The Nuclear Power Sector in Japan: Nuclear Materials ManagementFuel Cycles Practices, Plans and Poli

1
The Nuclear Power Sector in Japan Nuclear
Materials Management/Fuel Cycles Practices, Plans
and Policies

• 2006 Asian Energy Security Workshop
• November 6-7, 2006
• Beijing, China
• Tatsujiro Suzuki
• The University of Tokyo
• tatsu_at_pp.u-tokyo.ac.jp

2
CONTENTS

• Japans New National Energy Strategy
• Japans New Nuclear Energy Policy
• Three Major Issues
• Nuclear Power under Liberalized Electricity
  Market
• Spent Fuel, Reprocessing and Plutonium
• Multilateral Nuclear Fuel Cycle Approaches and
  Japans Response

3
Japans New Energy Strategy (2006)

• Responding to emerging global and regional energy
  security risks
• Concern over politicization of global oil
  market
• Diversified energy security risk
• Applying comprehensive energy security approach
• Set numerical targets for key policy goals by
  2030
• Acceleration of Nuclear Power Programs, including
  Nuclear Fuel Recycling and Fast Breeder
  Reactor(FBR) programs

4
Japans New National Energy Strategy (2)

• Basic Perspectives of Comprehensive Energy
  Security Strategy

Source New National Energy Strategy (May
2006) http//www.enecho.meti.go.jp/english/data/ne
wnationalenergystrategy2006.pdf
5
Japans New National Energy Strategy (3)

• (1)   Target of energy conservation
• At least another 30 improvement of efficiency
  will be attained by 2030.
• (2)   Target of reducing oil dependence
• The ratio will be reduced from current 50 to be
  lower than 40 by 2030.
• (3)   Target of reducing oil dependence in the
  transport sector
• The percentage will be reduced from 100 to
  around 80 by 2030.
• (4)   Target on nuclear power generation.
• The ratio of nuclear power to all power
  production will be maintained or increased at the
  level of 30 to 40 or more up to 2030 or later.
• (5)   Target of overseas natural resources
  development
• Oil volume ratio will be increased from current
  18 to around 40 by 2030.
• Source New National Energy Strategy (May 2006)
• http//www.enecho.meti.go.jp/english/data/newnatio
  nalenergystrategy2006.pdf

6
Maintain Share of Nuclear Power
Source New National Energy Strategy (May
2006) http//www.enecho.meti.go.jp/english/data/ne
wnationalenergystrategy2006.pdf
7
Japans Resource Diplomacy

• BBC World News, August 28, 2006

In the game of regional politics, Japan feels it
has a role to play in helping offset growing
Russian and Chinese influence Col Christopher
LangtonInternational Institute of Strategic
Studies
source BBC News http//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-p
acific/5291858.stm
8
Overview of Japans Nuclear Power Programs and
Policies

• Total of 55 nuclear power plants (49.6 GWe) are
  now providing roughly 1/3 of total electricity
  generation in Japan (as of March 2006)
• While primary energy consumption is not growing
  much, electricity demand is still growing, but at
  slower rate, primarily due to stabilized
  population growth.
• Nuclear power is expected to maintain its share
  (3040) until 2030, for both energy security and
  environmental reasons.

9
METIs New Nuclear Energy Policy Nuclear Power
Nation Plan(2006)

• Realization of replacement and new orders under
  the liberalized market
• Higher utilization of existing reactors with
  enhanced safety performance
• Steady progress in nuclear fuel cycle
• Early commercialization (2050) of FBR
• Strengthening industrys technical and human
  resource
• Promotion of international activities of nuclear
  industry
• Active contribution to effective international
  regime in reconciling expansion of nuclear power
  and non-proliferation
• Strengthening confidence building between local
  community and the government
• Steady progress in waste disposal

10
Liberalization of Electricity Market in Japan

• Japanese electricity market is gradually being
  liberalized after 1995.
• 1995 IPP was introduced
• Independent Power Producer
• 2000. 3 gt2,000 kWe market (25)
• 2004. 3 gt 500 kWe market (40)
• 2005. 3 gt 50 kWe market (63)
• 2007 Full market liberalization will be
  discussed

11
Future projection of nuclear capacity without any
new orders
Capacity (10MW)
source METI, Nuclear Power Nation Plan,
Aug.2006 (in Japanese) http//www.meti.go.jp/repor
t/downloadfiles/g60823a01j.pdf
12
Measures to promote nuclear power under
liberalized market

• Financial mechanism
• Allow levelized depreciation of capital
  investment
• Allow reserve system for future reprocessing
  (beyond Rokkasho)
• Reexamine funding mechanism for decommissioning
  fund
• Realize benefits of CO2-free power
• Promote extended regional power management to
  allow maximum use of nuclear power

13
Japans Nuclear Fuel Cycle Program
14
Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant
- Owner JNFL - 800 tHM /yr of capacity -
3,000tHM of spent fuel storage capacity. - Active
testing started from March.31, 2006. - Operation
year 2007 - Plutonium will be separated and MOX
powder will be produced by the end of November
for the first time.
15
Overview of Rokkasho Project(as of 2006.4)
200 litter each
Source http//www.fepc.or.jp/menu/cycle/cycle1.ht
ml
16
Estimated Total Life Cycle Cost of Rokkasho
Project

Source Report of Study Group on Cost Estimate
for Nuclear Fuel Cycle (METI, 2004)
17
Debate at JAECs LTP - Recycling vs Direct
Disposal - (1)

• JAEC established technical-subcommittee on
  economic comparison of fuel cycle options.
• Four scenarios until 2060
• Reprocessing all spent fuels (Rokkasho2nd Plant)
• Reprocessing at Rokkasho, and direct disposal
• Direct disposal of all spent fuels
• Interim storage of all spent fuels (decisions to
  reprocess or direct disposal will be deferred)

18
Debate at JAECs LTP - Economic Comparison
(\/kWh, 2 DR) - (2)
19
Debate at JAECs LTP - Recycling vs Direct
Disposal - (3)
20
Debate at JAECs LTP - Recycling vs Direct
Disposal - (4)

• JAEC LTP committee decided that maintaining all
  reprocessing/recycling policy is appropriate
• 2nd reprocessing plant will be needed after 2040,
  and FBR should follow.
• JAEC now included RD on direct disposal as a
  future option.

21
Cost Sharing Scheme
General Power Users
PPS Customers
Back end cost not covered by the existing
scheme (about \12.7 trillion)
Electricity Rate
Transmission cost charge
Newly Created Back End Fund
Source Denki Shimbun, May 12, 2004
22
Need to cover future reprocessing and SF Storage
costs
23
Back-End of Fuel CycleSpent Fuel Management
Issues

• Legal Constraints
• Reactor and Radioactive Material regulation
  requires reactor operators to specify final
  disposal method of spent fuel
• reprocessing is the only method for utilities
  since JAECs LTP does not allow direct disposal
• Amendment made in 1998 to allow interim storage
  (outside reactor and reprocessing sites)
• Law for HLW Disposal (1999)
• Law defines HLW as vitrified waste from
  reprocessing (spent fuel is not included as HLW
  and cannot be disposed by Nuclear Waste
  Management Organization NUMO)

24
Back-End of Fuel CycleSpent Fuel Management
Issues

• Physical and Political constraints
• Utilities promised reactor site communities to
  remove SF to reprocessing facility
• Physical storage capacity has been limited by
  political opposition to
• Expansion of storage capacity on site
• Acceptance of SF from other reactors/sites
• Spent fuel handling tax is being raised at
  reactor sites
• Now, some utilities plan to build first
  Away-from-Reactor (AFR) interim storage facility
  (5000 tons) at Mutsu city (Aomori)
• But the condition is to continue reprocessing
  policy

25
Cumulative inventory and management of spent fuel
in the future
26
2019
Start of Mutsu interim storage
2014
2016
Rokkasho pool only
Additional storage capacity needed beyond NPP
sites
Assumption Rokkasho storage pool 1,500tHM for
BWR and1,500tHM for PWR (1,096tHM for BWR and
680tHM for PWR was already filled by the end of
April 2006.)
27
Japans Pu Balance(as of April 2004)
Source Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
(METI) and Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), Answers to
the questions raised by Inami Tetsuo (The House
of Representatives member) for the Pu management
in Japan(August 2004). The number is rounded off
to one decimal.
28
81tPu
74tPu
81tPu
37tPu
48tPu
6tPu
Figure 4. Future plutonium stockpile until 2020
Assumption Before 2004 actual data After 2005
Demand MOX fuel From 2012, 9.3 tPu/year/plants
x18 plants Monju
re-start from 2010, 0.47tPU/year
Supply Rokkasho reprocessing plant start
from 2006
(2 -6tPu/year from 2006-2009, 8tPu/year from 2010)
29
Progress of MOX fuel program
as of September 2006
30
Plutonium Issues

• Japans plutonium stockpile could increase up to
  150 tons by 2020.
• If Rokksho plant start its operation as planned
  without any progress in MOX recycling programs
• Even with full MOX recycling programs as planned,
  Japanese plutonium stockpile will be around 80
  tons in 2011.
• In order to consume such large stockpile of
  plutonium, Japanese utilities must speed up and
  scale up its MOX recycling programs
  substantially.

31
Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Fuel
Cycle(1)

• Need for tighter control on enrichment and
  reprocessing facilities/technologies
• IAEA Elbaradei Proposal and MNA (multilateral
  nuclear fuel cycle approach)
• Assurance of fuel supply
• Enrichment and reprocessing facilities under
  multinational ownership or multilateral control
• Multinational management of spent fuel and HLW

32
Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Fuel
Cycle(2)

• US Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) US,
  Russia, France, Japan, UK, China
• Fuel supply guarantee to those who give up
  enrichment/reprocessing facilities
• Accept spent fuel/HLW from those who give up
  enrichment/reprocessing facilities (cf. Fuel
  Leasing scheme proposed by Russia)
• Develop Advanced Burner Reactor (ABR) and
  proliferation resistant fuel recycling
  technologies
• Develop a small reactor for developing country
• Develop advanced safeguards technologies

33
Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Fuel
Cycle(3)

• Uncertainties about GNEP
• Double standards for enrichment/reprocessing
  facilities (separate have and have not)
• Under development of advanced fuel recycling and
  ABR technologies
• No firm prospect for accepting foreign spent fuel
  and HLW
• Not clear how these approaches are effective for
  current non-proliferation issues

34
Multilateral Approach over Nuclear Fuel Cycle

• Closing nuclear fuel cycle is one of the corner
  stones of Japans energy security
• Considered as semi-domestic energy source
• At first, reluctant to support multilateral
  approaches as it may conflict with Japans
  nuclear fuel cycle strategy
• New energy strategy has adopted more positive
  policy toward multilateral approaches
• Contributing to enhanced global non-proliferation
  regime
• Japan can be a supplier nation of nuclear fuel
  cycle in the future

35
Japans response to GNEP

• Feb.7 Japan's view
• Positive statement and will discuss what Japan
  can do to contribute to the proposal (PM office,
  METI/MOFA/MEXT)
• Aug.8 "Nuclear power nation plan"
• METI Nuclear Policy Committee and Japans New
  Energy Strategy published in June
• Reaffirm commitment to FBR and closed fuel cycle
• Sep.8 Proposal for Expression of Interest (EOI)
• JAEA, JNFL, Fuji electric group, Mitsubishi heavy
  industries ltd., etc.
• Sept. Japans proposal for Nuclear Fuel
  Assurance (METI, JAEC)

36
Japans ProposalIAEA Standby Arrangements System
for Nuclear Fuel Supply (1)

• Japans strategic thinking
• Make Japan's presence in the GNEP
• Secure the position as a supplier of enriched
  uranium service in the future (do not want to
  limit future suppliers to only six nations)
• Basic concepts
• Supplementary to six country proposal
• Intend to reduce possibility of supply
  disruption in addition to preparation for
  possible disruption- need to enhance
  transparency of the market
• Six country proposal separate countries into
  have and have not. This proposal is intended
  to cover as many countries as possible as future
  suppliers.

37
Japans ProposalIAEA Standby Arrangements System
for Nuclear Fuel Supply (2)

• Each country can voluntarily register the
  following supply capability at IAEA
• Natural uranium
• Uranium conversion
• Enrichment service
• Uranium fuel fabrication
• Uranium fuel stockpile
• Registration can be categorized into the
  following three groups.
• Level 1 Has commercial supply capability, but
  has not exported to international market
• Level 2 Has already exported to intl market
• Level 3 Has stockpile which can be readily
  exported

38
Japans ProposalIAEA Standby Arrangements System
for Nuclear Fuel Supply (3)

• Role of IAEA
• Managing the Standby Arrangements System,
  including establishing database
• Clarifying conditions to receive fuel assurance
• Safeguards, safety, PP, export control, etc.
• Note that giving up supply capability may not
  be appropriate under the sprit of universal
  condition
• IAEA does not have any legal ownership, but will
  play important role in making arrangements
  between supplier and recipient states
• Reflecting negative response to six country
  proposal
• 6 country proposal could deny the right (Art. 4)
  of NPT
• Japans proposal does not deny such right

39
Possible Multinational Approach involving Japan
40
Possible Multinational Approach involving Japan
41
CONCLUSION (1)

• Energy Security Strategy has changed
  significantly
• More complex, diversified, multi-layered strategy
• Nuclear power is critical component of Japans
  energy strategy
• Maintain 3040 share of electricity generation
• Various measures are needed to ensure
  competitiveness of nuclear power under
  liberalized energy market

42
CONCLUSION (2)

• Japans commitment to closed fuel cycle remains
  strong
• But such commitment may create financial,
  political and social risks to Japanese nuclear
  program
• Reprocessing is costly
• Plutonium stockpile may increase
• In order to avoid such risks, Japan should
  explore socio-political solutions, including
  multilateral approaches to nuclear fuel cycle