By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Japan has restarted operations at the world’s largest nuclear power plant, Kashiwazaki-Kariwa, marking the first such move since the 2011 Fukushima disaster. Despite safety concerns and operational setbacks, reactor number six is slated to begin commercial operation next month as part of Japan’s effort to increase its nuclear power capacity to meet energy demands and net-zero emission goals by 2050. However, the plant’s capacity will be significantly less than pre-Fukushima levels, and public trust remains fragile due to safety scandals and the lingering effects of the disaster. As a result, Japan’s nuclear power revival faces financial hurdles and continued opposition, despite government efforts to restart reactors.
Read the original article here
Japan restarts the world’s largest nuclear power plant, a significant event that sparks a wide range of considerations. It’s easy to see why coastal locations are chosen, as these plants often require access to large water sources for cooling. However, the proximity to the coast certainly raised valid concerns, particularly in the wake of the Fukushima disaster.
The situation has triggered discussions about the fundamental choices made in the past. Perhaps, the focus should have been on building entirely new reactor designs, rather than just restarting the older ones. The arguments center around the idea that the inspection and relicensing processes of the original plants may have had shortcomings, as Fukushima was designed with flawed emergency backup generators and flood barriers.
There’s no doubt that Japan faces an uphill battle when it comes to energy. The reliance on imported fossil fuels is a major issue, and nuclear power could be a critical part of the solution. Nuclear energy is also seen as having an essential role to play if the world embraces a future dominated by electric vehicles. The move to smaller modular reactors (SMRs) is gaining traction, especially in North America.
It’s understandable that the public is hesitant, especially considering the accidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima. However, it’s essential to remember that the industry has evolved. Modern reactor designs boast improved safety features and rigorous regulations. While SMRs are a promising concept, it’s acknowledged that there are still some design and efficiency challenges to be addressed.
The Fukushima incident highlighted a need for improvement. It’s clear that the backup generators were positioned too low. Yet, the devastation caused by the tsunami, which resulted in significant loss of life, reinforces the understanding that there is no perfect power source. Every source has its challenges.
The ideal solution is to create a diverse energy portfolio. Nuclear power, with its high energy output relative to its footprint, is a good fit in areas where space is limited and demand is high. While fossil fuels can lead to air pollution, nuclear energy offers a cleaner alternative.
While SMRs have potential, they face certain constraints. The US Navy, however, has already been using this type of reactor for years with good results. Larger light water reactors offer inherent safety advantages in their design. The public wants properly secured and safe nuclear power plants.
There’s a strong argument to be made for learning from mistakes, not just avoiding situations. It’s important to remember that the ocean’s vastness makes it difficult to contaminate the entirety. Also, the impact of fossil fuels is actually much worse than the impacts of past nuclear accidents.
Nuclear power plants use water for multiple purposes. The main one is to cool the steam that turns the turbines to generate electricity. This water is usually recirculated and in a closed loop, so it does not come into contact with the ocean or river, or, if so, does not directly flow through reactors. The ocean serves as a gigantic heat sink for cooling this water.
The reality is that a nuclear plant doesn’t shut down instantaneously. Even after the nuclear reaction stops, residual heat continues to be generated, and this is why the Fukushima cores melted. Ultimately, it takes a lot of time and a large amount of radiation to contaminate the oceans significantly. Meanwhile, fossil fuels continue to damage the environment.
The truth is that nuclear power has to be considered as a very viable alternative, and can prove to be of utmost importance when it comes to combating environmental damage caused by fossil fuels. A list comparing the benefits and drawbacks of each would show that nuclear is a good option. The radiation in our day-to-day lives is not really significant, and is mitigated by the vast oceans.