Gensuikin pu fuel_cycle_suzuki_201408改訂１

1. プルトニウムと核不拡散問題：日本の核燃料サイクル
政策は変われるか？
Plutonium and Nuclear Proliferation: Can Japan change
its nuclear fuel cycle policy?
2014年８月 August, 2014
鈴木達治郎 Tatsujiro Suzuki
長崎大学核兵器廃絶研究センター（RECNA) 副センター長・教授
Vice Director, Professor
Research Center for Nuclear Weapons Abolition (RECNA), Nagasaki University
1

2. Summary 要旨
 プルトニウム問題は核兵器と原子力平和利用の接点として最も複雑で、深刻な課題の一つである。
 Plutonium issue is one of the most complicated and serious issues as a nexus between nuclear weapon
and civilian use of nuclear energy.
 福島事故後、核燃料サイクルの選択肢評価がなされ、将来の不確実性を考えて「柔軟な核燃料サ
イクル」への転換が提言されたが、基本路線は修正されていない。そのため国際的懸念が高まっ
ている。
 After the Fukushima accident, based on the assessment of various fuel cycle options, JAEC recommended
“flexible fuel cycle policy” but fundamental policy of “all reprocessing” has not changed. As a result,
international concern has been increasing.
 日本の政策が変化しない理由は、ウラン供給への不安、使用済み燃料を資源とする考え方、それ
に基づく全量再処理を規定した法・制度（地元自治体との約束）、代替案を評価する仕組みの欠
如等があげられる。
 Concern over uranium supply, institutional/legal system prescribing “reprocessing of all spent fuel,” based
on the idea of treating spent fuel as “resource”, including commitment to local community, lack of
institutional arrangement to assess the alternative options etc. are the reasons for “locked in” status of
Japan’s fuel cycle policy.
 したがって、燃料サイクルを変えるためには、使用済み燃料の貯蔵容量拡大、直接処分を可能と
する取組・制度、独立した政策評価機能の確立等に加え、「供給ありき」政策からの転換や、プ
ルトニウム在庫量削減に向けた明確なコミットメントが必要である。
 Therefore, in order to change its fuel cycle policy, Japan needs 1) institutional change to allow spent fuel
storage expansion and direct disposal 2) independent technology/policy assessment 3) shift from “supply
driven” to “demand driven” reprocessing 4) clear commitment to plutonium stockpile reduction.
2

3. 「我々は『死』、世界の破壊者になったの
だ」（1945/7/12）
 “……’Now I am
become death, the
destroyer of the
worlds’…”
 Robert Oppenheimer,
quoted in Kai Bird & Martin
Sherwin, “American
Prometheus: The Triumph
and Tragedy of J. Robert
Oppenheimer,” May 2006.
3
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Operation_Plumbbob_-_Boltzmann_2.jpg

4. 原子力を平和利用に
Atoms for Peace (1953/12/8)
 “..the United States pledges
before you, and therefore
before the world, its
determination to help solve the
fearful atomic dilemma - to
devote its entire heart and
mind to finding the way by
which the miraculous
inventiveness of man shall not
be dedicated to his death, but
consecrated to his life.”– Address
by Mr. Dwight D. Eisenhower, President
of the United States of America, to the
470th Plenary Meeting of the United
Nations General Assembly, Tuesday, 8
December 1953, 2:45 p.m.
4
http://www.iaea.org/About/atomsforpeace_speech.html

5. 原子力平和利用と核不拡散の両立は永遠の課題
 “ We have concluded unanimously
that there is no prospect of
security against atomic warfare in a
system of international agreements
to outlaw such weapons controlled
only by a system which relies on
inspection and similar police-like
methods.
 National rivalries in the
development of atomic energy
readily convertible to destructive
purposes are the heart of the
difficulty.”
- “The Achison-Lilienthal Report”
1946.
• 査察などの手法のみに依存す
る国際システムでは、核兵器
を違法としたとしても、核戦
争を防止できる見込みはない
という結論に達した
• 破壊的な目的にいつでも転用
可能であるという原子力技術
開発を国家間で争うことが本
質的な問題なのである。
- “アチソン―リリエンソール報
告”（1946）
5

6. Nuclear Fuel Cycle Technology Options
核燃料サイクル技術選択肢
MOX-Loaded LWR
SF
DU
HLW
Disposal
Commecialized in
Japan
Commercialized
overseas
Research &
Development使用済燃料
長期管理施設
U, Pu, Minor Actinides
MA Fuel
FBR Cycle
FBR Reprocessing
FBR
Spent fuel
New MOX fuel
Reconversion
MOX Fuel
Spent Fuel
U Mine
Recovered U
Milling
U Enrichment
Reprocessing
LWR cycle
U Fabrication
Natural Uranium
LWR
LEU
SF
U/Pu
SF
Conversion
UO2
UF6
HLW
LLW DisposalHLW
LLW
Yellow cake
Current status
Plutonium recycling
FBR
Waste Stream
Not realized yet
SF
Storage
SF
Storage
Once-through
(Direct Disposal)
Limited Recycle
Full Recycle
6

7. Major Findings of JAEC subcommittee on nuclear
power and fuel cycle (12/06/05)
 For the next 20~30 years, “MOX recycling” and
“Once-through” fuel cycle are the only
commercially available options.
 “Once-through” is more
desirable from economic and
nuclear proliferation/security
standpoints, but “MOX
recycling” is more desirable
from resource efficiency
standpoint.
 No significant difference in
terms of safety and waste
management.
Source: Chairman’s report on Subcommittee on nuclear
power and fuel cycle technologies, June 5, 2012. (in Japanese)
http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/iinkai/teirei/siryo2012/siryo22/
siryo1-1.pdf
7

8. 核物質が入手できれば核爆発装置の製造は可能
• “ Crude nuclear weapons (similar to the
Hiroshima gun-type and Nagasaki
implosion-type weapons) could be
constructed by a group not previously
engaged in designing or building
nuclear weapons provided that they
have the technical knowledge,
experience, and skills in relevant areas,”
by Carson Mark etc., 1988
• 「広島、長崎型原爆程度であれば、
未経験のグループであっても、関
連技術のノウハウがあれば、爆発
装置は製造可能」Carson Mark,
etc. 1988
• 「原子炉級プルトニウムであって
も、第1世代原爆の設計図を用い
て、1～数キロトンの核爆発装置
を製造することは、非国家主体組
織でも可能。先進国であれば、最
新の設計能力で十分な近代核兵器
を作成することができる」（米エ
ネルギー省、1997)
8
Source: US Department of Energy, 1997

9. プルトニウム、MOXの核拡散抵抗性
（日本政府の見解,2006, 2007年）
9
「使用済み燃料を再処理いたしまして回収されるプルトニウムにつきましては、
いわゆる原子炉級のプルトニウムというものでございますと、爆発力の高いプ
ルトニウムの濃度が低いというふうなこともあり、核兵器の製造には適さないと
いうふうに承知しております。」
平成１４年４月２５日、迎資源エネルギー庁電力・ガス事業部長(当時）の答弁。平成１８年１２月２２日、衆議院議員辻元清美君提
出日本政府の核兵器製造能力についての見解に関する質問に対する答弁書にて、政府が再認した。
出所：原子力委員会政策評価部会、「原子力政策大綱に示している平和利用の担保と核不拡散
体制の維持・強化に関する取り組み方の基本的考え方の評価について」、2007年5月15日。
http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/iinkai/teirei/siryo2007/siryo20/siryo20-1-1.pdf

10. Proliferation risk is lowest for Once-
through
 Proliferation risk is lowest for once-
through option, and higher for MOX
recycle and highest for FR/FBR.
 Safeguards will be required for direct
disposal of spent fuel as it contains
plutonium.
 Separated plutonium, which can be
used for military use even for poor
grade plutonium, needs special
control measures. There are no
agreements on proliferation
resistance of advanced fuel cycle
options.
10

11.  http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/policy09/pdf/20111221/siryo3.pdf
Source: National Policy Unit, Energy and Environmental Council, Cost etc.
Verification Committee.
http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/policy09/pdf/20111221/siryo3.pdf
11
All Reprocessing Current Model* Direct Disposal
Yen/kWh
Back End
Front
End
U fuel MOX fuelReprocessing Storage HLW
disposal
Direct disposal
*50% immediate reprocessing and 50% reprocessing after long term storage
Discount rate

12. 1. Total reprocessing
2. Mixed option
3. Total disposal
～3 Fuel Cycle Options～
○For all nuclear share option, total expense of F.C. option 3 is less than the other F.C. options.
○As for F.C. option 3, SF stored in Aomori pref. may have to be sent back and under the worst case,
nuclear power operation could be suspended if new SF storage capacity is not available.
F.C. Option 1
Total reprocessing
F.C. Option 2
Coexistence of
reprocessing/disposal
F.C. Option 3
Total disposal
Nuclear Share Option I: 35 % 18.4 17.3～18.4 13.9～14.8
Nuclear Share Option II: 20 % 15.4 15.3～15.4 12.0～12.8
Nuclear Share Option III: 15 % 14.4 14.4 10.9～11.6
Nuclear Share Option IV: 0 % － － 8.1～8.7
Total Expense of Fuel Cycle (Unit: trillion yen) <Discount rate: 0 %>
～4 Nuclear Share Options～
1. Nuclear share: 35 % (Installed capacity: 50 GW)
2. Nuclear share: 20 % (Installed capacity: 30 GW)
3. Nuclear share: 15 % (Installed capacity: 20 GW)
4. Nuclear share: 0 %
Fuel Cycle Economics in Variation of
Options (Summary)12
Ref. : http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/tyoki/hatukaku/siryo/siryo15/index.htm
16 May 2012 Technical Subcommittee on Nuclear Power, Nuclear Fuel Cycle, etc., Material No. 1-1,
No. 1-2, No. 1-3, No. 1-4 (Japanese)

13. Assessment of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Policy Options
and JAEC’s decision(June, 2012)
 “All reprocessing” option: Most desirable when nuclear power will
expand or stay as it is
 “Co-existing of reprocessing/direct disposal” option：Most
desirable when future of nuclear energy is uncertain
 “All direct disposal” option: Most desirable when nuclear energy
will be phased out
 As recommended by the technical subcommittee, regardless of
the policy choice, it is vital to build a system ready to cope with
future policy changes
13
Source: Chairman’s report on Subcommittee on nuclear power and fuel cycle technologies,
June 5, 2012. (in Japanese) http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/iinkai/teirei/siryo2012/siryo22/siryo1-1.pdf
Japan Atomic Energy Commission, “Decision on Nuclear Fuel Cycle Options”
http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/about/kettei/kettei120621_2.pdf

14. JAEC’s “No Pu surplus policy”
 In addition to IAEA full-scope safeguards over all nuclear
materials, Japan sticks to a principle of “no plutonium surplus
policy” since 1991, i.e. Japan does not have any plutonium
which does not have specific purposes to use. In order to
increase transparency, Japan has been publishing its plutonium
stockpile every year since 1994.
 In August 2003, JAEC announced its new guideline for
plutonium management preparing for commissioning of the
first commercial reprocessing plant.
 Utilities are expected to submit its plutonium usage plan
annually before separation of plutonium.
But, Japan now has 44 tons (35 tons in Europe, 9 tons in Japan) of
stockpile.
“Plutonium stockpile should be reduced regardless of fuel cycle options chosen in
the future”
(Statement in JAEC Subcommittee on Nuclear Power/Nuclear Fuel cycle
technologies) http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/iinkai/teirei/siryo2012/siryo22/siryo1-
1.pdf (in Japanese)
14

15. Global Plutonium Stockpile (2012)
15Source: International Panel on Fissile Material (IPFM),
“Global Fissile Material Report 2013”, http://fissilematerials.org/library/gfmr13.pdf
Japan~44 tons
Civilian
France Russia UK

16. Japan’s Plutonium Stockpile16
Source: International Panel on Fissile Material (IPFM), Global Fissile Material Report 2013,
http://fissilematerials.org/library/gfmr13.pdf
MOX Recycle
Since 2009
?

17. Plutonium Stockpile in Japan (as of the end of 2012)
2012 (kg) 2011 (kg)
Stock in Japan (Pu total)
Reprocessing Plants 4,363 4,364
MOX Fuel Plant 3,364 3,363
Stored at Reactors 1,568 1,568
Sub-total (Pu fissile) 9,295(6,315) 9,295 (6,316)
Stocks in Europe (Pu total)
UK 17,052 17,028
France 17,895 17,931
Sub-total :Pu total(Pu
fissile)
34,946 (23,277) 34,959(23,308)
Total (Pu fissile) 44,241(29,592) 44,254(29,624)
Source: Japan Atomic Energy Commission (2013, 2012) http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/sitemap/pdf/130911e.pdf
17

18. International concern over
Japan’s Plutonium
 Japan failed to report 640 kg of nuclear fuel to IAEA
(Kyodo, 2014/06/07)
- Japan failed to include 640 kg of unused plutonium in its
annual reports to the International Atomic Energy Agency in
2012 and 2013, in what experts are terming an “inappropriate
omission.”
- In March 2011, the MOX fuel was loaded into the No. 3 reactor of
Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s Genkai nuclear plant in Saga Prefecture
during a regular checkup. It was removed two years later because
the reactor has remained idled since the Fukushima nuclear crisis.
- Tatsujiro Suzuki, former vice chairman of the Japan Atomic
Energy Commission and a professor at Nagasaki University,
said the commission had overlooked the matter and therefore
“should make efforts to improve” its reporting.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/06/07/national/japan-failed-to-report-640-kg-
of-nuclear-fuel-to-iaea/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=japan-
failed-to-report-640-kg-of-nuclear-fuel-to-iaea#.U5e86_l_uSo
18

19. Nuclear Security Summit(2014/3)
 Joint Statement by the Leaders of Japan and the United States
on Contributions to Global Minimization of Nuclear Material
 “Japan has demonstrated its leadership by resolving to remove all special nuclear
material from the FCA, consistent with all Summit Communiqués’ spirit to minimize
stocks of nuclear material. Our two countries encourage others to consider what
they can do to further HEU and plutonium minimization.”
http://www.mofa.go.jp/dns/n_s_ne/page18e_000059.html
 Hague Summit Communique
We encourage States to minimise their stocks of HEU and
to keep their stockpile of separated plutonium to the
minimum level, both as consistent with national
requirements.
https://www.nss2014.com/sites/default/files/documents/the_hague_nuclear_security_summit_communiq
ue_final.pdf
19

20. New Energy Basic Plan (2014/4/11)
 GOJ remains committed to the policy of not
possessing reserves of plutonium of which use
is undetermined on the premise of peaceful use
of plutonium. In order to achieve this policy
effectively, GOJ will conduct an appropriate
management and utilization of plutonium while
paying due consideration to an appropriate
balance between separation and utilization of
plutonium.
 it is important to adopt a flexible approach,
since it is necessary to respond to various
uncertainties, including the technological trend,
energy supply-demand balance and the
international situation. Since these activities are
closely related to the estimation of the future
operating volume of nuclear power plants, the
amount of nuclear fuel, and quantity of spent
fuels produced, they will be conducted while
taking into consideration all of these factors
and ensuring strategic flexibility in accordance
with changes in the situation.
http://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/en/category/others/basic_plan/pdf/
4th_strategic_energy_plan.pdf
 プルサーマルの推進、六ヶ所再処理工場
の竣工、MOX燃料加工工場の建設、むつ
中間貯蔵施設の竣工等を着実に進める。
また、利用目的のないプルトニウムは持
たないとの原則を引き続き堅持する。こ
れを実効性あるものとするため、プルト
ニウムの回収と利用のバランスを十分に
考慮しつつ、プルサーマルの推進等によ
りプルトニウムの適切な管理と利用を行
う
 技術の動向、エネルギー需給、国際情勢
等の様々な不確実性に対応する必要があ
ることから、今後の原子力発電所の稼働
量とその見通し、これを踏まえた核燃料
の需要量や使用済燃料の発生量等と密接
に関係していることから、こうした要素
を総合的に勘案し、状況の進展に応じて
戦略的柔軟性を持たせながら対応を進め
る。
http://www.meti.go.jp/press/2014/04/20140411001/20140411001-
1.pdf
20

21. なぜ日本の核燃料サイクル政策は変えられないのか？
Why Japan’s nuclear fuel cycle policy has not been changed?
 ウラン資源海外依存への不安と高速増殖炉路線へのコミット
 Concern over nuclear fuel supply and its commitment to Fast Breeder Reactor (FBR)
 使用済み燃料対策としての「全量再処理」（法・制度上の制約、地元との約
束）：使用済み燃料は「資源」であるという考え方:直接処分は日本では違法
 Institutional/legal arrangements for “reprocessing of all spent fuel” based on the idea
that spent fuel is a “resource”
 Long term commitment to local community to remove spent fuel for future reprocessing
 Direct disposal of spent fuel is not legally allowed in Japan
 代替案を検討・評価する仕組み（独立・不偏の第三者機関）の欠如
 Lack of independent, unbiased third party to assess alternative options
 巨大プロジェクトのもつ硬直性（インフラ、資金調達、雇用・・）
 Inherent inflexibility built in large and complex project (infrastructure, financial
arrangement, employment….)
21

22. 22
Dry Cask storage type
Capacity : totally 5,000 tU
1st 3,000 tU, add 2,000tU in future
Operation: October 2013 (postponed)
(Status : under construction)
Construction cost: 0.1Trillion
(including dry casks)
Storage capacity:3,000tU
(storage 2,945 tU as of Sept. 2013)
Construction cost: 2.14Trillion
Commission date: not known
Rokkasho reprocessing plant
Mutsu Interim storage site
At-reactor storage
Storage capacity: 20,640 tU/17 sites (as of Sept. 2013,
14,340tons ~70% full)
On-site dry cask storage is not allowed by
local governments (Fukushima-1 & Tokai-2 was allowed).
Three types of spent fuel storage capacity
(As of September 2013, total of 17,335 tons are in storage)
If Rokkasho was cancelled…
?

23. どうすれば日本の核燃料サイクルは変えられるか？
How can Japan’s fuel cycle policy be changed?
 使用済み燃料貯蔵容量の拡大（特に乾式貯蔵、オンサイト・オフサイト）と直接処分を可能と
する取組の実施（使用済み燃料地域協議会の設置、法制度整備等）
 Measures to enable expansion of spent fuel storage (esp. dry cask storage, either on-site and/or off-
site) and direct disposal of spent fuel (Council of governors on spent fuel, other legal/institutional
arrangements)
 独立した第三者機関による政策・代替案評価機能の確立（国会原子力特別調査委員会の常設化、
技術の社会影響評価機関（TA）の設置等）
 Establishment of institutional scheme to allow independent assessment of policy/technology options
(permanent commission of investigation on nuclear energy, Technology Assessment (TA) institution,
etc.)
 柔軟な核燃料サイクル政策とプルトニウム在庫量削減（最小化）へのコミット（「供給あり
き」からの転換、削減量削減へのコミット、削減の代替案の検討・評価、プルトニウム処分の
国際協力プロジェクト等）
 Flexible nuclear fuel cycle management and commitment to reduce(minimize) plutonium stockpile
 Shift from “supply driven” reprocessing to “demand driven”, assessment of alternative options to reduce
plutonium stockpile, international cooperation on plutonium management
 燃料（天然、濃縮ウラン）の国際供給安定化と多国間アプローチへのリーダーシップ
 Leadership on nuclear fuel supply stabilization and on multinational approaches on fuel cycle activities
23

24. 福島第一共用乾式貯蔵施設（津波後）
Dry cask storage at Fukushima Daiichi (after tsunami hit)
24
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/news/110311/images/110909_69.jpg

25. A Proposal for Plutonium Management Policy –
A personal opinion
(2013/03/26)
1. Demand comes first: Reprocessing should
take place only when plutonium
demand(use) is specified. In order to
achieve this goal, spent fuel storage
capacity must be expanded.
2. Stockpile reduction: Matching
demand/supply is not good enough.
Existing stockpile should be reduced
before further reprocessing.
3. Flexible plan: Current Pu use plan (MOX
recycling in 16~18 units) is no longer
certain. Other options (Pu ownership
transfer, disposition as waste,
international cooperation etc.) need to be
pursued. With minimizing cost,
transportation and time required to
dispose.
1. 「再処理ありき」からの転換：利用の
見通し（必要量）を明確にしたうえで、
それに応じて再処理を実施する。その
ためには使用済み燃料貯蔵容量の拡大
が不可欠。
2. 「在庫量の削減」：需給バランスを図
るだけでは不十分。在庫量削減の見通
しが立たない状況で、再処理を実施す
ることは適切ではない。
3. 「柔軟な処理・処分計画」：16-18基
でリサイクルする現在の案は実現可能
性が不透明。他の処理・処分選択肢
（所有権移転、直接処分、国際協力
等）を検討すべき。その際、コスト、
輸送、時間の最小化をはかるべき。
25
http://www.aec.go.jp/jicst/NC/melmaga/2013-0123.html