Genkai No. 4 reactor shut down; only 6 reactors now operating in Japan
SAGA —
Kyushu Electric Power Co said Monday that it has shut down the No. 4 reactor at its Genkai nuclear power plant in Saga Prefecture for routine inspection. The shutdown now leaves Japan with only six of its 54 nuclear power plants in service.
Kyushu Electric said the reactor, which was shut down on Sunday night, provided around 40% of the electricity in Kyushu. Homes and businesses in the area have been asked to reduce their power consumption by 5% between from now until Feb 3.
According to TBS, the inspection was originally scheduled for mid-December, but was postponed. A planned maintenance on the 559-MW Genkai No. 1 reactor also started on Dec 1, meaning all of Kyushu’s six reactors at two nuclear plants have been closed for the first time in 31 years with no definite schedule for restarts.
No reactors taken offline for routine maintenance nationwide have yet been restarted due to public safety fears since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami triggered reactor meltdowns and radiation leaks at Tokyo Electric Power Co’s Fukushima Daiichi power station northeast of Tokyo.
The Genkai No. 4 reactor was the first to resume operations in Japan following the March 11 earthquake. The reactor automatically shut down on Oct 4 due to equipment trouble caused by human error, following which it reached full capacity in November.
Japan Today
Order by Time Order by Popularity
33 Comments
Login to comment
0
nandakandamanda
I bet the people at KEPCO, as at TEPCO, are all keeping straight faces.
4
thepro
If Japan continues to be able to operate on only 6 nuclear reactors, why do they need 54?? Seems like a huge number of plants for such a small country. Do they just keep building them to spend construction budgets and get more kickbacks?
-2
Elvensilvan
On one side, I salute the power-generating companies for their facility tests and inspections.
But on the other hand, why do they have to shut down these plants one after the other, knowing full well that December is in the winter season, and that demand of electricity is higher?
Let's be honest here: most (if not all) high-ranked employees are having a holiday break, some even for an extended period. Is that why the shutdowns are scheduled for the year-end?
-2
JapanGal
I say start them all up as soon as possible.
-2
YongYang
Excellent. What a wonderful countdown.
-1
The Munya Times
Some of the big bosses seem to understood that the radiation hits everybody equally and they won't survive the next meltdown, or lose more money unless they act. How long will the wonder last?
A few more left, the question is whether they shut them down, too or spend some money for inspection if they know how to do it at all.
I saw a revealing report on TV the other day, they said the operators didn't even know what to do, for TEPCO didn't even provide them with manuals for such emergency cases as they didn't think it will happen.
-1
lucabrasi
I'm no engineer; but I don't see why they have to shut a reactor down to inspect it. What are they looking for that wouldn't show up as a problem during normal operations? They check the safety of a railway line by running a train across it, not by stopping the traffic completely and looking at it.
5
wanderlust
@lucabrasi - they have to shut it down, take the top of the pressure vessel, fill it with water, and only then can they see inside to judge metal fatigue, embrittling of the core components, move around fuel cells to different positions, check turbine and pipe seals, control rods, etc.. 2,600 degrees core temperatures, and 300 degrees C of pressurized steam make this a little difficult when it is running...
1
Jared Norman
48 down, only 6 to go.
0
Jared Norman
Their look at the chemistry, reactor shielding and the primary support systems
0
lucabrasi
@wanderlust.
Thank you. Always happy to be put right by someone more technically-minded (ie 99% of the population, including my eight-year old niece!) :)
2
smithinjapan
thepro: "If Japan continues to be able to operate on only 6 nuclear reactors, why do they need 54??"
Big, fat envelopes that politicians (and likely the yakuza) enjoy. People can DEFINITELY cut private consumption down by five per cent and THEN some, but can companies? I see bigger than ever Christmas light displays all about the Kinki area despite the call all year for 節電, with their justification being that they shut them off 30 minutes earlier than in past years (despite MANY more lights being there than past years!), they use LEDs, etc.
Anyway, it's doable, so shut down the other six and get on with alternative energy sources already.
2
globalwatcher
So how does Japan effectively provide a power supply? I am puzzled. Is there anyone who can answer to my simple and dumb question?
1
gogogo
How did we go from 54 reactors to 6? Japan had overkill on reactors?
-1
melonbarmonster
We still haven't stopped melted cores from melting into the waters yet at Fukushima. Shut everything off and down and get rid of the cores.
1
TorafusuTorasan
As reactors go offline, power companies compensate by reactivating their "thermal" (i.e. fossil fuel burning) power plants which had been sitting dormant for years or decades.
Did Japan have overkill on reactors? 54 in a country the size of California, but not evenly located around the country since some prefectures like Okinawa and Wakayama have no reactors. Just like in America, reactors seem to be clustered near each other--for example, New York has five reactors, but 29 states have none. The U.S. has 104 reactors spread over a much bigger landmass, not all of it at high risk of earthquakes and tsunamis. So the answer to the overkill question is yes, given that Japan will experience 1/5 of the world's strongest earthquakes in any given year (including an average of two annually over 7.0), that large number of reactors seems unsustainable and we will likely never see that number operating again.
-3
j4p4nFTW
@thepro
Please don't ask questions such as this one. This matter is best left to the professionals who operate the plants and manage the electricity grid. We do not have the qualifications necessary to second guess what they think is best for the nation.
4
zichi
Reactors are retired by law to be shut down every 13 months for inspection which usually takes 2-3 months. Japan is going non nuclear by default. There's no clear statement from the government about what it intends to do about nuclear power.
I'm anti nuke plants but the country will need at least 20 reactors operating until alternative sources like renewables, can be put into place.
I think there are 14 new reactors which are being built. I don't remember how many were still in the planning stage, 4 or 5?
1
globalwatcher
j4p4nFTWDec. 26, 2011 - 02:38PM JST
This is the the best misquote of 2011!!!
Sounds like you have forgotten all lies of TEPCO, don't you. That's how you develop critical and creative thinkers. Their minds are filled with questions including Steve Jobs of the Apple. LOL
1
Blair Herron
That's the question which Koide Hiroaki (An assistant professor of "Kyoto University research reactor institute" famous scholor of nuclear engineering) has been asking the government for many years. Because of his anti nuclear activities, he has been ignored by government, scholars of nuclear, and industries. He explains why Japan doesn't need nuclear power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTx942kwh94
1
globalwatcher
Thank you Blair. Your suggested weblink answered all questions I had. Very good. Thank you.
KOIDE HIROAKI [KYOTO UNIVERSITY] EXPOSES THE LIES OF NUKE .flv
-9
j4p4nFTW
@globalwatcher
I'm sorry, but I don't really follow. Which specific lies are you talking about? You say TEPCO told a lie, but when? Do you have a court case showing proof that TEPCO lied about something?
0
TorafusuTorasan
I gave the wrong number of states without nuclear reactors. 19 is more accurate. A serious issue is the number of states that have agreed to house the nuclear waste: zero. Japan has the same problem--having to pay other countries to accept its nuclear waste. Environmental pollution and terrorism potential are dangers with the waste whereever it ends up.
j4p4n wants to know a lie, so here's one: shortly before the disaster, the TEPCO management contradicted a nuclear safety taskforce by saying that their Fukushima Daiichi plant complex was not at risk of being hit by a ten meter tsunami, thereby avoiding investing in building better barriers. How could they say that when the Sanriku coast gets a tsunami every generation or two, and the power plant is built right on the shore?
-1
Ranger_Miffy2
Shut them ALL down. Turn off the Pachinko lights. Go wind and solar and water power. Japan, here's our chance to show the way out of this bargain with the devil
1
Blair Herron
j4p4nFTW maybe right. TEPCO executives don't lie. They are very sneaky. They hide things so that they won't be sued. Here's one: TEPCO was told to submit severe accident manual by a Diet science committee, the majority of which had been blacked out. The committee chair said, "It is unacceptable for TEPCO to refuse to disclose these materials in the wake of this kind of disaster." TEPCO said, "These manuals are entirely internal documents pertaining to the operation of the reactors. They are not for general publication. The issue here is the protection of nuclear materials, and our intellectual property rights."
http://ventoorientale.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2011/09/black-out-manua.html
0
bello420
All the reactors need to be inspected to assure safe operating conditions, but maybe they should keep more than 6 running. Once they're all inspected they can be re-started as Japan needs them to feed it's massive electrical needs. Japan is the size of California but has 3.5x the population and much larger/developed industrial output... it's the 3rd largest economy in the world... gotta have big power to feed this machine and keep it running!
1
Serrano
"only six of its 54 nuclear reactors in service"
And still the escalators at my station are running!
1
LFRAgain
One, it needs to be pointed out that these are 54 reactors located at some 21 power stations located throughout Japan.
In other words, no, there are not more nuclear power plants in Japan than there are prefectures.
Two, Japan isn't functioning on just 6 nuclear reactors. It's had to bring back online a number of coal-burning power plnats to meet the shortfall in energy no longer produced by the now shutdown nuclear reactors. It also has a diverse enough array of energy sources as to not have to rely entirely on nuclear power.
It bears noting that with the exception of hydroelectric, geothermal, and solar sources which represent but 6% of Japan's total energy output, virtually all of Japan's energy resources are imported, including the nuclear materials to fuel its reactors -- and at great expense.
Three, in 2001, nuclear energy represented only 14% of the total amount of energy being produced and used in Japan. That number hadn't changed significantly up until the tsunami that crippled the Fukushima plant. Imported oil continues to provide some 50% of Japan's energy needs, with coal accounting for nearly 17% of Japan's energy production.
In short, it's not altogether accurate to suggest that Japan can function just fine on 6 reactors, as if the energy produced by the now shut down other 48 reactors was simply extravagant excess demonstrating the lack of necessity for nuclear power in Japan. The 48 reactors represent only a piece of a very complex energy pie that seeks to create and maintain energy security for a nation that has very few natural energy resources of its own besides coal.
2
zichi
Prior to 3/11, nuclear power generated about 27% of total power. Coal fired plants, 24%. Gas fired plants, 26%. Oil power plants, 13%. Hydro 8%. Renewables, 2%.
The lost of power from the shut down reactors has mostly been made up by an increase in power generation by gas powered plants and a small increase in coal.
Geothermal experts say geothermal power could be increased from the current 1-2% to 15%. A lack of an unified national smart power grid causes many supply problems. Power supply should be taken out of the hands of the power generating companies.
15 reactors are older than 30 years and should be the first to be decommissioned and the power plant at Hamakoa should also be closed down.
Out of the total 54 reactors, 10 are located in Fukushima, 6 at the doomed atomic plant, and 4 at the second Fukushima power plant which TEPCO wants to restart, if the government allows. 15 are older than 30 years and 2 reactors are at Hamakoa.
That would leave 27 reactors which the country will have to operate at some capacity or other. The government is considering increasing the maintenance period from 13 months to 20 months.
The government has not made a clear statement about nuclear energy.
Besides geothermal I think the best renewable for generating power could be both tidal and wave power with some increase in solar and wind.
The government spends ¥500 billion on R&D energy but most of it goes to nuclear with only 8% going on renewables.
-1
Samantha Ueno
Seriously, if any country can do it, Japan can. Shut down the remaining 6, work on getting nuclear power OUT. 54? seriously....how many nuclear reactors does California have? And while we're at it, airports too! California wouldn't need over 50 commercial airports, Japan doesn't either!
1
Patrick Hattman
Japan will be even more dependent on foreign oil and natural gas, as a result. This may be inevitable, but not desired. They are increasingly reliant on others, and subject to the whims of the markets.
0
globalwatcher
What planet do you live in? I do not live in Japan, but as far as I have been told there has been no litigation has been filed.
0
globalwatcher
j4p4nFTWDec. 26, 2011 - 05:17PM JST
I have just found the article listed above on JT against TEPCO .
Back to top