has a huge military that can go into war if their national energy source is at a threat (i.e. their allied energy providing nation got invaded), Japan is technically still under the "protection" of USA and if things turn sour their oil import cost can go way up.

Nuclear is pretty much the only way to go for them, as well as hydrogen generated as a by product (that's why they are the only one in the world going hydrogen fuel cell).
 
More Nukes less kooks
grin.gif
 
Its a great thing. They really don't have a lot of options.Hind sight is 50/50. US reactors for many years have multiple multiple redundacy. Not saying an accident isn't possible but its pretty low. BWR's like Japan has are incredably easy to cool in an emergency..having the accident they did is hard to justify except they were brain dead on multiple backups.
 
Originally Posted By: Al
having the accident they did is hard to justify except they were brain dead on multiple backups.


Yup, that is all at TEPCO's feet. They were told YEARS ago to make changes that would have prevented the incident. From relocating the generators and fuel tanks to a protected elevated location, to the building of a bigger and better sea wall, it was all ignored.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Al
having the accident they did is hard to justify except they were brain dead on multiple backups.


Yup, that is all at TEPCO's feet. They were told YEARS ago to make changes that would have prevented the incident. From relocating the generators and fuel tanks to a protected elevated location, to the building of a bigger and better sea wall, it was all ignored.


It's also a Japanese regulatory failure.
TEPCO should have been required to make the necessary changes.
They weren't and we all saw the outcome.
 
Originally Posted By: Exhaustgases
http://www.agreenroadjournal.com/2013/10/krypton-85-1800000-bq-radioactive-gases.html

Maybe they should read and study this first.


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Krypton-85_and_climate_change

Quote:

The false claim that Krypton-85 causes climate change has a long history, dating back to at least the 1970s or 1980s. Recently, it has become an important tool for anti-nuclear power activists who push it as a new anti-nuclear power meme.
This is undoubtedly due to the continued rise in importance of climate change, and as a result, of the pro-nuclear power argument that "nuclear power mitigates climate change" - a good, scientific argument which the anti-nuclear movement thus tries to directly counter through cooking up lies about Krypton-85.
Those lies are, in turn, based upon the disproven supposition that "if Krypton-85 emissions continue to increase, it may cause climate change".

Facts about krypton-85

- Its half-life is 10.756 years.
- The fission yield is around 0.3%; i.e., approximately 3 atoms of Krypton-85 are generated per 1000 fissions.
- It is a gas at Standard Temperature and Pressure (STP). The gas density, at a temperature of 21.1°C, is 3.479 kg/m³.
- The most common form (99.57%) of decay undergone by Krypton-85 is the emission of beta particles with a maximum energy release of 687 keV and an average energy release of 251 keV.
- The global atmospheric inventory of Kr-85 is estimated to about 5500 PBq at the end of 2009.[3]
- 1 PBq (petabecquerel = 1015 Bq).
- The amount of Krypton-85 in Earth's atmosphere is minute. Its contribution to atmospheric ionization and/or ozone formation is overwhelmed by other effects.


And: http://nukespp.blogspot.ca/2015/11/how-much-krypton-85-leaks-into.html (which cites many reputable sources)
 
Good for them. Now more innovation on fuel repurposing and reuse... Storage pools is not a good long term answer. Solve that and well really be on our way.

IIRC the French re-upgrade their fuel. Do the Japanese?
 
I thought that the Japanese didn't reprocess, under som treaty or other.

But I've also read that they've got reactors running on Mixed Oxide Fuel, which implies after use reprocessing.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Good for them. Now more innovation on fuel repurposing and reuse... Storage pools is not a good long term answer. Solve that and well really be on our way.

IIRC the French re-upgrade their fuel. Do the Japanese?


AFAIK, the only reprocessing facility is in France. They reprocess fuel for others however. We used to reprocess up here in the GWN as well (on-site) but with the plentiful uranium deposits it became non-viable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top