Japan Building 22 New Coal Power Plants

cancel2 2022

Canceled
.
It’s a glorious autumn afternoon and I’m standing on a hillside looking out over Tokyo Bay. Beside me is Takao Saiki, a usually mild-mannered gentleman in his 70s.

But today Saiki-San is angry.

"It’s a total joke," he says, in perfect English. "Just ridiculous!"

The cause of his distress is a giant construction site blocking our view across the bay – a 1.3-gigawatt coal-fired power station in the making.

"I don’t understand why we still have to burn coal to generate electricity," says Saiki-San’s friend, Rikuro Suzuki. "This plant alone will emit more than seven million tonnes of carbon dioxide every year!"

Suzuki-San’s point is a good one. Shouldn’t Japan be cutting its coal consumption, not increasing it, at a time of great concern about coal’s impact on the climate?

So why the coal? The answer is the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.

In 2010 about one third of Japan’s electricity came from nuclear power, and there were plans to build a lot more. But then the 2011 disaster hit, and all Japan’s nuclear power plants were shut down. Ten years later most remain closed – and there is a lot of resistance to restarting them.

In their place Japan’s gas-fired power stations have been doing a lot of overtime. But, as Britain has found out recently, natural gas is expensive.

So, the Japanese government decided to build 22 new coal-fired power stations, to run on cheap coal imported from Australia. Economically it made sense. Environmentally, not so much. Japan is now under intense pressure to stop using coal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-59525480

The BBC is still spitting its dummy out over Japan’s intention to carry on building 22 new coal power stations in the next five years, with combined carbon dioxide emissions of 74 million tonnes, about a quarter of Britain’s total emissions.

There is talk of eventually producing blue hydrogen from coal, and converting the plants to burn that instead. However that really is pie in the sky, as it would need carbon capture in the hydrogen process. If you have that, you might just as well use it in the coal plants themselves and carry on burning coal.

The reality is that CCS can only capture a proportion of the carbon dioxide. Meanwhile blue hydrogen will always be horribly expensive.

Of course, the BBC’s preferred solution is renewables:

"Japanese companies need cheap electricity to be competitive and they need clean electricity to be internationally acceptable. That means they need renewable electricity. Delaying this development will harm the Japanese economy."

However, there might be one slight snag with that!

It might not have occurred to the BBC, but Japan cannot simply import electricity when wind and solar are not working flat out. It has no interconnectors, and I doubt very much whether it would want to be totally reliant on Russia or China for its power.

With the shutdown of nuclear power, Japan has little alternative to using fossil fuels, regardless of what the BBC and Saiki-San might think.

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2021/12/08/japan-building-22-new-coal-power-plants/
 
So why the coal? The answer is the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster.

In 2010 about one third of Japan’s electricity came from nuclear power, and there were plans to build a lot more. But then the 2011 disaster hit, and all Japan’s nuclear power plants were shut down. Ten years later most remain closed – and there is a lot of resistance to restarting them.

In their place Japan’s gas-fired power stations have been doing a lot of overtime. But, as Britain has found out recently, natural gas is expensive.

So, the Japanese government decided to build 22 new coal-fired power stations, to run on cheap coal imported from Australia. Economically it made sense.
 
Hitachi is proposing to build the BWRX-300 small modular reactor. It is a 300-MWe water-cooled, natural-circulation SMR with passive safety systems. That's not fucked that's common sense.

https://www.ans.org/news/article-3482/ge-hitachi-smr-chosen-for-darlington-project/

That's nice.
But I still don't see how this would prevent a Fukushima event.
If the water pressure is lost?
I find it very hard to believe that the water located in/near the reactor is going to stay cool enough to keep the reactor under control if power is lost and the rods cannot be removed.

I think the future is lead or lead-bismuth fast reactors.
https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Chinese-lead-bismuth-test-reactor-starts-up

They have TONS of advantages.
Not the least of which is that they require NO power or outside water to remain safe.
And it is almost impossible for them to 'explode'.
If Fukushima happened to a lead cooled, fast reactor?
Nothing would have happened.
The lead would have cooled.
Now - the reactor itself might have been damaged beyond repair (definitely if it was lead-bismuth).
But that is it.
NO escaping radiation because lead is a natural protector from radiation.
If the radiation cools and hardens? It still keeps radiation in and stops the radioactive process.
No hydrogen explosions.
No escaping radiation.
No external contamination.
Even if there is a leak in the reactor?
The lead will quickly harden and seal the reactor.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead-cooled_fast_reactor
 
That's nice.
But I still don't see how this would prevent a Fukushima event.
If the water pressure is lost?
I find it very hard to believe that the water located in/near the reactor is going to stay cool enough to keep the reactor under control if power is lost and the rods cannot be removed.

I think the future is lead or lead-bismuth fast reactors.
https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Chinese-lead-bismuth-test-reactor-starts-up

They have TONS of advantages.
Not the least of which is that they require NO power or outside water to remain safe.
And it is almost impossible for them to 'explode'.
If Fukushima happened to a lead cooled, fast reactor?
Nothing would have happened.
The lead would have cooled.
Now - the reactor itself might have been damaged beyond repair (definitely if it was lead-bismuth).
But that is it.
NO escaping radiation because lead is a natural protector from radiation.
If the radiation cools and hardens? It still keeps radiation in and stops the radioactive process.
No hydrogen explosions.
No escaping radiation.
No external contamination.
Even if there is a leak in the reactor?
The lead will quickly harden and seal the reactor.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead-cooled_fast_reactor

It's clear that you do not understand passive control safety systems, so allow me to enlighten you. These are state of the art systems that require no operator intervention or external power systems to shut down in the event of reactor incident requiring shutdown.

Passive nuclear safety is a design approach for safety features, implemented in a nuclear reactor, that does not require any active intervention on the part of the operator or electrical/electronic feedback in order to bring the reactor to a safe shutdown state, in the event of a particular type of emergency (usually overheating resulting from a loss of coolant or loss of coolant flow). Such design features tend to rely on the engineering of components such that their predicted behaviour would slow down, rather than accelerate the deterioration of the reactor state; they typically take advantage of natural forces or phenomena such as gravity, buoyancy, pressure differences, conduction or natural heat convection to accomplish safety functions without requiring an active power source.[1] Many older common reactor designs use passive safety systems to a limited extent, rather, relying on active safety systems such as diesel powered motors. Some newer reactor designs feature more passive systems; the motivation being that they are highly reliable and reduce the cost associated with the installation and maintenance of systems that would otherwise require multiple trains of equipment and redundant safety class power supplies in order to achieve the same level of reliability.

https://nuclear.gepower.com/build-a-plant/products/nuclear-power-plants-overview/bwrx-300
 
Last edited:
Japan has nothing on China and India who are building hundreds of coal plants. They must have missed the Paris promise to save the planet.
 
It's clear that you do not understand passive control safety systems, so allow me to enlighten you. These are state of the art systems that require no operator intervention or external power systems to shut down in the event of reactor incident requiring shutdown.



https://nuclear.gepower.com/build-a-plant/products/nuclear-power-plants-overview/bwrx-300

I get that.

But what happens if you cannot add more coolant to the reactor for over 7 days?
Apparently?
The reactor will overheat.

What if the coolant leaks out due to accident/terrorism?
Bye bye reactor and surrounding area.


Now answer me this please?

Which is safer?
1) this reactor?
2) or a lead/lead-bismuth reactor?
 
It would be nice if that was the ONLY thing this idiot doesn't understand.

:laugh:

This from the guy whom starts threads about road signs being misspelled.
And then wanders off into some incoherent blather about politics based on that ONE sign.
 
Last edited:
Or fourth grade comprehension.

And this from the guy who appears THE biggest coward on this board.

He simply refuses to debate anyone straight up.
That means that all he is doing is posting ad hominem's and strawman.
Which - by definition - makes him a HUGE troll.

He excludes people from his threads that 'upset him'.


In all seriousness.

I have NEVER seen a poster who trolls AND whom seems desperate to avoid confrontation at the same time.

No offense...but that is beyond pathetic, to me.

If you are going to be a troll?
At least have the guts to stand up to people.
Instead of running away from them when they hurt your whittle feewings.
And indirectly trolling them behind their back.
You must be one, spineless dude in real life.

Good day.
 
Last edited:
And this from the guy who appears THE biggest coward on this board.

He simply refuses to debate anyone straight up.
That means that all he is doing is posting ad hominem's and strawman.
Which - by definition - makes him a HUGE troll.

He excludes people from his threads that 'upset him'.


In all seriousness.

I have NEVER seen a poster who trolls AND whom seems desperate to avoid confrontation at the same time.

No offense...but that is beyond pathetic, to me.

If you are going to be a troll?
At least have the guts to stand up to people.
Instead of running away from them when they hurt your whittle feewings.
And indirectly trolling them behind their back.
You must be one, spineless dude in real life.

Good day.

Earl thread bans me because I am so much better than he is, and he just cant deal with that.
 
Earl is so much like Moon....those who have the ability to call them out and make them face justice get thread banned.
 
Are you serious?
I ought to 'bone up on 4th gen. nuclear reactor....'?
What the hell for?
I don't work in the field.


But okay.

Than you should bone up on lead/lead-bismuth fast reactors.

Sorry sonny, don't bring a knife to a shootout, that's the best advice you'll get this week. I study nuclear technology advancements assiduously, I know about MSR, thorium, LFR, BWR, LWR and pebble bed types of reactors. I also know about fusion reactors and the huge leap forward that has just been achieved. That you don't recognise that says much about you. You need to read some basic 101 type material, how about that?

Regarding Lead-Cooled Fast Reactors (LFR), they have certain theoretical advantages over say fluoride or sodium cooled ones, but haven't read of any companies actively pursuing the technology.
 
Sorry sonny, don't bring a knife to a shootout, that's the best advice you'll get this week. I study nuclear technology advancements assiduously, I know about MSR, thorium, LFR, BWR, LWR and pebble bed types of reactors. I also know about fusion reactors and the huge leap forward that has just been achieved. That you don't recognise that says much about you. You need to read some basic 101 type material, how about that?

Regarding Lead-Cooled Fast Reactors (LFR), they have certain theoretical advantages over say fluoride or sodium cooled ones, but haven't read of any companies actively pursuing the technology.

UM...I like U....But your claimed expertise is iffy.
 
Someone successfully convinced them to stop messing with nuclear? Dunno why they don't do solar tho. All that wide open ocean space, yaknow?
 
Back
Top