Using Geothermal Energy instead of Nuclear Energy in Japan - Thesis Proposal Example

Japanese Government should use Geothermal Energy instead of Nuclear Energy Introduction Japan previously operated fifty four nuclear reactors and planned an increase in future operations by thirty to fifty percent. This was all before the March 11, 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and the resulting meltdown at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant. Almost one third of the country’s electricity came from nuclear power plants. (Bortz 14). Even though the government and industries are resisting change due to the huge investments they have made in nuclear energy, the phasing out of nuclear power is almost certain due to public pressure and major safety concerns. Geothermal power, as an energy alternative, is safer than nuclear power and offers solutions to Japan’s energy dilemma. The Problem Japan is a nation that has for thousands of years experienced volcanic eruptions and earthquakes which are of a large scale. Ironically, it is also a country that has for a long time been lamenting on its deficiency in natural resources. The questions arising are why Japan is not tapping into its huge potential for geothermal energy capacities and whether the country will eventually start to look into the possibility of tapping into such resources in the aftermath of the March 11 earthquake, nuclear crisis and tsunami. In spite of the fact that Japan is located above the third largest reserve of geothermal energy in the world, less than one per cent of its energy output is presently obtained from geothermal power. Even though the investment in nuclear energy has been high ever since the 1970s oil crisis, the Japanese government has continued to import its gas, coal and oil from overseas for a long time. Nuclear power accounted for 30% of the country’s electrical supplies at the time of the March 11 disaster and there were plans in place to increase this to 50% by 2050 (Bortz 24). Since the disaster, a shadow has been cast over the country’s nuclear plans by the government’s on-going stress testing of existing plants plus the ever growing hostile reactions by the public against nuclear energy. The government has therefore made a promise to renew energy policies of the country with a slow change towards more renewable natural energy sources such as geothermal energy. Industry leaders from Japan like Mitsubishi and Toshiba control 70% market share of geothermal technology. On the other hand, Fuji Electric had a hand in the making of the largest geothermal plant in the world last year in New Zealand, a country not its homeland. This raising the question of why Japanese companies are not investing in their home country even with its plenty hot water reservoirs. One key reason behind this is bathing. The practice of taking a bath in natural volcanic hot spring “onsen” is integrated in the Japanese culture deeply (Emma 10). The valuable “onsen” industry is the result of this and it is a ferociously protected one. There are more than 28,000 hot springs around Japan’s mountainous landscape which are protected by government rules which keep developments in such areas strictly under control. There however might be a shift presently as there are plans for two brand new plants that will both be in the tsunami-hit Iwate region. These plants are due to open in the year 2015 and 2020 respectively (Gleason 41). Most importantly, there are presently murmurs in the media that the government is set to possibly give a go ahead on the further development of the country’s geothermal industry in the highly protected areas such as national parks. Even with geothermal energy constantly facing opposition from the “onsen” lobbyist, it remains a step in the right direction. The country will finally be tapping into one of its overlooked natural resource. Types of geothermal sources Geothermal energy sources Mining of the earth’s heat generates geothermal power. Wells are drilled into permeable sedimentary rocks or into natural fractures in basement rock in regions with high temperature ground waters of shallow depths. Steam or hot water flows up via the wells through either boiling (flashing) or by pumping flow. There are experiments being carried out to find out whether a fourth method which involves drilling deep wells into hot dry rocks can be used economically to heat water pumped down from the surface. In 1989, a hot dry rock project was deserted in the United Kingdom after being declared not feasible economically. There are presently other hot dry rock programs being developed in Switzerland, France, Australia and Germany. Even though magma resources provide very high geothermal opportunities, the existing technology does not allow for retrieval of heat from these resources (Gleason 59). Geothermal versus Coal A large power plant full of boilers, burners and handling systems is required for the generation of coal. A tall stack that gives off a certain degree of carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen and sulfur-based chemicals, air pollution and other particulates are the products of a coal plant. These coal mines usually need one or more rail lines for the transportation of coal from the mine to the plant. In addition, the coal plants make a market for deep mines and strip mines which in turn bring about legacy and environmental issues which include surface subsidence and depleted aquifers among others. On the other hand, geothermal power gives off nearly no CO2, no particulates, no sulfur compounds or nitrogen, requires no trains, no deep mines nor strip-mines and no rail line. Geothermal does not result in mine subsidence or acid rain but only requires several wells in the ground used to cycle the steam or hot water and re-inject it after use. With over ninety per cent historical reliability, geothermal is a dependable source of base-load electric power throughout the year (Brown 29). Geothermal versus Natural gas The generation of natural gas necessitates turbine plants, which give off comparatively huge quantities of CO2. Additionally, gas-burners need pipeline back to one or even more gas fields whether offshore or onshore. This process requires a constant program of gas- drilling, exploration, development and discovery. These invariable well-drilling programs are turning out to be more and more problematical especially now in the Post-Peak Oil world we are facing (Wicaksono 71). Geothermal on the other hand, calls for production of geothermal fluids from a comparatively small number of re-injections and production wells. The effect of geothermal on the landscape is nowhere close to the massive scale of drilling that is required to satisfy a natural gas necessity over many years. Also, geothermal fields have longer life spans of many decades compared to fast-depleting natural gas. Geothermal versus Nuclear Power Nuclear energy requires massive infrastructure and human resource for production. It requires great security systems due the risky nature of nuclear plants. The plant is usually protected by a huge containment structure designed to resist a plane crash onto the nuclear plant or a missile hit from a luxury cruise. In addition to the physical resources necessary for the operation of a nuclear plant, there is great need for highly trained security staff. Technical personnel are needed to coordinate all production operations. The cost of such highly specialized personnel is very high. For a nuclear plant to continue with its operations, there must a uranium mine to constantly fuel a nuclear plant. The mines are deep and wide and cause environmental degradation. High level safety measures must be put in place to ensure that radioactive waste is stored safely for hundreds of millenniums. Comparing all the above details necessary for smooth operation of a nuclear plant, geothermal energy offers a simplified technology that can be well managed without the need of highly specialized infrastructure and personnel. No intense security and safety measures are required to cater for wastes. In fact, water used in production of geothermal energy can still be used hence should not be even regarded as waste (Brown 71). Is geothermal energy feasible in Japan? Geothermal energy production is workable in Japan. This is because of a recently formed feed-in tariff in which utilities must purchase geothermal power at 42 yen for every kilowatt consumed. The premium comes as a result of geothermal energy being more expensive to produce compared to nuclear energy. With this tariff, Japan pay-back period for investment in geothermal will be approximately seven years. Japan is located above the third largest reserve of geothermal energy in the world. This translates to a possible 24 million kilowatts capacity up from the current 550,000 kilowatts. Majority of hot eater reserves are in national parks whose boundaries are protected by law. Relaxation of regulations controlling developments in protected areas have already began. Reductions of such legal constraints have resulted to a start to establishment of a geothermal plant in Tsuchiyu which is purposed to produce 250 kilowatts of electricity (Bortz 53). Obstacles to Developing Geothermal Energy Among the major challenges facing Japan’s quest for geothermal energy is the tourism industry. Proprietors of hot water resorts popular for hot water bathing argue that establishment of geothermal plants will contaminate the hot water from hot springs. National parks also strongly protect hot water reserves which mainly exist in the parks. These reservoirs are even protected by law contained in Japan’s National Parks act. Changing use of hot water leisure sites into energy development areas is in this manner a great obstacle. With the growing public interest for Japans reduction of its reliance on nuclear energy, changing laws to accommodate geothermal projects is now easier than ever. In addition, water used for geothermal energy production is still safe and can be used by hot water resorts without fear water contamination. The cost of putting up a geothermal power station is estimated to be three times as much as it costs to set up a coal-fired plant of a similar capacity. Since geothermal plants do not burn fuel, the high upfront cost of setting up is offset over seven to twelve years (Brown 71). If the parliament enacted a law which will necessitate electric companies to purchase geothermal energy at a premium price then the geothermal business would become more feasible. Geothermal power may be conceived to be clean energy. However, it is not perfectly renewable since a hot water field cannot be renewed as rapidly as it can be tapped. Opened in 1995, the Yanaizu-Nishiyama plant’s production has fallen to half its original 65 megawatts of capacity (Emma 5). Another hindrance is the fear that the injection of cool water back into the ground or the drilling could act as an earthquake inducer. On the brighter side, Japan’s citizens no longer have to worry about the possible emission of deadly radiation similar to that of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. The rotten-egg smell of hydrogen sulphide is a chief environmental concern. Interestingly, this can only be harmful in high concentrations. Such amounts are however not likely to escape from the geothermal plant. The rotten-egg smell of hydrogen sulphide can hardly cause complains from people living near geothermal plants. Conclusion Though geothermal energy constantly faces opposition from the “onsen” lobbyists, it would evidently be a step in the right direction. One of the strongest points of geothermal energy over nuclear energy is its benefits of clean energy. This is because geothermal plants produce energy from natural heat deep down in the earth’s surface. Other major benefits which japan can gain by using geothermal power are its reliability over other clean energy sources such as wind and solar which are dependent on weather conditions. Natural gases and coal cause major land degradation problems and increase emission of poisonous gases into the atmosphere. It is more reasonable for japan to invest in geothermal power since this form of energy is not as disadvantaged as wind and solar energy which require certain topographical conditions. Geothermal power requires much smaller land for production unlike nuclear energy which requires large spaces due to security and safety measures. Obstacles such as laws protecting national parks and hot water baths have a greater chance of being altered due to public interests inclination towards reliance of renewable and clean energy sources such geothermal. Though the government of Japan had intentions of increasing nuclear power consumption to 40% by 2017 and 50% by 2030, the 11th March Sendai earthquake has changed its plan. The government aims at increasing its geothermal current capacity of 537 megawatt to its potential capacity of 20 gigawatts. "If it hadnt been for the nuclear disaster, we would never have given this project a second thought", Ikeda, general manager of the Tsuchiyu Onsen Tourist Association, said as he emphasized on Japan’s need to embrace geothermal projects (Bortz 49). Works Cited Bortz, Fred. Meltdown!: The Nuclear Disaster in Japan and Our Energy Future Single Titles Series. Minneapolis: Twenty-First Century Books, 2012. Print. Brown, Warren. Alternative Sources of Energy: Earth at Risk. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1993. Print. Emma, Chanlett-Avery. Japans Nuclear Future: Policy Debate, Prospects, and U. S. Interests. Philadelphia: DIANE Publishing, 2010. Print. Gleason, Carrie. Geothermal Energy using Earths Furnace. St. Catherine’s: Crabtree Publishing Company , 2008. Print. Wicaksono, Agung, . Energy Efficiency in Japan. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2008. Print. 95 Read More