The reason I want to join the LKYSPP Japan Trip 2014 is because I am very interested in the Japan’s policy on energy security after the Fukushima’s meltdown.
The Fukushima meltdown has created a dramatic influence on Japan’s energy policy. After the accident, the government decided to halt the operation of all the 50 nuclear power plants in Japan. It is a significant decision because nuclear generation was provided about one third of Japan’s energy need. Before the Fukushima, the country even formulated national plan to push nuclear contribution to 50 % by 2030 of the total energy mix in Japan. However, the earthquake on April 2011, which followed by huge tsunami that hit Fukushima nuclear power plant had changed the landscape of Japan’s future energy scenario. The strong public opposition against nuclear power plant had pushed the government to change the policy in the energy sector.
However, the problem is still remained. The decision to halt the operation of nuclear power plants has been driving up the amount of imports of hydrocarbon, especially for coal and natural gas. Consequently, Japan is becoming more dependence on foreign countries to fulfill its energy needs. Japan is also lowering its greenhouse emissions limits to adapt to the new burning record of thermal coal, which cause a new environmental concern especially in relation with the issue of climate change.
Alternative solutions: demand side and supply side
After the Fukushima disaster, Japan faces a huge challenge to reach sustainable energy security right. The decision to halt the operational of nuclear power plants has created a very difficult situation for policy makers in energy sector. However, the difficult challenge may possibly create a new opportunity for...
... middle of paper ...
...ecurity will always be an important and vital decision for the future of every nation. In the case of Japan, it will provide a very important lesson. The trip to Japan will offer a valuable and rare opportunity to study the formulation and implementation of policy in energy security during a crisis. The Fukushima crisis absolutely creates a very challenging situation for policy maker in Japan. As the opposition against nuclear power plants is still running high among the public, the government must ensure the fulfillment of energy in modern Japan society. Therefore, every policy that being taken must be able to balance the opinion of the public with the real demand of energy. If Japan successfully solved the delicate issue of its energy security, it will provide a very important lesson for other countries in the world to formulate the right policy in energy sector.
Smil, V. (2010).Myths in the Headlines: Nuclear Power, Energy: Myths and Realities: Bringing Science to the Energy Policy Debate (pp. 150-157). Washington, D.C.: Publisher for the American Enterprise Institute.
This paper will depict the cause of the Fukishima nuclear power plant meltdown; the size of the area evacuated around the Fukishima nuclear power plant and how many people were displaced; in addition my opinion as to the preparedness of the world for natural disasters such as the meltdown that occurred at
I. (Gain Attention and Interest): March 11, 2011. 2:45 pm. Operations at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant continued as usual. At 2:46 pm a massive 9.0 earthquake strikes the island of Japan. All nuclear reactors on the island shut down automatically as a response to the earthquake. At Fukushima, emergency procedures are automatically enabled to shut down reactors and cool spent nuclear fuel before it melts-down in a catastrophic explosion. The situation seems under control, emergency diesel generators located in the basement of the plant activate and workers breathe a sigh of relief that the reactors are stabilizing. Then 41 minutes later at 3:27 pm the unthinkable occurs. As workers monitored the situation from within the plant, citizens from the adjacent town ran from the coastline as a 49 foot tsunami approached. The tsunami came swiftly and flooded the coastline situated Fukushima plant. Emergency generators were destroyed and cooling systems failed. Within hours, a chain of events led to an explosion of reactor 1 of the plant. One by one in the subsequent days reactors 2, and 3 suffered similar fates as explosions destroyed containment cases and the structures surrounding the reactors (Fukushima Accident). Intense amount...
March 11, 2011 rocked the peace and brought the world to its knees while witnessing one of the largest energy disasters in history, the Fukushima Accident. This disaster occurred because of a tsunami that resulted from a magnitude 9.0 earthquake. Failed safety protocol for tsunami resistance led to the meltdown of three of the six nuclear reactors resulting in the emission of a substantial amount of radioactive material. In response to this grave incident, President Barack Obama addressed his “Speech on Japan” to the Americans and Japanese affected by this horrific event. Obama delivered this speech in hopes of implanting the idea of safety within the mindsets of his listeners and reassuring success for the future. Barack Obama behests a hopeful atmosphere through demonstrating careful consolation of the people affected and explicating confidence in the recovery of Japan.
There is a range of safety concerns in regards to nuclear power with one of these being the effects of radiation resulting from a nuclear accident. Research shows that there is a link between exposure to radiation and the development of cancer (Zakaib 2011) whist Preston (2012) express’s concerns that people exposed to radiation may not be able to see the effects of radiation exposure for several years as was the case in Chernobyl. Furthermore, people are unable to move back into the vicinity of reactors that have been involved in an incident due to their fear of radiation as is the chase in Fukishima (Cyranoski & Brumfiel 2011) and in the areas surrounding Chernobyl (Berton 2006). Governments are increasingly becoming more stringent in the levels of radiation in which people are exposed to with this evident in Fukishma, where the Japanese government evacuated people living within a 30km radius of the plant (Evacuation Orders and Restricted Areas n.d.). As a result of nuclear accidents and the resulting radiation, support for nuclear power has diminished due to safety concerns.
Though nuclear energy has the efficiency and effectiveness to help eliminate our needs for coal and natural gases, it is still too dangerous of an energy form to be using. It has proven to be dangerous through its multiple failures and meltdowns since the Three Mile Island incident. In under thirty five years, three major accidents occurred that will take years to clean up. Chernobyl is still in the clean-up phase even though it occurred in 1986. This clean up phase is only the decommissioning of the plant entirely, not the time it will take for the radiation to hit a level where it will be safe to inhabit the land again. Fukushima will be the same way. We also will not know the total effect of these disasters for thousands of years. For now, it is best that people stick to researching new forms of energy and leaving nuclear energy as a thing of the past.
America needs to pay better attention to what is happening in Japan. This is our opportunity to learn and prepare our own Nuclear Plants in the event of such a crisis. We currently have 100 commercial nuclear power reactor units licensed to operate in the U.S. These operate in 31 of the 48 contiguous states. The nuclear power reactor units provide the U.S. with approximately 20 percent of its electricity. By reviewing Americas history of some recent natural disasters, I intend to build a case that an incident such as Fukushima could happen her in the U.S. I find it essential that these lessons be taken seriously to strengthen nuclear safety and it eventually leading to a complete phasing out of nuclear energy.
Hancocks, Paula. "Fukushima's Nuclear Power Mess: Five Big Questions." CNN. Cable News Network, 07 Nov. 2013. Web. 11 Nov. 2013.
The topic for my competitiveness report is how the energy industry affects Japan’s economy. I chose Japan as my target country because I have studied Japanese for almost nine years already, and I am seeking job opportunities in Japan. In addition, understanding the advantages and disadvantages of the Japanese business environment can help eliminate unnecessary cultural conflicts, and increase the possibilities of adapting into the environment.
Most people have bad feelings towards nuclear power because of three major incidents, Three-mile Island in 1979, Chernobyl in 1986, and more recently Fukushima in 2011. It is because of these events that many dislike the idea of nuclear power and have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in these events. According to the World Nuclear Association, “These three significant accidents occurred during more than 16,000 reactor-years of civil operation. Of all the accidents and incidents, only the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents resulted in radiation doses to the public greater than those resulting from the exposure to natural sources. The Fukushima accident resulted in some radiation exposure of workers at the plant, but not such as to threaten their health, unlike Chernobyl. Other incidents (and one 'accident ') have been completely confined to the plant.” (WNA). Each plant had its problems, but the only plant to actually cause damage and the loss of human life was the ukraine reactor in Chernobyl. According to WNA, what happened during the meltdown was that the staff running the reactor did not follow the correct procedure and when they were supposed to follow through with one action they neglected to stop something from happening, therefore resulting in the meltdown of only one reactor out of four. The total meltdown could have been easily prevented if the engineers running the plant had followed through with all plant procedures. The meltdown was an unfortunate accident and many nations turned from nuclear power soon afterwards until more recently when the technology to handle all possible situations with the most extreme care. The United states is best known for its procedures with rectors. The US has set in plans to handle any and all actions for the possible event of a nuclear situation. According to the Nuclear Safeguards Infrastructure Development and
Nuclear power has grown to be a big percentage of the world’s energy. As of January 18, 2013 in 31 countries 437 nuclear power plant units with an installed electric net capacity of about 372 GW are in operation and 68 plants with an installed capacity of 65 GW are in 15 countries under construction. As of end 2011 the total electricity production since 1951 amounts to 69,760 billion kWh. The cumulative operating experience amounted to 15, 15,080 years by end of 2012. (European Nuclear Society) The change that nuclear power has brought to the world has led to benefits in today’s energy’s usage.
The use of nuclear power in the mid-1980s was not a popular idea on account of all the fears that it had presented. The public seemed to have rejected it because of the fear of radiation. The Chernobyl accident in the Soviet Union in April of 1986 reinforced the fears, and gave them an international dimension (Cohen 1). Nevertheless, the public has to come to terms that one of the major requirements for sustaining human progress is an adequate source of energy. The current largest sources of energy are the combustion of coal, oil, and natural gas. Fear of radiation may push nuclear power under the carpet but another fear of the unknown is how costly is this going to be? If we as the public have to overcome the fear of radiation and costly project, we first have to understand the details of nuclear energy. The known is a lot less scary then the unknown. If we could put away all the presumptions we have about this new energy source, then maybe we can understand that this would be a good decision for use in the near future.
Media coverage of such cases have made the public less comfortable with the idea of moving further towards nuclear power and they only opt for reducing human activities to reduce global warming. It is true that there have been some notable disasters involving nuclear power, but compared to other power systems, nuclear power has an impressive track record. First, it is less harmful and second, it will be able to cater for the growing world population. Nuclear power produces clean energy and it delivers it at a cost that is competitive in the energy market (Patterson). According to the US Energy Information Administration, there are currently 65 such plants in the Unite States (National Research Council). They produce 19 percent of the total US energy generation.
There was a multitude of causes of the disaster in Japan. The first cause was a 9.0 magnitude earthquake that occurred off the coast of Japan. Japan is located in “The Ring of Fire,” an area in the Pacific Ocean that has multiple faults and earthquakes (Pedersen 13). Tectonic plates shifted off the North Pacific coast of Japan and created a massive earthquake. The next cause was a thirty-three foot wall of water that swept over cities and farmland in Japan (Branigan 2). Martin Fackler, a journalist, stated, “The quake churned up a devastating tsunami” (Fackler 3). The tsunami reached speeds of 497 miles per hour while approaching Japan (Fackler 3). The third and final reason of the disaster was that the cooling systems at multiple nuclear power plants failed. At Fukushima, a nuclear power plant in Sendai, Japan, the radioactive rods began to overheat due to the absence of water, which cools it. Explosions occurred at three of the reactors, which spewed radiation into the air (“Comparing nuclear power plant crises”). In conclusion, the earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear power plant issues were the causes of the disaster in Japan, but they also had a myriad of effects.
With the depletion of fossil fuel resources comes speculations and debates about alternative energy sources. The world, including the Philippines, is practically dependent on a dwindling non-renewable source of energy. Today, experts are debating about and considering three options: Nuclear, Solar, or Wind Energy. Everyone has been accustomed to the bad image of nuclear energy as a result of the Chernobyl and Fukushima incidents above all others. The popular belief is that radiation from a nuclear meltdown is very harmful to humans and other living things—which is true—and that nuclear power plants are very dangerous and not ideal—which is not. According to Smith, et. al (n.d), all the nuclear disasters that ever occurred were caused by human error and natural disasters like tsunamis, not one because of system failure. Putting the false beliefs aside, with proper engineering and adequate maintenance by experts, a nuclear power plant is a very ideal and viable source of energy for the following reasons: