{"id":4488,"date":"2019-07-19T16:00:06","date_gmt":"2019-07-19T07:00:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.cnic.jp\/english\/?p=4488"},"modified":"2019-08-06T11:21:18","modified_gmt":"2019-08-06T02:21:18","slug":"the-rokkasho-reprocessing-plant-and-nuclear-weapons-efficient-use-of-resources-and-waste-reduction","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/?p=4488","title":{"rendered":"The Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant and Nuclear Weapons ~ Efficient use of resources and waste reduction?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

CNIC Symposium Report<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Caitlin Stronell<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On June 4 CNIC held a symposium at the Diet Members Building\nin Tokyo. The three speakers, Frank von Hippel, a research physicist and emeritus\nprofessor with the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton\nUniversity; Dr. Kang Jungmin, an independent nuclear analyst who was the Chair\nof the Korean Nuclear Safety and\nSecurity Commission in 2018; and CNIC’s Matsukubo Hajime each gave\ndetailed talks on the costs and dangers of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel\n(SNF).  All three speakers concluded that\nthe Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant would not accomplish its supposed goals of\nefficient use of resources and waste reduction, and should not operate. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The symposium was attended by about 90 people, including one\nDiet Member and several media representatives. Several students of nuclear\nengineering, as well as their teacher, participated, stimulating lively\ndiscussion. It is not often that we get to exchange opinions with people from\nsuch a variety of different views and backgrounds, so this was a valuable\nexperience for all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Session 1: Facts and\ndeceptions ~ analyzing the reprocessing lobby’s claims<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Frank von Hippel<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

The first session addressed the claims of the reprocessing\nlobby, that reprocessing reduces the hazard and volume of radioactive waste. Reprocessing\nseparates the plutonium from spent fuel and the plan is to then mix it with\nuranium to create mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel so it can be ‘reused.’ Prof. von Hippel\nshowed that this does not reduce the amount of space required to store or\ndispose of waste. He pointed out that the long-term decay heat from spent MOX\nfuel is 5 times greater than that\nof low enriched uranium fuel. As a result, the waste casks would require correspondingly\nlarger spacing underground to prevent overheating. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the case of burying spent fuel waste in a repository, reprocessing proponents argue that plutonium and other transuranic elements dominate the toxicity as well as the radioactive decay heat after 300 years, which provides the rationale for why they should be separated. Prof. von Hippel pointed out, however, that in a beyond-worst-case repository failure situation calculated by Sweden\u2019s repository company, SKB, the surface dose would not be dominated by plutonium. In fact, its contribution would be much lower than Carbon-14 in the first several thousand years or Iodine-129 thereafter because of its low solubility and mobility underground. As he joked, \u201cthe buried plutonium is only dangerous if someone digs down hundreds of meters and eats it.\u201d Even though Carbon-14 or Iodine-129 would be more dangerous than plutonium, Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd (JNFL), the operator of Rokkasho, seems much less worried about them and plans to routinely release both of them into the atmosphere and ocean when Rokkasho operates. Rokkasho also would routinely release into the ocean and atmosphere more than 10 times the amount of tritium in the Fukushima Daiichi contaminated water. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Prof. von Hippel also\nemphasized that, if there is an accident at a reprocessing plant, it is likely\nto be much more severe than a nuclear repository failure, with greater releases\nof radionuclides into the environment. Therefore, despite its huge cost,\nreprocessing has none of its claimed advantages such as reducing waste volume\nand toxicity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Jungmin Kang<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Next, Dr. Kang gave us an overview of the situation\nregarding reprocessing R&D in South Korea (ROK). Although the ROK is not\npermitted to reprocess its SNF under the terms of its 123 Agreement with the\nUS, as a way to deal with the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute’s (KAERI)\ninsistence that ROK should have the same “right” to reprocess as\nJapan, a US-ROK Joint Fuel Cycle Study was set up in 2011. It is a ten-year\nproject, but may be extended after 2021 depending on discussions between the\nROK and the US.  Although most of the\nresearch is being carried out jointly in the US, permission was given for KAERI\nto carry out limited experiments on the first stage of pyroprocessing at its facilities\nin Daejeon, but it has been unable to go ahead with these experiments due to\nstrong opposition by the local community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Basically, KAERI cites similar reasons for the necessity of pyroprocessing as Japan does for reprocessing. It claims that pyroprocessing will reduce the required area of an underground waste repository by “up to 100 times” and that the pyroprocessed waste would “decay to the level of natural uranium in roughly 300 years rather than 300,000 years.” As Prof. von Hippel had already pointed out, these ‘reasons’ are largely untrue and would increase risks much more than reduce them. Dr. Kang pointed out that ‘The reduction of the geological disposal area claimed by KAERI would require leaving Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 on the surface for hundreds of years until 99% decayed as well as the fissioning of plutonium and other transuranic elements by fast-neutron reactors such as Monju, which no country has yet succeeded in deploying despite more than 50 years of costly efforts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

KAERI’s plan therefore includes sodium-cooled fast reactors like Monju. This plan is unlikely to materialize under the present Moon administration, but it has not been completely abandoned. Not only are the same discredited reasons used to justify pyroprocessing, the same failed technology is somehow supposed to succeed in the ROK. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. Kang also stressed that separated plutonium is a\ndirect-use nuclear weapons material. The proliferation risks are significant,\nespecially in light of the sensitive situation regarding North Korea’s nuclear\nweapons. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Following these two presentations, we had the first question\nand answer session from the audience. There was one question regarding how it\nis possible to make a nuclear weapon from reactor-grade plutonium. Prof. von\nHippel answered that weapons designers now agreed and many studies have been\npublished which show that new bomb designs can readily use so-called\n‘reactor-grade’ plutonium to make effective weapons. This discussion continued\ninto the break time with some more detailed technical discussions but in the\nend, despite claims to the contrary by some nuclear experts in Japan, the\nquestioners could see that the plutonium, which is separated from spent fuel\nduring reprocessing can indeed be used to make nuclear weapons capable of mass\ndestruction. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Another important question from the audience concerned\ncommunication between the pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear camps. The two speakers\ntalked about what they called ‘lies’ of the reprocessing proponents, but a questioner\nsaid that this must be a difference in viewpoint and had any effort been made\nto try to bridge this difference? Dr. Kang said that this was not just a\ndifference in viewpoint or opinion, it was a matter of disagreement about scientific\nfacts. While both speakers agreed that\ncalling the opposite camp ‘liars’ was perhaps not conducive to communication,\nit was important to point out what the scientific facts are and where the\nproponents are in fact deceiving people. As Prof. von Hippel quoted:\n“People are entitled to their own opinion, but you are not entitled to\nyour own facts.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Session 2: Rokkasho’s\nsecond reprocessing plant ~ insufficiencies and contradictions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

After a brief break, CNIC’s Matsukubo Hajime presented his\nsimulation of three scenarios in which all Japan’s nuclear power plants that\nhave not been scheduled for decommissioning, including 18  planned MOX-fueled reactors, operate mostly for\n40 years and some for 60 years. In all three cases both the volume of spent\nfuel and the reprocessing fund will be insufficient to maintain the\nreprocessing program. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Matsukubo began his talk by mentioning an article published\nby Kyodo News in September last year in which it was claimed that the nuclear\nfuel cycle was facing collapse because ten utilities had decided not to\ncontribute funds to the construction of a second reprocessing plant at Rokkasho\nwhich would reprocess spent MOX fuel. The Minister for Economics, Trade and\nIndustry immediately denied this claim and demanded that Kyodo issue a\ncorrection. In fact he made this demand at several subsequent press conferences\nup until March this year. At the same time, the Minister admits that the\nconstruction schedule for the second reprocessing plant has not yet been\ndecided and several issues need to be examined. He also has stated publicly\nthat the government is not considering new construction or replacement of\nnuclear power plants. The minister maintains that the Reprocessing Fund is\nsufficient to cover reprocessing of all spent fuel, including MOX fuel. This fund\nis made up of contributions by utilities, set by the amount of fuel they used\nthe previous year, so the amount in the fund depends on how much fuel utilities\nuse. However, Matsukubo’s simulation shows that, for all three cases he\nexamined, there will be insufficient fuel used to generate the required amount\nof funds to build the second reprocessing plant. Under these circumstances it\nwould seem very likely, as the Kyodo article suggested, that the nuclear fuel\ncycle is indeed facing collapse and the Minister’s denials simply don’t add up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Session 3: The danger\nof spent fuel pools and alternatives to reprocessing<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

In the final session, Prof. von Hippel and Dr. Kang gave examples and simulations of the extreme dangers of spent-fuel-pool (SFP) fires. Around the world, many SFPs are densely packed with spent fuel rods, well beyond their original design capacity.\u00a0 Spent fuel builds up because a comprehensive way to deal with it has yet to be decided on. In Japan it is waiting to be reprocessed, but this is a highly risky situation. Prof. von Hippel pointed out that the Fukushima Daiichi accident showed us just how dangerous SFPs can be. The water which cools the spent fuel was evaporating rapidly from the Unit 4 SFP pool because it contained a hot, recently discharged core. It was only because water accidentally leaked into the SFP from the adjoining reactor well that the spent fuel remained covered and didn’t catch on fire. If there had been a fire, massive amounts of Cesium-137 and other radionuclides would have been released directly into the atmosphere and simulations show that if the wind had have been blowing towards Tokyo, it would have been necessary to relocate 29 million people.\u00a0 Dr. Kang’s simulation of releases if there was a fire at the Kori NPP in Korea indicate that up to 21 million people in Korea would have to be relocated and in neighboring Japan, relocations would reach up 27 million people. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prof. von Hippel suggested that a much safer alternative to\ndensely packed SFPs is dry cask storage and gave examples from Germany and the\nUS as well as Japan. A photo of the dry cask storage at Fukushima Daiichi\nshowed the casks covered in seaweed from the tsunami, but safe. Indeed, keeping\nthe spent fuel in dry cask storage until a geological repository becomes\navailable is a much less costly and safer alternative to reprocessing it too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The speakers each addressed highly technical issues and\nshowed with scientific facts and detailed simulations the contradictions and\ndeceptions that Japan\u2019s nuclear fuel cycle is currently based on, as well as\nthe huge costs and risks involved. The challenge is to communicate this information\nto the wider public, which will in the end be paying for reprocessing, both in\nterms of cost and risk and to forge a dialogue with decision-makers so the\nnecessary policy changes can be made.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

CNIC Symposium Report By Caitlin Stronell On June 4 CNIC held a symposium at the Diet Members Building in Tokyo. The three speakers, Frank von Hippel, a research physicist and emeritus professor with the...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[96,33,34],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4488","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cnic-seminar-report","category-rw","category-rokkasho"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4488","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4488"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4488\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4561,"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4488\/revisions\/4561"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4488"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4488"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cnic.jp\/english\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4488"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}