And the risks are truly negligible in the grand scheme of things. Especially following incidents because every incident is a learning experience and newer, better technology and policies are put in place to prevent a repeat.
At this point in time, I genuinely wish most of the world's power came from nuclear. Stop all this insane coal mining and smog generating nonsense.
It's expensive to build new power plants. Japan has a number of them that have been inactive since the 2011 earthquake. This example is just turning one back on again.
The extra CO2 that has been emitted all those 15 years will eventually have more of an impact on health and the environment than all the radiation leaked from Fukushima.
Without Fukushima, Japan could have nearly carbon electricity by now.
It was easier to turn off nuclear overnight out of fear than to turn off fossil overnight for the climate.
Global opposition to nuclear power is one of the most bizarre things out there. No doubt fueled by decades of coal and oil industry lobbying and propaganda.
It's sad to see that Japan that once had ~30% of its power generated from nuclear, only sits at around ~5% now. But at least they're making plans for re-opening many of the plants they closed down.
Public opinion does continue to irk me. Barely over 50% support nuclear in Japan. It's pure insanity considering that the issues brought about by the Fukushima incident pale in comparison to the negative effects of having to get that power elsewhere.
I hate how badly the public is educated concerning power generation. Folks have no damn idea how anything works, so they form their opinions based on whatever nonsense they saw in the latest hollywood movie or something.
Folks have no damn idea how anything works, so they form their opinions based on whatever nonsense they saw in the latest hollywood movie or something.
Of all the countries to use this line of reasoning about, Japan? Really? You don't think their might be some other reason why Japanese people specifically might have some apprehension about nuclear power?
The mainstream opposition in Japan, especially in the post-Fukushima era, is more based around "Can our government and utilities companies operate this safely?" than about issues with nuclear power conceptually.
Even just from the data in this article, it's clear that the public's issue is the people who have been entrusted to run it:
A prefectural survey published in October showed 60% of residents believe conditions for a restart have not been met, and nearly 70% expressed concern about TEPCO’s ability to operate the plant safely.
And the government also has shown that it just can't effectively do emergency management. The Hanshin-Awaji earthquake in 1995 should have been a massive wake-up call on the need for a comprehensive and functional emergency management agency, and that just never materialized despite numerous calls for establishing one.
I think these are just arguments that tepco needs to be dismantled/absorbed and restarted as a competent company. And the Japanese gov actually needs to follow through with a competent disaster management agency. Rather than anything specific against nuclear.
A comparison is California, USA's Pacific Gas and Electric company. They do operate one nuclear plant in California but no issues. Their electric lines and gas lines have caused massive fires causing state wide disasters. A lot of the reasons point at incompetence and trying to maximize profits rather than upgrade infrastructure/invest in safety.
I think these are just arguments that tepco needs to be dismantled/absorbed and restarted as a competent company. And the Japanese gov actually needs to follow through with a competent disaster management agency. Rather than anything specific against nuclear.
Yes, the point I was making is that idea that this is all just because of "an uneducated public basing opinions on whatever Hollywood movie" is just total bullshit.
If it's not possible to trust the existing governance framework to reliably provide nuclear energy, then it's rational to oppose restarting a nuclear reactor that would exist under that framework. And if they didn't fix it after the last major disaster, or the one before that, then why should anyone believe they would do it before the next one?
70% of the people in the poll specifically cite not trusting TEPCO to safely operate the plant as their reason. Negative sentiment among the Japanese public regarding nuclear power is lower today than at any other time in history.
Global opposition to nuclear power is one of the most bizarre things out there.
It's not, for multiple reasons. Most of all it's the fact that the only reason nuclear power is even viable is because all the risks are carried by the tax payer (society). This is unlike any other forms of energy where the risk is carried by the provider (business).
There was a study from I believe the late 1990s which looked at how much it would cost to insure a nuclear power plant against the risks the same way it was necessary for other forms of electricity generation (i.e. without being able to off-load the risks to society), and the calculated costs were several Billions of EUR (of 1990's money) - for a single power plant.
The reality is that to be viable, nuclear power had to be subsidized on a scale that even makes the subsidies for fossil fuels look like pocket change.
It also doesn't help that the nuclear industry itself has a very long track record of being untrustworthy, and not just because the original claim that nuclear power was "too cheap to meter" turned out to be nonsense.
Then of course there's the fact that, as of today, the cheapest forms of power generation are renewables. And in the approx 30 years it now takes for any new nuclear plant between laying the first brick and the start of generating electricity, the cost gap will only get bigger.
It may or may not make sense for Japan to reactivate this nuclear plant, but the main issues with nuclear power aren't going away.
Operating coal and other fossil fuel power planets would also be more expensive if the health and environmental impacts from coal pollution weren't also subsidized by society.
All power generation has externalities that by definition aren't paid by the power plant operator unless the government quantifies them and forces then to pay it (ex. Carbon taxes). Alternatively if society is going to pay the cost anyways you could have the government build and operate the power plants so it doesn't need to be profitable. Access to affordable abundant power is important for productivity which can raise GDP and tax revenue.
As for the long construction times and high cost, it's difficult to disentangle the inherent complexity required to build a safe nuclear power plant from the incidentally complexity that nuclear power has been saddled with by obstructionist fossil fuel industry lobbying.
I agree that renewables will be a large part of our future energy mix, but they have their limitations which nuclear complements well.
Good
Despite the risks, nuclear power still provides clean and cheap energy which Japan desperately needs
And the risks are truly negligible in the grand scheme of things. Especially following incidents because every incident is a learning experience and newer, better technology and policies are put in place to prevent a repeat.
At this point in time, I genuinely wish most of the world's power came from nuclear. Stop all this insane coal mining and smog generating nonsense.
Will my bill go down? I have an all electric apt and this stupid water heater is expensive.
In my area electric heaters are much cheaper than others. I wish I had one.
No it won't, because nuke is expensive as fuck.
It's expensive to build new power plants. Japan has a number of them that have been inactive since the 2011 earthquake. This example is just turning one back on again.
I want it to be restarted soon
Hope this means cheaper power next summer.
The extra CO2 that has been emitted all those 15 years will eventually have more of an impact on health and the environment than all the radiation leaked from Fukushima.
Without Fukushima, Japan could have nearly carbon electricity by now.
It was easier to turn off nuclear overnight out of fear than to turn off fossil overnight for the climate.
Wow, I didn't realize it hadn't been restarted yet. That's pretty crazy.
Not a minute too soon.
Excellent.
Global opposition to nuclear power is one of the most bizarre things out there. No doubt fueled by decades of coal and oil industry lobbying and propaganda.
It's sad to see that Japan that once had ~30% of its power generated from nuclear, only sits at around ~5% now. But at least they're making plans for re-opening many of the plants they closed down.
Public opinion does continue to irk me. Barely over 50% support nuclear in Japan. It's pure insanity considering that the issues brought about by the Fukushima incident pale in comparison to the negative effects of having to get that power elsewhere.
I hate how badly the public is educated concerning power generation. Folks have no damn idea how anything works, so they form their opinions based on whatever nonsense they saw in the latest hollywood movie or something.
Of all the countries to use this line of reasoning about, Japan? Really? You don't think their might be some other reason why Japanese people specifically might have some apprehension about nuclear power?
The mainstream opposition in Japan, especially in the post-Fukushima era, is more based around "Can our government and utilities companies operate this safely?" than about issues with nuclear power conceptually.
Even just from the data in this article, it's clear that the public's issue is the people who have been entrusted to run it:
Even prior to Fukushima, TEPCO had already comprehensively demonstrated that it could not be trusted to reliably run nuclear reactors. They falsified safety information numerous times, including about this specific plant in the decades leading up to the 2007 Chuetsu earthquake.
And the government also has shown that it just can't effectively do emergency management. The Hanshin-Awaji earthquake in 1995 should have been a massive wake-up call on the need for a comprehensive and functional emergency management agency, and that just never materialized despite numerous calls for establishing one.
I think these are just arguments that tepco needs to be dismantled/absorbed and restarted as a competent company. And the Japanese gov actually needs to follow through with a competent disaster management agency. Rather than anything specific against nuclear.
A comparison is California, USA's Pacific Gas and Electric company. They do operate one nuclear plant in California but no issues. Their electric lines and gas lines have caused massive fires causing state wide disasters. A lot of the reasons point at incompetence and trying to maximize profits rather than upgrade infrastructure/invest in safety.
Yes, the point I was making is that idea that this is all just because of "an uneducated public basing opinions on whatever Hollywood movie" is just total bullshit.
If it's not possible to trust the existing governance framework to reliably provide nuclear energy, then it's rational to oppose restarting a nuclear reactor that would exist under that framework. And if they didn't fix it after the last major disaster, or the one before that, then why should anyone believe they would do it before the next one?
70% of the people in the poll specifically cite not trusting TEPCO to safely operate the plant as their reason. Negative sentiment among the Japanese public regarding nuclear power is lower today than at any other time in history.
It's not, for multiple reasons. Most of all it's the fact that the only reason nuclear power is even viable is because all the risks are carried by the tax payer (society). This is unlike any other forms of energy where the risk is carried by the provider (business).
There was a study from I believe the late 1990s which looked at how much it would cost to insure a nuclear power plant against the risks the same way it was necessary for other forms of electricity generation (i.e. without being able to off-load the risks to society), and the calculated costs were several Billions of EUR (of 1990's money) - for a single power plant.
The reality is that to be viable, nuclear power had to be subsidized on a scale that even makes the subsidies for fossil fuels look like pocket change.
It also doesn't help that the nuclear industry itself has a very long track record of being untrustworthy, and not just because the original claim that nuclear power was "too cheap to meter" turned out to be nonsense.
Then of course there's the fact that, as of today, the cheapest forms of power generation are renewables. And in the approx 30 years it now takes for any new nuclear plant between laying the first brick and the start of generating electricity, the cost gap will only get bigger.
It may or may not make sense for Japan to reactivate this nuclear plant, but the main issues with nuclear power aren't going away.
Operating coal and other fossil fuel power planets would also be more expensive if the health and environmental impacts from coal pollution weren't also subsidized by society.
All power generation has externalities that by definition aren't paid by the power plant operator unless the government quantifies them and forces then to pay it (ex. Carbon taxes). Alternatively if society is going to pay the cost anyways you could have the government build and operate the power plants so it doesn't need to be profitable. Access to affordable abundant power is important for productivity which can raise GDP and tax revenue.
As for the long construction times and high cost, it's difficult to disentangle the inherent complexity required to build a safe nuclear power plant from the incidentally complexity that nuclear power has been saddled with by obstructionist fossil fuel industry lobbying.
I agree that renewables will be a large part of our future energy mix, but they have their limitations which nuclear complements well.
This completely ignores the massive external costs the fossil fuel industry has imposed on society for decades.
Beware, reddit is full of brainwashed nukeshills.