From our other sites
The story
The Nikkei reported that the Japan Atomic Industrial Forum (JAIF), at a press conference on the 2nd, estimated the economic ripple effect of rebuilding a single nuclear reactor at approximately ¥4.3 trillion. In the 5ch thread reacting to the news, some posters argued rebuilding should go ahead, while others raised a string of doubts about the estimate itself — questioning whether it accounted for the negative impact of a potential accident, comparing it to the cleanup cost of the Fukushima Daiichi disaster (with some citing figures as high as ¥50 trillion), and worrying that construction and decommissioning costs would simply get passed on through electricity bills. The discussion further expanded into comparisons of generation costs by power source and arguments over who bears responsibility for energy policy during the Democratic Party of Japan’s time in government, leaving the thread split between supporters and skeptics.
Economic ripple effect of rebuilding nuclear reactors: “¥4.3 trillion per unit” — estimate by the Japan Atomic Industrial Forum – Nikkei
October 2, 2026, 19:18
JAIF Chairman Masui speaking at the press conference (2nd, Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo)
Source: nikkei.com / Original article here
What people said
No way they'd ever say that even if they did calculate it.
Scammers who only ever talk about the upside use this exact same trick.
If there's an accident, that's minus ¥100 trillion.
If it's just about ripple effects, thermal power plants would do the job just as well.
Because there'll be a landslide over in Nepal, you know.
I'm all for building nuclear plants.
But let's see them build one right under Tokyo's nose first.
More importantly, just keep rebuilding them one after another.
They're plenty safe these days.
And decommission the old ones in order.
These days a single reactor costs several trillion yen to build, so that comes back to bite you in your electric bill.
Decommissioning costs money too, so that also gets passed on through electricity rates.
As long as the basic setup — using nuclear power to generate a massive heat source and just boil water with it — doesn't change, the fundamental danger doesn't change either.
Even with a "power-independent natural convection cooling system," it's not like failure is impossible.
Those highly-touted small modular reactors (SMRs) are small enough that they can cool via air cooling even during a total loss of power.
But because they're small, they don't put out much power.
Kind of defeats the point of it being a nuclear plant.
About the only upside is not emitting CO2.
If it has this much economic benefit and helps energy security too, they should just get on with it already.
I will never forgive Naoto Kan and the Nuclear Regulation Authority for this.
Oh, and Chubu Electric Power is a no-go though.
Naoto Kan: "The LDP's nuclear policy is too soft. From here on it's the Hatoyama Initiative. Under the DPJ government we'll build 14 or more new reactors. Cabinet decision."
Then Fukushima happened and now he's dodging all responsibility, lol
> June 2010 (Hatoyama/Kan administration, at the time): Cabinet approved a "Basic Energy Plan" that included building 14 or more new reactors by 2030.
From Naoto Kan's official website
―――
The DPJ government's track record and Kan's own pledge
The government's "Basic Energy Plan" gets revised once every three years.
The most recent plan in place when the nuclear accident occurred was approved by the cabinet in June 2010, right after I became Prime Minister,
and it called for "raising the combined share of nuclear and renewable energy in the power mix to about 70% by 2030."
It might be a little hard to follow, but in effect this meant pushing ahead with new reactor construction — at least 14 additional units by 2030.
Looking back now, it was an outrageous plan.
it's more sensible all around to rebuild the old plants with new ones.
Unless the plan is actually to say "once the current reactors reach end of life, we're done with nuclear power" instead.
The rebuilding debate is already happening.
Commercial solar: approx. ¥8.2–11.8 (per kWh)
LNG thermal: approx. ¥10.7–14.3
Nuclear: approx. ¥11.7 and up
Coal thermal: approx. ¥13.6–22.4
Onshore wind: approx. ¥9.8–17.2
Oil thermal: approx. ¥24.9–27.6
Put offshore wind in there too.
Don't tell me that was left out on purpose.
And now crude prices are spiking, widening that deficit even further.
It's one of the causes of the weak yen.
The nuclear plants are actually running though.
We're at our limit. Give us a break with this scorching heat, Japan.
Save us, nuclear power.
Sure, let's go scatter some more cesium around then ♡
It'll cool things right down.
Offshore wind, floating perovskite solar, and zinc batteries — that combo is Japan's trump card.
But the real question is: where are they rebuilding, and can it actually be managed properly?
What you're dealing with isn't some backyard vegetable patch where nobody minds if you half-ass it —
it's a nuclear power plant handling radioactive material, you know?
Who's even funding this in the first place?
Japan's foreign currency keeps draining away just to buy LNG fuel.
Uranium is imported too, but it's far cheaper than LNG.
The nuclear plants have already been back online for a while now, haven't they.
That's probably why there's talk of small modular reactors and the like even in the US.
With no staff left on site, once something escalates all you can do is run.
Unfortunately, even that ¥50 trillion isn't enough.
The reason being, the cleanup still isn't anywhere close to resolved.
I really wish they'd stop collecting the cleanup costs through electricity bills in other regions. Just bill Tokyo for it.
Background and key points of this discussion
The “¥4.3 trillion” figure here is JAIF’s (Japan Atomic Industrial Forum, an industry group representing utilities, manufacturers, and others) estimate of the ripple effect from construction investment alone — it’s worth noting this does not include safety-measure costs, decommissioning costs, or costs tied to accident risk. As for the Fukushima Daiichi cleanup costs raised in the thread, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry’s 2016 estimate put the combined total for decommissioning, compensation, and decontamination at roughly ¥21.5 trillion, and there has been continued speculation since then that the figure could climb higher still. Generation costs are also a tricky number to compare directly, since the assumptions shift from one power source to another depending on factors like operating rate and how accident risk gets factored in. The thread also drifted into debate over the rights and wrongs of energy policy under the former Democratic Party of Japan government — but that’s a separate historical question from whether the current rebuilding plan itself is sound, and the two shouldn’t be conflated.
*This article is compiled as an excerpt/summary from the 5ch (News Express+) thread “Economic ripple effect of rebuilding nuclear reactors: “¥4.3 trillion per unit” — estimate by the Japan Atomic Industrial Forum.”
Leave a Reply