NUCLEAR GUARDIANSHIP FORUM, On The Responsible Care of Radioactive Materials
Issue # 2, Spring 1993, p. 7.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japan's Plutonium: The New Nuclear Threat
by Nora Akino
Fifty years after the onset of the nuclear age, the world is
increasingly turning away from nuclear power as a viable future
energy source, seeing more and more the disastrous price we have
already paid for it in death and environmental destruction. As a
result of mounting public opposition, continuing technical
problems, high costs, and the yet unsolved dilemma of waste
disposal, the worldwide nuclear industry is in decline.
One notable exception is Japan, which is expanding its nuclear
program by pursuing an ambitious plutonium-based energy policy.
When fully implemented, the Japanese program will involve shipping
massive amounts of plutonium across the world's oceans and result
in the production of more of that deadly substance than currently
exists in the combined U.S. and Soviet nuclear arsenals.
Plutonium, a by-product of burning uranium in conventional
reactors, is the most toxic radioactive substance known to
humankind and an essential nuclear weapons material. Japan plans
to burn plutonium in both conventional and fast breeder reactors.
Fast breeder reactors produce more plutonium than they originally
consume, creating an ever increasing supply of fuel. It was this
self-supplying aspect of fast breeder technology that so
captivated Japanese and Western policy makers in the aftermath of
the 1970s oil shocks.
------------------------------------
...the Japanese program will involve
shipping massive amounts of plutonium
across the world's oceans and result
in the production of more of that deadly
substance than currently exists in the
combined U.S. and Soviet nuclear arsenals.
------------------------------------
Twenty years and tens of billions of dollars later, however, fast
breeder technology has failed to live up to its promise of
providing cheap, "renewable" energy. The severe environmental and
health risks inherent in fast breeder technology have made it
extremely expensive and unpopular. Countries like the U.S.,
Germany, and Britain have abandoned their fast breeder programs
because of their prohibitive cost, continuing technical failures,
and intense public opposition. If Japan pushes forward with its
plutonium policy, it is likely to give new impetus to a technology
deemed too dangerous by most nuclear nations and opposed by a
majority of the Earth's inhabitants.
Japan is currently building a nuclear fuel cycle facility to
extract plutonium from conventional nuclear reactor wastes. When
completed, the Rokkasho fuel complex will be the largest of its
kind in the world and will be able to separate five tons of
plutonium a year. In the mean-time, Japan has been sending reactor
waste to France and England for reprocessing. The extracted
plutonium will be shipped back to Japan in as many as 30 shipments
over the next twenty years. On November 7, 1992, the first
plutonium shipment left France for Japan aboard the freighter
Akatsuki Maru, and arrived in January amidst international
reaction.
The potential risks of overseas plutonium transport are enormous.
In a collision, shipboard fire, or sinking, this toxin with a
half-life of 24,000 years could enter the food chain and cause an
environmental disaster of unprecedented magnitude. Plutonium is
also a highly desirable target of terrorists seeking to acquire
nuclear arms. A single plutonium shipment could be made into as
many as 150 nuclear bombs.
A larger Japanese plutonium stockpile will also pose a serious
threat to international security and nuclear non-proliferation. It
will make it nearly impossible to dissuade other nations,
especially Pacific nations wary of resurgent Japanese military
power, from amassing their own nuclear stores under the guise of
civilian nuclear programs. This is already a reality in North
Korea, where the government, pointing to Japan's own plutonium
program, has rebuffed calls by the U.S. and Japanese to dismantle
a large reprocessing plant under construction. Current arms
reductions efforts also could be undermined if the U.S. and the
former Soviet Union find it impossible to destroy their own
plutonium stocks in the face of a Japanese stockpile.
Finally, considering the radical changes in the world order that
have taken place in just the past two years, and the fact that
plutonium has a half-life of 24,000 years, the future implications
of widespread civilian plutonium use are frightening.
Looked at from every possible angle, the costs of civilian nuclear
energy programs to life, to the environment and to human and
social progress are staggering and unjustifiable. For the last
fifty years, the world's nations, industrial and developing alike,
have poured hundreds of billions of dollars into nuclear programs
that have resulted in untold thousands of radiation deaths,
landscapes devastated by uranium mining and waste dumping, and
disasters like Chernobyl of which we may never know the full
effects. Between 1979 and 1990, International Energy Agency (IEA)
governments spent almost 60%, or $35 billion, of their energy
research funds (this does not include the hundreds of billions
spent on building, maintaining, and repairing commercial plants)
on nuclear power, in contrast to 6.3% on energy efficiency and
9.4% on renewable. And yet, over the last two decades, improved
energy efficiency in the U.S. has saved several times as much
energy as was produced by all this nation's nuclear reactors put
together. (These figures are from Worldwide Nuclear Industry
Status Report, May 1992, Green-peace, Worldwatch Institute, WISE,
Paris)
A number of environmental and nuclear watchdog organizations,
including Greenpeace International, Natural Resources Defense
Council, and Nuclear Control Institute, are actively opposing
Japan's plutonium program. In Berkeley and Tokyo, an organization
calling itself Plutonium Free Future has been working since
February of 1992 to publicize and mobilize opposition to Japan's
plutonium policy. Formed by concerned Japanese and American
citizens residing in the San Francisco Bay Area, the group's
stated mission is to "raise international awareness of the dangers
of civilian plutonium use through political action and public
education, and to promote renewable energy development as the
foundation of a sustainable future for our children."
------------------------------------
...over the last two decades,
improved energy efficiency in the U.S.
has saved several times as much energy
as was produced by all this nation's
nuclear reactors put together.
------------------------------------
In October and November of 1992, Plutonium Free Future filed a
formal Petition of Objection against Japan's plutonium shipment
with the Science and Technology Agency in Tokyo. More than 2200
individuals, organizations, and government figures from 52 nations
signed the petition. In response, Science and Technology Agency
officials held the first public hearing on the plutonium shipment
ever, on December 14th. Over 60 petitioners were present at the
hearing, among them lawyers and scientists. The government would
answer only technical questions, submitted in writing ahead of
time, relating to the safety of the cask which contains the
plutonium on board ship. Yet, even though these questions prepared
by our scientists were technical and were presented in writing to
the Agency in plenty of time, during the public hearing the Agency
expert was unable or unwilling to respond with any accuracy. The
petitioners were shocked at this disregard of legal public
process. Japanese media remained silent about this hearing. Almost
no publicity came out. So far the Japanese government has not
shown any signs of halting shipments.
In later developments, the Japanese electric utility companies
have begun to indicate that they are not eager to continue on the
path to commercial fast-breeder reactors. In response to this
reluctance the government has renewed its commitment a and
indicated that it will continue work on plutonium reprocessing and
breeding alone, without the help of the utilities.
But if the electric utilities don't want to use the plutonium,
what could it be for?
------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information contact: Plutonium Free Future, P.O. Box
2589, Berkeley, CA 94702 USA. tel: 510-540-7645, fax:
510-540-6159, email: pff@igc.org.
Nora Akino, a freelance writer residing in Berkeley California,
has worked with Plutonium Free Future for the past year. She is a
Japanese citizen, raised in the US.