June 12,2011
In April 1967, when the construction of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant and other commercial nuclear reactors started, the government’s Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) published a long-term plan for the study, development, and use of atomic energy. The plan stressed that, from the point of securing independence of atomic energy development in Japan, it is not desirable for Japan’s nuclear power generation to depend for a long time on the U.S.-developed light-water reactor or to depend exclusively on the United States for the supply of enriched uranium as fuel for this type of reactor.
All reactors are light-water reactors
However, all the 54 nuclear reactors now existing in Japan are U.S.-developed pressurized water reactors (PWR) and boiling water reactors (BWR, including 4 refined models).
Japan’s dependency of the supply of enriched uranium on the United States is still over 70%, though the source of suppliers has diversified to France (18%) and Britain (8%) as compared to 100 percent dependence on the United States in the initial period.
The 1987 white paper on atomic energy published by the AEC pointed out that Japan is under restriction by contract with the United States that when Japan’s nuclear power facilities mix in non-U.S. produced enriched uranium with U.S. enriched uranium, the percentage of non-U.S. uranium must not exceed 30%.
Even more serious is that the 1988 Japan-U.S. Atomic Energy Agreement set new and dangerous moves in motion, including the construction of nuclear fuel enrichment facilities in Japan. The attached paper #4 to the agreement refers to constructing a nuclear fuel recycling plant at Rokkasho Village (Aomori Pref.) that extracts from used nuclear fuel (uranium and plutonium) for commercial reuse as fuel, and constructing the fast-breeder reactor Monju in Fukui, which was to be built to produce more plutonium than that consumed as fuel. The attached paper #4 had been approved by the United States.
Knowing that the technology for nuclear recycling facilities had not been fully established, the United States is not operating such facilities itself. Thus, the U.S. agreement to the construction of such facilities in Japan meant that the United States was intending to use Japan as a laboratory for testing their feasibility.
Even after change of government
The promotion to construct more nuclear reactors continued in Japan even after the government was taken over by the Democratic Party of Japan.
In June 2010, the Cabinet of Prime Minister Kan Naoto approved a basic plan on energy to construct at least 14 nuclear reactors on the assumption that nuclear power generation should contribute to more than 50% of the total power generation in 20 years. In his talks with U.S. President Barack Obama in November that year, Kan confirmed that Japan would promote Japan-U.S. cooperation in the field of nuclear energy.
At the outbreak of the Great East Japan Disaster in March this year, Prime Minister Kan declared that discussion should start anew by wiping the slate clean for the basic plan on energy. However, at the summit meeting of the eight major industrialized countries (G8 summit) in France at the end of May, he expressed his intent to achieve the highest degree of safety in nuclear power to the U.S. president and the other leaders, thus making an international promise to continue with nuclear power generation.
The prime minister’s promise for the highest degree of safety sounds empty after people witnessed that the “safety myths” were completely exposed as deceptions with the Fukushima nuclear reactor accident. For Japan to take the first step toward doing away with all the nuclear power stations, it is necessary to break itself away from the fetters of the United States.
All reactors are light-water reactors
However, all the 54 nuclear reactors now existing in Japan are U.S.-developed pressurized water reactors (PWR) and boiling water reactors (BWR, including 4 refined models).
Japan’s dependency of the supply of enriched uranium on the United States is still over 70%, though the source of suppliers has diversified to France (18%) and Britain (8%) as compared to 100 percent dependence on the United States in the initial period.
The 1987 white paper on atomic energy published by the AEC pointed out that Japan is under restriction by contract with the United States that when Japan’s nuclear power facilities mix in non-U.S. produced enriched uranium with U.S. enriched uranium, the percentage of non-U.S. uranium must not exceed 30%.
Even more serious is that the 1988 Japan-U.S. Atomic Energy Agreement set new and dangerous moves in motion, including the construction of nuclear fuel enrichment facilities in Japan. The attached paper #4 to the agreement refers to constructing a nuclear fuel recycling plant at Rokkasho Village (Aomori Pref.) that extracts from used nuclear fuel (uranium and plutonium) for commercial reuse as fuel, and constructing the fast-breeder reactor Monju in Fukui, which was to be built to produce more plutonium than that consumed as fuel. The attached paper #4 had been approved by the United States.
Knowing that the technology for nuclear recycling facilities had not been fully established, the United States is not operating such facilities itself. Thus, the U.S. agreement to the construction of such facilities in Japan meant that the United States was intending to use Japan as a laboratory for testing their feasibility.
Even after change of government
The promotion to construct more nuclear reactors continued in Japan even after the government was taken over by the Democratic Party of Japan.
In June 2010, the Cabinet of Prime Minister Kan Naoto approved a basic plan on energy to construct at least 14 nuclear reactors on the assumption that nuclear power generation should contribute to more than 50% of the total power generation in 20 years. In his talks with U.S. President Barack Obama in November that year, Kan confirmed that Japan would promote Japan-U.S. cooperation in the field of nuclear energy.
At the outbreak of the Great East Japan Disaster in March this year, Prime Minister Kan declared that discussion should start anew by wiping the slate clean for the basic plan on energy. However, at the summit meeting of the eight major industrialized countries (G8 summit) in France at the end of May, he expressed his intent to achieve the highest degree of safety in nuclear power to the U.S. president and the other leaders, thus making an international promise to continue with nuclear power generation.
The prime minister’s promise for the highest degree of safety sounds empty after people witnessed that the “safety myths” were completely exposed as deceptions with the Fukushima nuclear reactor accident. For Japan to take the first step toward doing away with all the nuclear power stations, it is necessary to break itself away from the fetters of the United States.
