IEEJ： November 2013ｃ IEEJ 2013○Special Bulletin
A Japanese Perspective on the International Energy Landscape (149)November 6, 2013IEEJ International Nuclear Energy ForumKen Koyama, PhD
Chief Economist, Managing Director
The Institute of Energy Economics, JapanOn November 5, the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan, sponsored its international nuclear
energy forum under the theme of “How to restore confidence in nuclear energy after Fukushima.” At
the outset of the forum, Ryosei Tanaka, Parliamentary Vice Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry,
delivered a special speech. Later, discussions took place in Session 1 on how we can restore people’s
confidence in nuclear safety and risk management and in Session 2 on nuclear fuel cycle backend
problems or how we can allay concerns over nuclear waste and fuel recycling. Keynote speeches
were made by Itaru Yasui, President of the National Institute of Technology and Evaluation, inSession 1 and by Irena Mele, Special Advisor to the Director of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste
Technology at the International Atomic Energy Agency, in Session 2. Later in each session,
world-renowned experts in this area made speeches and held panel discussions.
The forum was attended by six speakers/panelists: William D. Magwood, IV, Commissioner ofthe U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; Paul Howarth, Managing Director of the British National
Nuclear Laboratory; Bertrand Barré, former Head of the Nuclear Reactors at the French Alternative
Energies and Atomic Energy Commission known as the CEA; Lauri Muranen, Secretary General at
the Finnish Energy Council; Jean-Pol Poncelet, Director General of the European Atomic Forumknown as FORATOM; and Hajimu Yamana, professor at the Kyoto University Research Reactor
Institute. They had vigorous discussions on how to recover confidence in nuclear energy and thebackend problems. I here discuss impressive key points of discussions at the forum.
First, the forum gave me an opportunity to reaffirm that for Japan that faces the great challengeof restoring confidence in nuclear energy after the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant
accident, it is important to acquire various useful knowledge and experiences from intellectuals andexperts from throughout the world. In Session 1, a panelist noted that how to address or tolerate
nuclear and other risks is susceptible to social, cultural and historical backgrounds and that Japanmight lack experience in figuring out risks quantitatively and objectively. Japanese society thus often
takes an “all-or-nothing approach” toward risks, tending to pursue “zero risk,” the speaker said.
Against such backdrop, Japan might have been caught in a trap of the “nuclear safety myth”. In thissense, a key future challenge may be how to widely develop probabilistic risk assessment and its
recognition in Japanese society.

1

IEEJ： November 2013ｃ IEEJ 2013
○Based on this point, some forum participants noted that efforts to restore confidence in nuclear
safety should include not only the enhancement of engineered safety at nuclear facilities andequipment but also human and social measures to secure and train personnel in equipment operationand crisis management, ensure information transparency and improve information transfer orcommunication capacity. Particularly, improvement in communication/information transfer is one of
the key confidence restoration measures. Enhancing the transparency and openness of informationand improving information transferors’ communications capabilities are key future challenges.
The most important thing for restoring confidence in nuclear energy is the steady operation ofan independent, reliable nuclear safety regulatory body, U.S. NRC Commissioner Magwood noted
memorably. In a sense, this is a starting point. Without such body, confidence in nuclear energy
cannot be restored. In this respect, Japan’s new Nuclear Regulation Authority has great roles to play.
Great expectations are placed on the regulatory body. I hope to see the NRA play a central or leadingrole in restoring confidence in nuclear energy while learning lessons from past efforts by the NRC
and other foreign nuclear regulators.
Another impressive point of the forum was that foreign experts reaffirmed that citizens should
coolly and objectively discuss and share advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy, including
reasons why nuclear energy is required. This indicates the importance of discussions based on theviewpoint of the best energy mix in Japan.
The backend problems discussed in Session 2 are also very important for considering futurenuclear policy. There are many challenges including processing and disposal of spent nuclear fuels,
disposal of radioactive waste and nuclear cycle problems. These challenges are at issue inconsidering the future course of nuclear energy.
While refraining from dipping into the details of the discussions on these challenges, I would
like to note that nuclear experts from throughout the world impressively cited specific cases andcountry-by-country conditions in making the following points: (1) responses and efforts to address
the backend problems differ far from country to country, (2) despite such differences, various
practical technical options have been taken for disposal of high-level and other radioactive waste andthe nuclear fuel cycle, (3) efforts to develop technological options in response to the backend
problems are making progress, and (4) the problem is how to form nationwide and local consensus
based on important political and strategic decisions.
Regarding the fourth point, forum participants pointed out that the presence of an independent,
reliable regulatory body is again basically important, that a consensus-forming process based on
information disclosure and secured information transparency is indispensable, and that the actual andsteady achievements in present backend efforts including the safe management of spent nuclear fuels
are basically important as a reference. It is important that multiple foreign experts noted Japan has
many lessons to learn from overseas cases where forward-looking backend measures have beentaken.

2IEEJ： November 2013ｃ IEEJ 2013
○As discussions are made on Japan’s energy policy revision toward the end of this year, it may
be needless to say that these discussions should be based on the realities after the Fukushima
accident and Japan’s unique conditions. Nevertheless, discussions covering a wide range ofviewpoints from throughout the world are also indispensable for the energy policy revision. I wouldlike to see policy discussions that effectively utilize useful arguments and proposals made at thisinternational forum on nuclear energy by intellectuals and experts from throughout the world.

Contact: report@tky.ieej.or.jp
The back issues are available at the following URL
http://eneken.ieej.or.jp/en/special_bulletin.html

3