Independent Regulators May Help Clear Japan's Nuclear Energy Path

Before the accident at Japan’s Fukushima plant in March 2011, the country was headed down a path of using more nuclear energy. Now, more than two years later, it may decide to get back on the same track.

The nation’s prime minister is expected to lead his Liberal Democratic Party to victory in the upper chamber there early next week. If successful, a majority of lawmakers could push through the re-starting of most of those nuclear units that have been closed. And while such a position is contrary to how most Japanese feel, the country has now set up an independent nuclear regulator that would have powers unlike those ever granted to its predecessor -- ones that could assure integrity of regulatory system. 

Specifically, the so-called Nuclear Regulatory Authority has publicly stated its goals to incorporate the highest safety standards in the world, which include active measures to counter natural disasters. The aim is win the public’s trust and to create the “peaceful” development of nuclear power. By contrast, the agency that had overseen monitoring efforts was accused of being too cozy with industry, allowing senior government officials to get high-level jobs with Tokyo Electric Power Co. right after they had done their oversight stints. 

“We should be careful not to consort with electric utilities and other interest groups; and we will be tireless in our efforts to improve our regulatory measures so that Japan’s nuclear regulation standards will be among the world’s highest,” says Shunichi Tanaka, head of the Nuclear Regulatory Authority. 

The agency, created in September 2012, has shown its willingness to exert its influence: It just said, for example, that the disabled Fukushima nuclear facility has been leaking contaminated, or radiated, water into the Pacific Ocean for two years. While Tepco had initially denied such accusations, it now says that this may have been possible.  

Last May, Japan turned off its last nuclear reactor. Since then, it has re-started two units. But it has had to rely on imported natural gas to meet much of its electricity needs. Meanwhile, it has been able to employee energy efficiency methods resulting declines in consumption while also building solar units. Still, it’s energy costs have escalated, with consumers paying an estimate 12 percent more in electric bills. 

Competing Interests

Proponents of restarting some of the nuclear facilities are emphasizing that the country cannot replace 30 percent of its electric power generation overnight. They add that all of the country’s nuclear reactors are going through rigorous new stress tests to try and ensure that they could survive massive natural events. 

To that end, France’s Areva has said that Japan would re-start six of its 52 reactors by year-end; Areva benefits from selling new safety equipment. Many of the rest could get a second-life soon after, especially if Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s party gains control of the upper house there. Abe has said those nuclear units that exceed the nation’s new stress testing could re-start within a year of those evaluations. 

Opponents, however, are not just fearful of accidents but are also pushing cleaner energy forms. They are urging the Japanese government to move more aggressively into greener energies, pointing out that in the months following the disaster that the nation cut its energy consumption by 15 percent. They are also saying that the power structure there has yet to compensate the people for their losses, or to take all necessary precautions to prevent the spread of radiation. 

They have a sympathetic ear in the Federation of American Scientists. It says that the accident at Fukushima was preventable -- that the earthquake and tsunami there in 2011 were not unprecedented and were not unforeseeable. Poor planning, it says, led to the mis-allocation of resources and compounded the problems there. 

“Stronger regulation across the nuclear power industry could have prevented many of the worst outcomes at Fukushima Daiichi and will be needed to prevent future accidents,” write Charles Ferguson and Mark Jansson, president and director of the  Federation of American Scientists, respectively. 

The two applaud the development of the Nuclear Regulatory Authority and say that its fierce independence is a must. Among the steps the agency should take, they say, is the creation of a whistle-blower law that allows tipsters to weigh in without repercussions. They say that the prior close relationships between industry and their regulators prevented transparency and candid communications, noting that previous monitors had been “defanged.”  

Finally, the scientists say that any decision to restart the nuclear reactors be based on an “informed approach” -- not political pressures. At the same time, they say that the Japanese public must understand that all energy technologies come with risks, including nuclear power. It’s a balancing act among environmental, economic and human wellbeing concerns, they conclude.

To subscribe or visit go to:  http://www.riskcenter.com

http://riskcenter.com/articles/story/view_story?story=99915614