Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Nuclear Energy:Necessary or
Unnecessary?B11562 Misaki Tango
1. Introduction2. Defining Terms3. Evidence: Necessary4. Evidence: Unnecessary5. Analysis6. Conclusion
Outline
原子力29%
水力8%
火力62%
新エネルギー等1%
発電量の割合（ 2010年）
1. Introduction
METI (2010)
1. Introduction2012 spring…
Ooi nuclear power plant stopped!
1. IntroductionThis means… 脱原発
状態
1. IntroductionBut July 2012…
Ooi nuclear power plant worked again!
1. Introduction
Now…脱原発状態
１万人「玄海・川内、再稼働反対」 福岡で廃炉求め集会九州電力の玄海（佐賀県玄海町）・川内（鹿児島県薩摩川内市）の両原発の再稼働反対と廃炉を求める集会が１０日、福岡市中央区の舞鶴公園であった。九州・沖縄各県の市民団体や原発訴訟関係者らが呼びかけ、主催者によると１万人を超える人が参加した。「子どもたちが安心できる未来のため、原発ゼロを目指そう」などと訴えた。
Asahi Shimbun (2013)
1. Introduction
1. Introduction
Asahi Shimbun (2013)
1. Introduction2. Defining Terms3. Evidence: Necessary4. Evidence: Unnecessary5. Analysis6. Conclusion
Outline
‘Nuclear Energy’ the energy present within atomic nuclei or possessed by their components
2. Defining Terms
OED (2013)
‘Necessary’ Indispensable, vital, essential; requisite.
‘Unnecessary’ Not necessary or requisite; needless.
2. Defining Terms
OED (2013)
Nuclear Energy:Necessary orUnnecessary
2. Defining Terms
When Thinking about
Future
1. Introduction2. Defining Terms3. Evidence: Necessary4. Evidence: Unnecessary5. Analysis6. Conclusion
Outline
3-1. Not so Dangerous
3-2. Cheap
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
3. Evidence: Necessary
3-1. Not so Dangerous
Air Pollution is more dangerous!=Thermal Energy is more dangerous!
3-1. Not so Dangerous
Because of Air Pollution!
30,000 to 50,000 people die
In Japan
WHO (2009)
No one is killed by Fukushima Nuclear Disaster!
3-1. Not so Dangerous
Fujisawa (2012: 43)
3-1. Not so Dangerous
Fujisawa (2012: 28)
Thermal energy is more dangerous
No one died due to Fukushima disaster
3-1. Not so Dangerous
NecessaryIndispensable, vital, essential;
requisite.
3-1. Not so Dangerous
3-2. Cheap
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
3. Evidence: Necessary
3-2. Cheap
Nuclear Thermal Hydroelectric
5-6 yen 7-8 yen 8-13 yen
Energy Cost (per kwh)
METI (2010)
Official data
Nuclear energy is economical
3-2. Cheap
NecessaryIndispensable, vital, essential;
requisite.
3-1. Not so Dangerous
3-2. Cheap
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
3. Evidence: Necessary
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
METI (2010)
原子力29%
水力8%
火力62%
新エネルギー等1%
発電量の割合（ 2010年）
To Reduce Greenhouse Emissions…
（気候異変）温室ガス、苦肉の削減案 政府「２０年までに０５年比３．８％減」 ２０２０年までの日本の温室効果ガス削減目標が、「０５年比３・８％減」で固まった。１１日からポーランドで始まる国連気候変動枠組み条約締約国会議（ＣＯＰ１９）で説明する。その削減幅はきわめて小さく、国際社会の評価は厳しいものになることが予想される。
Asahi Shimbun (2013a)
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
Yomiuri Shimbun (2013a)
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
Asahi Shimbun (2013a)
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
Asahi Shimbun (2013b)
The percentage of renewable energy is only 1%
It’s difficult to reduce greenhouse gas emissions a lot without nuclear energy
A trade deficit is increasing
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
NecessaryIndispensable, vital, essential;
requisite.
1. Introduction2. Defining Terms3. Evidence: Necessary4. Evidence: Unnecessary5. Analysis6. Conclusion
Outline
4-1. Dangerous
4-2. Expensive
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
4. Evidence: Unnecessary
4-1. Dangerous
4-1. Dangerous
1.5 quadrillion becquerel of cesium137
169Oshima (2011: 12)
UnnecessaryNot necessary or
requisite; needless
4-1. Dangerous
4-2. Expensive
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
4. Evidence: Unnecessary
Nuclear Thermal Hydroelectric
5-6 yen 7-8 yen 8-13 yen
Energy Cost (per kwh)
METI (2010)
4-2. Expensive
4-2. Expensive
Oshima(2013: 112)
Nuclear Thermal Hydroelectric
10.25 yen 9.91 yen 7.19 yen
Energy Cost (per kwh)
The evidence that nuclear energy is economical have lost
4-2. Expensive
UnnecessaryNot necessary or
requisite; needless
4-1. Dangerous
4-2. Expensive
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
4. Evidence: Unnecessary
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
Current Situation
脱原発状態
Example1: Denmark
MIN-IREN(2006a)
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
MIN-IREN(2006b)
Example1: Denmark
Example2: German
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
MIN-IREN(2006c)
Example2:German
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
MIN-IREN(2006d)
The existences of the countries that provide electricity without nuclear energy
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
UnnecessaryNot necessary or
requisite; needless
1. Introduction2. Defining Terms3. Evidence: Necessary4. Evidence: Unnecessary5. Analysis6. Conclusion
Outline
3-1. Not so Dangerous
4. Analysis
→安全かどうか定かではない。 低線量での被ばくのデータがない。
5
3-2. Cheap
4. Analysis
発電コスト＝総発電コスト÷発電量原子力の運転年数を 40年、設備利用率を 80％とした値が原子力の発電コストであるとして計算していることに問題がある。（ Oshima 2011:92-93） 3
3-3. Impossible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
4. Analysis
→環境面と経済面での問題がある。
8
4-1. Dangerous
4. Analysis
→低線量での被ばくのデータがないため、 どれくらい危険なのかがわからない。
5
4-2. Expensive
4. Analysis
8
→技術開発、立地対策のコストも含まれる。経済産業省が計算に加えていなかった所も加えている。
4-3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy
4. Analysis
3
→デンマーク、ドイツはひとつの例。 状況が異なる。
独政府は、福島第一原発の事故で世論が「脱原発」に傾いた中でも、安全性を確認した上で、原発 9基の稼働を続けている。（ Yomiuri 2013b）
1. Introduction2. Defining Terms3. Evidence: Necessary4. Evidence: Unnecessary5. Analysis6. Conclusion
Outline
5. AnalysisNecessary
Unnecessary 1. Not so
Dangerous→⑤
2. The Cost is not Expensive→③
3. Unrealistic to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy→⑧
1. Dangerous→⑤
2. Expensive→⑧
3. Possible to Provide Electricity without Nuclear Energy→③
Total： ⑯ Total： ⑯
There are no definite answer…
6. Conclusion
However
6. Conclusion
UnnecessaryImmediately
Gradually
When Thinking
about Future
Thank you for listening!
Nuclear Energy:Necessary or Unnecessary
B11562 Misaki Tango
