Japan's nuclear energy policy: From firm commitment to difficult dilemma addressing growing stocks of plutonium, program delays, domestic opposition and international pressure

Abstract

Since 1956, Japan has been on a path to reduce its dependence on foreign energy sources through the development of nuclear power. This paper examines the origins of this commitment, the changing social issues and the current dilemma Japan faces regarding the future of its nuclear energy policy and its efforts to overcome the domestic and international pressures to ensure safety and security.Galvanized by international initiatives and further motivated by the oil crises in the 1970s, Japan's commitment to develop a closed nuclear fuel cycle, one which reprocesses fuel from thermal reactors for use in advanced fast breeder reactors, has remained resolute. However, program delays, international security concerns over the plutonium, a weapons-grade nuclear material and one of the products of reprocessing, and increasing public opposition to various components of the Atomic Energy Commissions’ Long-Term Program for Development and Utilization of Nuclear Energy, have put pressure on the government to resolve these issues.The commitment to develop the technology on one hand is commendable however it has contributed to the dilemma the Japanese nuclear industry now faces: A growing stockpile of plutonium and no readily available means of reducing it. With growing public involvement, finding a straightforward technology solution is increasingly difficult.In 1995, an accident at Monju, one of the first prototype fast breeder reactors in Japan, prompted the Commission to initiate the first Roundtable Conference. The purpose of the Conference was to open the policy making process in an effort to determine a "national consensus" on nuclear energy. Further accidents and on-going opposition further slowed the implementation of the Program, however, in the latest Program, released in 2000, the Commission attempts to address these issues while building in a new style of flexibility in order to allow for greater options in the future. © 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.