zichi's past comments

  • 3

    zichi

    You can't help but listen to their expertise.

    So a degree in geography would be on a higher than yoga and those "experts" who claimed over many decades that a nuclear disaster could never happen in Japan, or further experts who claimed the seawall defence at the Fukushima NPP was high enough for calculated and possible tsunami?

    Posted in: Japan takes S Korea to WTO over Fukushima-related food import restrictions

  • 0

    zichi

    Just stop, like quit, do the painful cold turkey which lasts forever but no gum, patches, e-cigarettes whatever, like just quit and yes it can be done because I did even though most days it hits me mentally, even after several years, guess mentally, I still smoke half a pack a day? Sometimes I want a cigarette until I smell one then I wonder how I smoked for so many decades.

    Posted in: Is nicotine all bad?

  • 1

    zichi

    then we should be moving to rapidly decommission Japan's dams.

    There's never been a major disaster because of a Japanese dam.......

    Posted in: Nuclear reactor in Shikoku gets OK to restart

  • 3

    zichi

    KEPCO had its court appeal rejected which prevents the restarting of two of its Takahama reactors.

    Have any of you ever readed the New guidelines for nuclear safety?

    I think you missed the important point when the chairman of the NRA stated the safety of the reactors and any restarts couldn't be guaranteed.

    A panel report by the Environment Ministry stated electricity from renewables could be increased to 20% of total power by 2030.

    At the Ikata NPP there are 3 reactors, No1, 1977 makes it 38 years old. No2, 1981 34 years old and the No3, 1994 19 years old.

    Good, hope to see it operating soon. Lots of nice, low carbon power.

    Not according to the plans of PM Abe who wants to increase the base load power to 60% of the total or about 66TWh which will be provided by hydro, 10%, nuclear from the safe reactors, 15% and the other 75% from coal which will increase the current use of coal by more than 30%.

    Posted in: Nuclear reactor in Shikoku gets OK to restart

  • 1

    zichi

    Kristjan Loftsson can't sell the flesh from the Fin whales, Icelanders don't buy it but Japan buys the belly flesh and tail, the rest is turned into oil. The majority of Icelanders no longer eat whale flesh and more is consumed by tourists believing it's a culture thing. The routes via Europe and Canada were closed down to prevent the whale flesh shipments so now via Angola, probably one of the donee countries supporting Japan at the IWC.

    Posted in: Iceland whale meat shipment to Japan sparks protests

  • 2

    zichi

    The numbers of workers exposed to radiation limits are a concern for all those involved, from the government, TEPCO, companies employing temp workers and probably most of all the temp workers themselves since they are liable to lose their livelihoods unless they can be transferred to the decontamination work. If you could be bother to Google and search for yourself you would discover the figures are accurate.

    The concerns for reaching radiation exposure limits are an issue because the limits are set down in law, although the Ministry Of Health, on advice of the NRA is considering increasing the five year limit to 250 millisieverts but the exposure in any single year limited to 20 millisieverts.

    In fiscal year 2014, according to a report issued by TEPCO, 992 workers were exposed to radiation at or greater than 20 millisieverts and 11 of them were actual TEPCO workers. In 2013, the numbers were 660 exposed. In fiscal 2014, 20,695 plant workers were exposed to radiation with the average dose being 4.99 millisieverts and the highest level for a TEPCO worker 29.5 millisieverts and a temp worker 39.85 millisieverts.

    TEPCO is required to submit reports to the government on the levels of radiation exposure the workers experience.

    When a worker, whether a TEPCO or temp worker are exposed to a rate of 100 millisieverts or 20 or more millisieverts they are no longer allowed to work at any nuclear power plant, not just the nuclear ground zero.

    Posted in: Handling radioactive waste at Fukushima plant could be improved: IAEA

  • 10

    zichi

    There are still many areas in Fukushima where people are unable to return to live or even grow food stuffs and while the food reaching the markets is declared safe the problems will remain for many more decades.

    Posted in: Taiwan enforces stricter controls on Japanese food imports

  • 2

    zichi

    @GuyJeanDailleult

    I didn't say anything about workers dying at the nuclear ground zero which has happened too. The problem is the number of temp workers exposed to radiation above the permitted levels which removes them from the work force for at least five years and since the nuclear disaster will take many decades involving many tens of thousands of temp workers it will be a problem to find enough of them to work at the site. A worker was killed this year too.

    Workers at the nuclear ground zero are limited to 100 millisieverts over 5years or a maximum of 20 millisieverts in any one year. The temporary workers are used as radiation sponges also known as "glow boys" and "jumpers". The numbers of workers exposed to radiation limits increased by 1.5 times the previous year.

    Even when the reactors are restarted, PM Abe intends to increase the base load of power to 60% of total or about 600TWh, which will provided by nuclear 15%, hydro 10% and coal 65% which will increase the current level of coal to more than 30% increase. The reactors declared safe to generate the power will reach the end of their life cycles by 2030 and with current reactors costing $10 billion each its hard to see how the country will be able to build new ones.

    Posted in: Handling radioactive waste at Fukushima plant could be improved: IAEA

  • 8

    zichi

    The death penalty was to be expected in this case but capital punishment is always wrong and that point is recognised by all the EU countries with the majority of the world countries abolishing it and also 18 of the American States.

    A horrendous crime inflicting death and injury on innocent victims but no matter how horrendous the crime the death penalty can never be justified. Probably today an unpopular comment but I will never change my stance I have held for more than five decades, the one I will always hold.

    Last year, 2014 America executed 35 people.

    Posted in: Boston Marathon bomber sentenced to death

  • 4

    zichi

    At the end of March, TEPCO disclosed that a 35-ton fuel-handling machine which lies in the spent fuel pool following the explosions back in 2011 is also resting on the inner gate of the pool and that the gate is out of position.

    The spent fuel pool contains 566 fuel assemblies including MOX fuel. TEPCO still do not know know it can progress in removing the No3 spent fuel since the radiation levels are also above 2 SIEVERTS/hour.

    TEPCO was planning to finish removing debris from the spent fuel pool by the end of June and start removing the spent fuel by the end of September.

    No1 Reactor http://cache3.asset-cache.net/gc/473412184-starts-preparation-work-to-take-cover-off-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7QWev0RNKdL%2fWeCEF%2bVUaaASriO2kSOHXNiFO3iV4yfkU3%2fQm%2fwQ68eT6UKoqQywQ3tomVvj6WvjvCbEhKOyqFAo%3d

    Posted in: Handling radioactive waste at Fukushima plant could be improved: IAEA

  • 0

    zichi

    A King of Kings!

    Posted in: Blues legend B.B. King dead at 89

  • 3

    zichi

    By Mar 31, this year, more than 1,000 workers, mostly the temp contract workers but also including about 20 TEPCO workers were exposed to radiation levels higher than 50 millisieverts which means they can't continue to work at the nuclear ground zero. Over the coming decades it will become a problem to find enough workers who have not been exposed to radiation limits.

    Posted in: Handling radioactive waste at Fukushima plant could be improved: IAEA

  • 4

    zichi

    TEPCO are removing the cover over the No1 reactor building but before doing so its using remote control robots to spray the dust to prevent its release when the cover is opened to the atmosphere. The radiation levels inside the building are too high for workers to enter.

    TEPCO will remove the cover and then the earthquake debris before removing all of the roof and upper structure to expose the spent nuclear fuel cooling pool. TEPCO will remove all the spent fuel from the pool but it has not stated if it will need to build a structure like the one used to remove the spent fuel from No4 reactor.

    Posted in: Handling radioactive waste at Fukushima plant could be improved: IAEA

  • 2

    zichi

    Residents of the Fukushima Tsushima district of Namie Town designated as a "difficult-to-return zone" due to high levels of radiation from the ongoing disaster at the nuclear plant are set to file a class-action lawsuit against the government and plant operator TEPCO. The radiation levels are greater than 50 millisieverts per year when legally the limit for Fukushima is limited to 20 millisieverts per year. The lawsuit is being filed by about 100 former residents. The Ministry of the Environment still has not announced a plan for decontamination in difficult-to-return zones.

    This follows another lawsuit filed by 340 residents of the Miyakoji district of Tamura.

    ..........new ones constructed costing ¥10 trillion each.

    Great. So lets build these new ones. Safer. Cleaner. less waste. Awesome. And cheaper to operate than any of the alternatives.

    Certainly a cheap comment from you since you won't be contributing a single yen to any costs and you won't be building anything here.

    Posted in: Gov't eyes nuclear power for 20-22% of electricity supply

  • 2

    zichi

    KEPCO could have done better to decrease its costs before applying to the government to rise its power charges by 10% but the government lowered that to 8,36%. KEPCO have asked its unions to accept reductions in its pension committments and claiming to re committed to reductions while still paying its top executives ¥21 million and refusing a government request to lower it to ¥18 million.

    5,000 companies and local governments terminated their KEPCO because of its raised rates and switched to new power supplies. There's some explanation of this on the TEPCO website.

    http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/corpinfo/ir/kojin/jigyou-e.html

    and also at

    https://www.amt-law.com/en/pdf/bulletins9_pdf/140106.pdf

    Posted in: Kansai Electric to increase electricity rates for households by 8.36%

  • 2

    zichi

    KEPCO power charges are total ¥7,610 for 283kWh (April) works out at ¥26.89/kWh. We are at home 24/7 and work from home. We also live in large house.

    Posted in: Kansai Electric to increase electricity rates for households by 8.36%

  • 1

    zichi

    Looks good but on my Olympus Mirrorless I'm using a 50 mm legacy lens, Minolta which is about 35 years old and works great even though it's actually heavier than the actual body.

    Posted in: Canon's EF50mm F1.8 STM lens

  • 5

    zichi

    KEPCO reported a group net loss of 148.38 billion yen for fiscal 2014 due to the cost of thermal power generation to replace nuclear power.

    The cost of fossil fuels, especially oil have fallen during 2014 but the value of the yen weakened. There are the costs of updating the safety of the reactors at about ¥60 billion each and further costs to be added over the coming few years for additional safety features like offsite emergency control rooms.

    Part of the failure lies with the lack of a national grid system and a smart one would be better. The maximum amount of power generated by wind would be in Hokkaido and the major demand for power would be in Tokyo but because of the lack of a national grid system that wind power from Hokkaido cannot be transferred for Tokyo use.

    In East Japan there are three grid systems providing electricity at 50MHz. They are Hokkaido, Tohoku and Tokyo. Between Hokkaido and Tohoku is a maximum grid connection of 0.6GW, and Tohoku to Tokyo 6GW.

    In West Japan there are six grid systems supplying electricity at 60MHz. Chubu, Hokuriku, Kansai, Shikoku, Chugoku and Kyushu. Between Kansai and Hokuriku, Shikoku and Chogoku there are 23.63GW of grid connections. More than the total power provided by KEPCO for 80% of its time.

    May 12, KEPCO published a document "Measures to Mitigate Electricity Rates" http://www.kepco.co.jp/english/corporate/ir/brief/pdf/2015_may12_1.pdf

    In the document KEPCO are requesting to increase the rate for households and small business by 10.23% and an average of 13.93% for the liberalized sector. Not including the increase in sales tax.

    KEPCO stated it will decommission its No1&2 Mihama reactors. KEPCO claim to have made cost cuts of ¥67.8 billion with ¥13 billion of that from reductions fuel purchases.

    Imports of LNG and coal are expected to stay high unless Japan moves to start more than a few reactors, analysts have said.

    Starting those reactors considered to be safe by the NRA would only generate 15% of total power or about 150TWh. The reductions would be from LNG which currently provides about 400TWh. Reducing the LNG by 150TWh would reduce costs by about ¥600 billion nationally.

    The 9 mainland power utilities generate about 1000TWh/year costing about ¥13 trillion which they sell for about ¥20 trillion making profits of about ¥7 trillion, which seems like a very healthy profit.

    In 2014, KEPCO generated 145,854GWh slightly less than the previous year and sold 134,490GWh also slightly less than the previous year.

    Between the year ending Mar. 31, 2014, and the year ending Mar. 31 2015, KEPCO accounts show no change in renewable energy power facilities which were ¥1,824 million.

    The balance for KEPCO on Mar. 13, 2015 stood at ¥638,876 million. Assets are about ¥7 trillion.

    http://www.kepco.co.jp/english/corporate/ir/brief/pdf/2015_apr30_1.pdf

    Over the decades, KEPCO invested in nuclear power plants but not many other fuel types. It only owns 12 thermal plants. LNG (5,873MW) x 5, Oil (8,175MW) x6 and Coal (1,800MW) x1 providing a total of 15,848MW or nearly 50% of its capacity.

    The costs of the nuclear disaster have increased to ¥11 trillion and most likely by 2030 will go above the ¥35 trillion level. The country needs to be investing in at least two major smart grid systems, East and West, renewables need to be increased to provide at least 20% 200TWh of total power.The monopoly of the power utilities over power generation and supply must end.

    http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/govt-eyes-nuclear-power-for-a-fifth-of-electricity-supply#comment_1976938

    Posted in: Kansai Electric to increase electricity rates for households by 8.36%

  • 4

    zichi

    A government panel of experts headed by Masahiro Sakane, an adviser at Komatsu Ltd., has decided what the cost of power generation by source will be in 2030. It priced nuclear energy at the lowest of all energies, at ¥10.1/kilowatt hour compared with ¥8.9/kWh in 2011. The price includes the cost of the nuclear disaster at ¥9 trillion and the cost of decommissioning a reactor at ¥60 billion each one required. The price does not reflect the cost of updating the reactors which has topped ¥2 trillion, more than 1.5x from one year ago. Its not the final cost figure.

    The nuclear disaster in just four years has cost more than ¥10 trillion and most likely, eventually will cost more than ¥50 trillion. It does not include the cost of the Aomori reprocessing plant or the cost of safely storing 20,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel and 150 tons of plutonium. Nor does it include the costs of decontamination in Fukushima, probably more than ¥20 billion. Also not included will be the compensations paid to the local communities, which will have decommissioned reactors.

    The cost of ¥10.1 for nuclear energy compares with •¥11 for hydro. •¥12.7 for solar. •¥12.9 for coal. •¥13.4 for LNG.
    •¥13.9 for onshore wind. •¥14.4 for Gas cogeneration •¥19.2 for geothermal. •¥28.7 for offshore wind.
    •¥29.7 for biomass.

    By the year 2030, 28 reactors in the current fleet will be 40 years or older. Its unrealistic that Japan could generate even 14% of total power from nuclear energy in 2030. There's little possibility of reaching the current government target of 22%. It could only achieve the targets if the life cycle of the reactors are increased or new ones constructed costing ¥10 trillion each.

    http://www.greenpeace.org/japan/Global/japan/pdf/20150428-briefing-energy-mix.pdf

    The government is seeking to raise base load to 60% provided by nuclear 20%, hydro 20% coal 20%.

    The government wants the total power generation to be provided by •Nuclear 20%, •Coal 26%, •LNG 27% •Renews 22-24%.

    These figures do not add up or work out. Power is generated at about 1,000TWh per year so if base load were to be 60% then the base load would have to be 600TWh provided by nuclear, hydro and coal.

    The possibility of using nuclear for 20% of the total will only be possible if the life cycles of the reactors are increased, since by 2030 at least 25-30 will be reaching the end of their cycles or already reached it, making it difficult to achieve more than 15% unless the life cycles are increased or a high number of new reactors costing ¥12 trillion each, are built before 2030, another unlikely scenario. The power from hydro is limited by installed capacity and is running at a max.

    •Nuclear 15% =150TWh •Hydro 14% = 85TWh •Coal 61% =365TWh

    The remaining 40% of peak demand 400TWh will come from LNG and renews. Probably, LNG at 300TWh and renews at 100TWh.

    So the figures would be: given that the base load will be 60% provided by nuclear, hydro and coal,

    Total power 1,000TWh

    •Nuclear 150TWh 15.0% •Hydro 85TWh 8.5% •Coal 365TWh 36.5% this would include about 40TWh from biomass/waste •LNG 300TWh 30.0% •Renews 100TWh 10.0%

    Power Generation Costs •Nuclear 150 TWh ¥1.515 trillion •Hydro 85 TWh ¥ 935 billion •Coal 365 TWh ¥4.708 trillion •LNG 300 TWh ¥4.020 trillion •Renews 100 TWh ¥1.500 trillion

    TOTAL ¥12.678 trillion

    Power Charges per kWh •Domestic 300TWh x¥24, =¥7.200 trillion •Business 350TWh x¥18, =¥6.300 trillion •Services 350TWh x¥18, =¥6.300 trillion

    TOTAL:¥19.800 trillion minus costs ¥12.678 trillion equals profits ¥ 7.122 trillion

    *******Replace the nuclear energy with another higher cost one and the overall costs would not increase by much still leaving the power utilities with yearly profits of around ¥7 trillion.

    Posted in: Gov't eyes nuclear power for 20-22% of electricity supply

  • 5

    zichi

    @Heda_Madness

    Zichi - seems you're struggling with the numbers, First of all I said tens of thousands will die. Assuming those figures are correct and given that coal imports have increased but still... the longer the plants are off line the more will 2000 ish a year will lead to tens of thousands in a minimum of ten years.

    No I'm not struggling with the numbers since math’s was one of my good subjects and also being a control and measurement engineer, microscopist and electrical engineer, numbers have been a major part of my occupation. I take the current numbers for power generations by source in TWh's and times them by the Willem Post figures you posted. The death rate per fuel. Currently, that would create no more than about 13,000 premature deaths per year, which are small numbers when compared to the deaths from the major diseases which I've already quoted.

    Even with the restart of the reactors, which the government plans to do at some point, the 15%-20% of power generated would not decrease the premature deaths by that much since it would cause a reduction in the LNG used but not coal. In fact, even with restarting the reactors, the government also intends to increase the amount of coal, which will lead to an increase in the premature deaths. But none of the figures are the **tens of thousands of deaths* so often quoted by you. You often quote the possible premature death rate from power generation but never once quoted the number of live saved by electricity.

    Japan's fossil fuel production plants are on the coast. Good job the cities are all based in land.. oh wait a second...

    To repeat your own quote "But as for your other point. you've missed a very key part". Some part of the pollutants from the coastal fossil power plants are carried out to the sea just like the radiation was from the nuclear disaster. So currently, coal is producing 338TWh of power so according to your Willem Post figures that would lead to about 8,112 premature deaths if the pollution went inland but if for instance the wind carries 50% of the pollutants out to sea then the level of premature deaths would also drop 50%. The figures for the premature deaths caused from power generation do not consider the personal conditions of the likely victims or the local environment conditions. Even risk management must consider those local points.

    You stated that fossil fuels caused less premature deaths in America because of the greater land mass but most of the plants are located inland.

    Indeed. I ABSOLUTELY reject that the WHOLE of Fukushima has been contaminated to dangerous levels. And maintain it is only PART of it. Can you perhaps provide a link that shows that either 8-10% of the country has been contaminated for 100s years? The anti-nuclear supporters like to point out that Fukushima has been contaminated while rejecting evidence.

    I have never stated on this post or any other that dangerous levels of radiation have contaminated the whole of Fukushima. That's just a fantasy and a twisting of words on your part. The government stated that 8-10% of the country was contaminated by radiation from the nuclear disaster which also included the release of plutonium. The government also drew up a plan for decontamination costing many billions of yen and in many areas did not reduce the radiation levels by much. The work did not involve any of the mountainous areas and probably never will. The government also produced and published a map which I have already linked to showing areas were people could return, areas were people could visit but not stay overnight and areas which people could not visit nor probably ever return to live. I have provided you with so many links but only one or two from your direction.

    The problem common to all the evacuated areas with the nuclear exclusion zone besides the radiation levels are the destruction of properties from the earthquake and tsunami and the destruction from not being lived in for the last four years with an increase in mold and vermin like rats and snakes taking over houses. An increase in ferrel pigs and other wild animals, which have also invaded homes in search of food. The destruction of the infrastructures needed by every community. For people wanting to return to their former communities, the problem of the radiation levels which just one aspect of the greater problems.

    Posted in: Gov't eyes nuclear power for 20-22% of electricity supply

View all