Post-Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident: Implications for Japan
and the World
Charles D. FergusonPresident
Federation of American Scientists
Fermi National Laboratory Colloquium December 4, 2013
Where It All Began and Who Began It
Were the Right Technological Choices Made at the Start?
Fukushima Daiichi Plant Design
“Feed and Bleed” and Filtered Vents
U.S. Nuclear Plants with Design Concerns
23 U.S. Reactors with BWR Mark I type design
Concerns raised as early as 1972 about the BWR Mark I
Recommendations from late 1970s and early 1980s to install hardened, filtered vent system
6 other reactors with ice condenser emergency cooling system
Nuclear Regulatory Commission conducted 90 day review of all plants
Three Pillars to Japan’s Energy Policy Prior to the F-D Accident
• Energy security• Use of market mechanisms to meet energy needs• Reduce greenhouse gas emissionsPrior level of and goal for nuclear power• Nuclear power provided about 30% of electricity• Plans for up to 50% on or about 2030• Now many want phase out or at least much
reduced role
Deep Distrust of “Nuclear Village”
Amakudari, “Descent from heaven”
“Safety Myth”• Cover ups of safety
violations• A few dozen
violations at Fukushima Daiichi alone
• Warning in 2009 about potential for massive tsunami
A Role for Non-Governmental Organizations: U.S.-Japan Nuclear Working Group
• Trilateral partnership among the Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation, the Federation of American Scientists, and the Sasakawa Peace Foundation
• Formed in summer 2011• Just recently completed last
outreach in October 2013
“Made in Japan”• Main conclusion of
Japanese Diet Commission’s report, published in summer 2012 and headed by Dr. Kiyoshi Kurokawa
• The accident was preventable.
U.S.-Japan Nuclear Working Group: Issues that must be addressed irrespective of
Japan’s energy policy decisions
1 Wellbeing of People Affected by the Fukushima Accident
2 Expeditious Decommissioning and Decontamination
3 Credible Strategy for Japan’s Plutonium Stockpile
4 Global Dissemination of Lessons from the Fukushima Accident
Broader strategic concerns within Japan’s energy policy debate
1 Japan’s Role as a Leading International Actor2 Global Nuclear Nonproliferation Leadership3 Japan’s Emerging Nuclear Safety Regulations4 Climate Concerns5 Japan’s Role as a Global Economic and
Technology Leader6 Japan as the Cornerstone of Regional
Security
Strategic recommendations for the industries and governments of Japan and the United States
1 Tomodachi Energy Communities Alliances2 Joint Work on Decommissioning and Decontamination3 Global Leadership on Spent Fuel and Waste Storage4 Maintain U.S.-Japan Technological Advantage5 Completion of 2005 Amendment to Convention on
Physical Protection of Nuclear Material6 Confidence-Building Through Transparency and
International Scrutiny7 U.S.-Japan Joint Energy Security
What is the Working Group Doing Now and will do in the Future?
• Help with exchanges between regulatory officials and Congress and Diet members
• Continue with analytic work• Encourage tri-national cooperation: ROK, Japan, U.S.
Current Activities at Fukushima-Daiichi
“Tank Farm”
Decontamination
The Need for Better Public EducationOp-Ed Contributor: David Ropeik
“Fear vs. Radiation: The Mismatch,” published: October 21, 2013 “Without a much broader and persistent effort by various branches and levels of government to help the public understand the actual biological effects of radiation, we will continue to face the threat of deep historic nuclear fears that simply don’t match the facts.”
Another View and Why We Need Better Public Education
Excerpts from Dr. Helen Caldicott’s October 30, 2013 NYT letter in response to Ropeik’s op-ed:
“Large areas of the world are becoming contaminated by long-lived nuclear elements secondary to catastrophic meltdowns: 40 percent of Europe from Chernobyl, and much of Japan. …
A New York Academy of Sciences report from 2009 titled “Chernobyl” estimates that nearly a million have already died from this catastrophe. In Japan, 10 million people reside in highly contaminated locations.”
Will there always be risk?• “. . . there is no way to eliminate all
risk entirely . . . despite all the design improvements that we conceive, systems still fail; despite all the training and lessons learned in exercises that are conducted, human beings will still make mistakes, particularly when confronted with once-in-a-lifetime events,” Former NRC Chairman Richard Meserve
“Normal Accidents”Thesis of Charles Perrow, Sociologist at Yale
Will Fission Reactors be Phased Out?"I’ve never seen a movie that’s set
200 years in the future and the planet is being powered by fission reactors—that’s nobody’s vision of the future. This is not a future technology. It’s an old technology, and it serves a useful purpose. But that purpose is running its course.” Former NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko, as quoted in IEEE Spectrum
What Needs to be Done to Make Nuclear Power Safer?
• Building passive safety and advanced active safety systems
• Instilling safety culture• Assuring independent regulation• Researching better technologies and better
understanding of human behavior• Factoring in Beyond Design Basis Events
For example, AP1000
Example of Enhanced Active Safety Systems, EPR
Reactions from Various Countries• Polls showed decrease of
public support—generally not surprising
• Countries against became more against
• Countries in favor stayed in favor except for Japan, which reversed its position
• U.S. still in favor but economics are the main problem for new nuclear plants
• Positive sign: Beijing temporarily halted construction in 2011 needs to deal with “safety gap”
• China seemed to be building too fast and had not kept pace with training high quality workforce
Tale of Two Countries
Reversal of the Reversal• Soon after accident,
German Chancellor Merkel reversed previous reversal that had extended life of reactors.
• In April 2011, unveiled 6 point plan to phase out nuclear power in 10 years
Is the German Plan Smart for Japan?• Germany can buy electricity
from and sell to other grid-connected European countries, including France with almost 80% of electricity from nuclear power
• In summer and winter, France typically imports from Germany and vice versa in spring and fall.
• Japan is not grid connected to other countries.
• Unlike Japan, Germany still has significant deposits of coal although this “brown” coal is especially dirty
• Germany has a natural gas pipeline network to other countries
Spent Nuclear Fuel Pools• Most of the almost 70,000
tons of spent U.S. nuclear fuel stored in deep pools of water
• Many other countries in similar situation
• No permanent storage available
• Companies reluctant to spend money on dry cask storage
• Removal of SNF from Fukushima reactor #4 started in November
Dry Cask Storage• Estimated $3 to $5
billion to transfer all overcrowded spent fuel to dry casks
• Germany applies this method
• Used to a limited extent in the United States and Japan (proven at F-D)
Use of Plutonium-based Fuels• Reactor #3 at Fukushima was fueled with mixed
oxide (MOX) fuel, which contains plutonium oxide• Japan has invested about $28 billion in a plutonium
recycling program New policy expected in Dec. 2013 or soon thereafter
• U.S. has refrained from reprocessing spent fuel to use plutonium since the Carter administration
• But the United States has planned to dispose of weapons-grade Pu by using MOX this may change
Parting Thoughts from Fermi
“The history of science and technology has consistently taught us that scientific advances in basic understanding have sooner or later led to technological and industrial applications that have revolutionized our way of life…What is less certain and what we all fervently hope is that man will soon grow sufficiently adult to make good use of the powers that he acquires over nature.”
Thank You Very Much for Your Attention
For more information about the Federation of American Scientists, please see: www.fas.org
For more info on nuclear energy
