[Title]
[Author’s name]
[Institution]
Abstract: Five months have passed since tThe Fukushima Daiichi accident occurred on March 11, 2011. The Japanese’s government and Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) encountered great deal of difficulties to stabilize the nuclear power reactor. have got hard the stricken nuclear reactors into stable, aAlthough the maximum radiation level hasis decreased,ing, and as of end-August it still accounts for one-fifth of the level detected last monthas of end of August 2011.
There are currently Serious growing concerns with regarding the complexities of the nuclear energy we facethat are faced by in the society of Japan now.
First of all, in wake Owing to the occurance of the Fukushima Daiichi accident, the firm belief called the “Safety Myth”on absolute safety of that Japan’s nuclear power plants were absolutely safe, has suddenly collapsed. Over the past several decades, people have tended to trust the government and electric power companies, which assured about the safety and ensured about the necessity of nuclear power.
SecondlyHowever the recent disaster that took place in Fukushima has triggered, public angers and distrusts among people have triggeredthat lead to the negative campaigns against nuclear energy, in addition to oppositions against and the government and nuclear power companies as well. Severe The harsh public criticism has forced with the government to separate the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) from an affiliation of with the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI). This action was taken, due to a reason that since NISA, the safety organ, had been expressed contradictions withcontradictorily annexed with METI, which is the promoting organ agency for nuclear energy,
Thirdly, tThe nation-wide opinion poll and surveys undertaken by Asahi Shimbun, a leading Japanese daily newspaper, has announced that 74% of respondentspeople supported a the policy to phase-out all nuclear power plants with the final goal to completely end the operation of nuclear plants. Aa target goal to abandon it, although only mere 14% of the respondents disagreedoes not agree . (Asahi Shimbun, June 14)
Fourthly, There are approximately 100,000 and or more residents that took evacuationed out of from the dangerous Fukushima Daiichi zone at present, and are were suffering from immediate threats at all times;such as radiation exposure, and health problems, sanitary contamination, products shipment ban, business slump, unfounded groundless rumors, etc. These conditions all of which have severely weakened their capability to completely recover and return to their normal lives. According to the Japan Center for Economic Research that was quoted by the New York Times, huge sums of compensation claims for TEPCO wouldill account for 11-15 trillion yenJPY, or US$ $136-186 billion. However it is not yet known , and no one knows how much higher would the cost be incurred in the long term. it should cost in the long future. (New York Times web-online, June 28)
Finally, oOn August 30, 2011, tThe Cabinet cabinet of former Prime Minister (PM) Naoto Kan has resigned en masse. Kan left his post after less than 15 months in power, and he apologized in his statement that his cabinet could not respond satisfactorily to the March 11th disaster and Fukushima nuclear accident. Former Financial Minister of Kan's cabinet, Yoshihiko Noda, was elected as Prime MinisterPM (PM) in looming anticipation of continuing nuclear crisis.
Keywords: Fukushima; nuclear policy; nuclear safety; nuclear energy
The second update of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Station accident (June 1 through August 31, 2011)
1 Introduction[1]
This article presents Here below is the second updated development report on the Fukushima Daiichi accident observed from June 1 through August 31, 2011, following the first one from March 11 through May 31.
All of news sources quoted herein in this article are taken from the press releases by of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) of the Ministry of Economy Trade and Industry (METI), Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the NHK (Japan Broadcasting Corporation), which aimed to monitors the statements and press conferences of the Chief Cabinet Minister, and other relevant organization. The Asahi Shimbun, a leading Japanese paper, has reported intensively on the results of the public opinion poll on nuclear on June 14, 2011.
2 Nuclear policy changes revisited
2.1 “Less nuclear- dependent society”
The former Japan's Prime Minister Naoto Kan has declared that Japan will revise its energy policy from scratch the beginning and reduce its dependence on nuclear power, aiming to create a society with less dependence t on nuclear power. The former Prime Minister Kan made the remark at a news conference in Hiroshima City, on August 6, 2011, shortly soon after the 66th anniversary commemoration ceremony of the US atomic bombing of the city.
The Cabinet panel on Energy and Environment has agreed that the current energy policy shall be completely reversed under the new scenario with the long-term timetable and goal. , of whichThe core philosophy that includesing the post-Kyoto Protocol commitment , has yet to be initiatedbeen masterminded. (NHK, August 6)[1]
On August 30, 2011, the former Prime Minister Naoto Kan and his cabinet ministers have resigned en masse, and he apologized in his statement that his cabinet could not respond satisfactorily to the March 11th disaster and nuclear accident. and He insisted on the importance of the legislative action for adoption of promoting renewable energy promotion law which has passed the Diet. (NHK, August 30)[2]
2.2 The new nuclear safety agency approved
The Cabinet has approved to set up a new nuclear safety agency under the Environment Protection Ministry in next by April 2011, which will would take over the functions of the NISA, Nuclear Safety Commission, and the radiation monitoring undertaken by the MEXT (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology). (MEXT).
TheA new nuclear safety agency is separated from the current regulatory functions of METI/ANRE (Agency of Natural resources and Energy), which promotes nuclear energy. (NHK, August 15)[3]Another reason behind the birth establishment of the new agency has gloomy enhanced unbundling of METI umbrella, that is, NISA’s suspected involvement suspected in nuclear scandals to manipulate public opinion in order to support the restart ing of Genkai nuclear power plant in Saga prefecture. [4](NHK, July 8)
2.3 Confusion over the stress tests and terms for restarting operationsing terms
The dDistrusts between central and local government are growing as the former has repeatedly changed its course in handling of the nuclear crisis and the hasty decision to implement the stress tests without adequate preparation. Speaking at a Diet committee meeting on July 7, , 2011,METI Minister Banri Kaieda said conveyed his apologies on behalf of the government for their he's very sorry that the government's abrupt decision to introduce stress tests at the Genkai plant in Saga prefecture and other areass in neighboring municipalities while are not yet convinced about the safety of the reactors was not yet assured. The government was also expected to , and that the government must do more to win their support from the public.
Former Prime Minister Naoto Kan explained to the Diet regarding his why he instructed ions to the METI Minister Banri Kaieda as well as the and also Mminister in charge of Nuclear nuclear Accident accident Goshi Hosono, to work out devise a new set of standards that idle reactors must meet pior to reoperation. before they can be put back online.
According to the former Prime Minister Kan, said the problem under with the current law is that the operation of idle reactors can be restarted with approval by NISA, but although that the agency was primarily responsible for the failure of to prevent the Fukushima Daiichi accident prevention. He instructed the two ministers to propose new safety rules that people will be acceptable by the general public. (NHK, July 7)[5]
METI Minister Banri Kaieda announced on August 4, 2011, that three top officials of METI, ANRE and NISA in charge of nuclear policy be were replaced over due to their failures in proper handling of the Fukushima Daiichi accident. (NHK, August 4)[6]
2.4 The first Fukushima investigation panel held
The government panel that was assigned to investigate the accident at Fukushima Daiichi has commenced the work started oin early June 2011. The panel , which consists of ten experts from various fields, and two technological advisors. At the first meeting, t he former Prime Minister Naoto Kanordered the told at the first meeting that the panel to should broadlyextensively examine the technological and other issues, including the closed inner circle of labors association named, called “Nuclear Mura (guild)”. He also singled out the fact that METI is contradictorywas responsible for both the promotion and regulation of nuclear power policy.
The Chairman of the panel for investigation on the Fukushima Daiichi accident, Yotaro Hatamura, who is Professor Emeritus of Tokyo University told addressed that this panel needs to convincingly answer respond to the public's questionsqueries that may arise from the public. But hHe stressed that tthe panel will would not aim to clarify identify the organization or agency who is responsible for the Fukushima Daiichi accident. Four teams within thThe panel 's four teams willwould discuss about the technical problems of the accident, the bbackground of social issues, the national regulation system of nuclear safety, and other pertinent issues. The panel members visited the Fukushima Daiichi plant inon June 2011, and it plans planned to compile complete theits interim report by the end of this year2011 and finalize the draft it after the nuclear reactors are under control. (NHK, June 7)[7]
2.5 Continuing reassurance of nuclear export policy re-assured
On August 5, the Cabinet approved that the plan for Japan should to continue ongoing negotiations and uphold past agreements on nuclear export. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano told stated that the government's decision is not inconsistent with the prime minister's recent statement of “less dependent ceon nuclear energy option”
.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Edano claimed that the importance of said what is important is to compileing policies on nuclear technology cooperation at an early datestage is, based on conclusions drawn from the Fukushima nuclear accident.
Until the Fukushima Daiichi accident, the government had been promoting nuclear plant exports as part of the nation's economic growth strategy, as negotiations were underway negotiating with Vietnam, Turkey, Jordan, Lithuania, and Kazakhstan. (NHK, August 5)[8] On July 29, TEPCO was said to wwithdrithdrewaw from the bid for Turkey nuclear power plant project
2.6 Report of IAEA team visited visitation to Fukushima site
The IAEA team, consisted of eighteen members, team inspected the Fukushima Daiichi plant and other nuclear facilities from May 24 through June 1, 2011. The l Leader of the IAEA survey team to Japan, Michael Weightman, handed the report to the Prime Minister's Advisor Goshi Hosono, whom (later was assigned as the Minister minister in charge of Nuclear nuclear Accidentaccident), in Tokyo on June 1, 2011. The report points pointed out that Japan underestimated the impacts of the tsunami. It urges the government to correctly assess the risks of all natural disasters, and draw upevise protective measures in the design and operation of nuclear power plants (see table 1). The report adds that NISA should be independent and be given a clear roles based on IAEA standards, so that it may properly can respond appropriately to disasters. Minister in charge of Nuclear Accident Hosono thanked the team for its extensive and detailed investigation, and said stated that the Japanese government will make the best use of the report as it probes the crisis. The team leader, Weightman said claimed that his team had been given access to all the required information it needed, and was able to compile complete the report promptlyquickly. He said tThe accident in Fukushima has valuable lessons that can be shared by all other countries. (NHK, June 1)
Table 1 " Lessons learned from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident"
Table 1 " Lessons learned from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident"Strengthen preventive measures against a possible severe accident (only headlines);, including:
(1) Strengthen measures against earthquakes and tsunamis
(2) Ensure power supplies
(3) Ensure robust cooling functions of reactors and PCVs
(4) Ensure robust cooling functions of spent fuel pools
(5) Thorough accident management (AM) measures
(6) Response to issues concerning the siting with more than one reactor
(7) Consideration of nuclear power station arrangement in basic designs
(8) Ensureing the water tightness of essential equipment facilities
(source:; NISA, 2011)
2.7 International repercussion
After Subsequent to the Fukushima Daiichi accident, Germany has decided upon phasing out all of seventeen nuclear power plants be phased out by 2022 - , a decision overwhelmingly ratified in August 2011 by the German parliament. The Swiss government has shelved plans for building up to three new nuclear power plants and took a decision decided to phase out nuclear power plants altogether between the year 2020 and 2035. In Italy, although it was at an already scheduled referendum, decided to eliminate any say completely no nuclear energy path scenarios on July 26, 2011, although it was already in the scheduled referendum. . Turksey shares similar reluctance still worry about nuclear energy.
The Ddecommissioning decision of the Fukushima Daiichi prompts prompted British MOX plant to close inevitably.its operations.
2.8 Renewable energy bill enacted
On August 23, 2011, the so-called feed-in-tariff law, — by which utilities are required to pay a premium price for electricity from renewable sources, — was enacted at the Diet, which was expected to aid should help Japan to leap to the forefront of the solar, wind, geothermal, and biofuel market in place of nuclear power.
3 Roadmap to stabilize damaged reactors
3.1 Sharp decrease in radioactivity level down, but---
The government and TEPCO said stated on August 17, 2011, that the maximum radiation levels around the Fukushima Daiichi plant during the past 2 weeks were 200 million becquerelsBecquerel per hour. This is one-fifth the levels detected in July, and one-10 millionth the levels in mid-March, shortly after the troubles beganaccident that occured at the plant.
The government and TEPCO said claimed there wasis no major change in their timetable for bringing the plant under control, and that their goal continues remained to be to achieve cold shutdown of the reactors while processing contaminated wastewater and to reducing reduce radioactive emissions. (NHK, August 17)[9]