But still no concrete plan to store waste

 May 1, 2014

As I See It: Gov't needs to look at options on handling, disposal of radioactive waste

A photo shows the Tono Geoscience Center's Mizunami Underground Research Laboratory in Gifu Prefecture, where geological disposal of high-level radioactive waste is being researched. (Mainichi)

拡大写真 

http://mainichi.jp/english/english/perspectives/news/20140501p2a00m0na012000c.html 

Selection of a final disposal site for high-level radioactive waste from Japan's nuclear power plants has proved a difficult task. Under a basic energy plan approved by the Cabinet in April, the government promised to "stand at the forefront and tackle the issue." But it provided no concrete plans. It appears the government is merely trying to pave the path toward restarting the nation's nuclear reactors.

The catastrophe at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant destroyed trust in Japan's nuclear power policies, and it will take a long time for that trust to be restored. Hastiness is counterproductive. The government must go back to the drawing board on existing policy and set about tackling the issues at hand.

The government's basic energy plan states that the current generation is responsible for solving the problem of nuclear waste. It says the government will propose scientifically viable sites to bury radioactive waste deep underground and "seek local understanding." Apparently, government officials have realized they cannot get far by simply waiting for local bodies to come forward to host facilities.

A panel of experts from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) discussed the issue and it was hoped they would settle on a final disposal site. However, when they met in March, all they settled on were geological conditions, such as making sure the disposal site was well away from active faults, volcanoes and other potentially hazardous locations. Many members commented that they had not actually discussed in concrete terms which locations were best. However, the government adopted the basic energy plan while ignoring the progress of deliberations at the panel.

Due to a lack of natural resources in Japan, the government had set a national policy of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel to extract uranium and plutonium that could be used again in a nuclear fuel cycle. The waste produced after reprocessing was to be solidified in glass and buried deep underground for good. However, there are no prospects for starting operations of the reprocessing facility in Aomori Prefecture, and with 17,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel on its hands, Japan is running out of storage space.

The basic energy plan left the policy of reprocessing all spent nuclear fuel unchanged. But as things stand, officials urgently need to come up with a replacement policy as a top priority.

The disaster at the Fukushima plant has flung a spanner in the works. In technical terms, it is impossible to reprocess the melted fuel at the crippled Fukushima plant. An option other than reprocessing, adopted by countries including Finland, is to place radioactive waste in special containers and directly bury it. But Japan is not considering such an option. In February, the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry told a gathering of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party that when directly burying waste there is a risk of explosions and damage to containers. The ministry indicated that it would stand by its final disposal method, which assumed all spent nuclear fuel would be reprocessed.

But even if reprocessing were to go ahead, problems would emerge: If reprocessed fuel were used in the Monju fast-breeder reactor in Fukui Prefecture, or if a MOX fuel combining plutonium and uranium were used, this would produce other types of nuclear waste, and new reprocessing facilities would have to be built.

Under the government's basic energy plan, the Monju reactor is to be used in research to reduce long-lived radioactive materials. According to METI, "nuclear waste would become harmless in 300 years, not 100,000."

However, Osamu Tochiyama, director of the Radioactive Waste Disposal Safety Research Center at the Nuclear Safety Research Association, says, "If our aim isn't to utilize resources, then it would be better to dispose of the waste directly without reprocessing it." That's because officials still haven't considered how to deal with waste produced through reprocessing that is difficult to handle.

To make it easier for local bodies to host radioactive waste disposal facilities, the government settled on a new policy that would make it possible to retrieve waste even after it is buried underground. But this approach has no technical basis, and officials have not considered where the retrieved waste would be stored.

In a separate meeting of ministry experts on April 30, panel members accepted the policy, but warned, "The government should be aware that is does not have sufficient public support to proceed with final disposal as a foregone conclusion."

A proposal from the Science Council of Japan in 2012 is pertinent. "Current science and technology is limited in its ability to find stable geological strata. Japan should not become fixated on reprocessing all fuel, and store the waste aboveground for a specified period," the council said.

In January this year, I participated in a class at Chiba University that took up the issue of nuclear waste. The words of one student stuck with me: "I have a feeling we'll forget about it if we bury it."

At this point in time, when society is still skeptical about burying radioactive waste, it would be nothing but a tragedy for a local body to be named by the government as a prospective site for burying waste.

The ministry and the Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan say there is a need for "calm discussion" of the issue. They plan to proceed with negotiations with a limited number of local bodies and officials after the designation of prospective sites. However, this would amount to the government forcing a local body to host a troublesome facility.

The Tokyo gubernatorial election in February, in which freedom from reliance on nuclear power became an issue, was a chance for voters in an area that consumes a large amount of electricity to think, in light of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, about the harsh reality in areas hosting nuclear facilities, and to turn their eyes toward the issue of nuclear waste. Taking the opportunity, officials should work toward a conclusion that the public can understand and which also benefits areas that host the nuclear facilities. To achieve this, it is necessary to adopt a safer method of storage, thereby gaining time so technological advances can be made.

Japan also needs to put forward policies to prevent a further increase of harmful waste. I believe this is the first step in the path to restoring people's confidence. (By Daisuke Yamada, Tokyo Bureau)

May 01, 2014(Mainichi Japan)