A. Origin article.
B. related article.
A. ○ The Fukushima Crisis 385 ; Frightened Areva,but Don't Worry!福島危機385.衆院選挙前の空騒ぎ。
09/18/2012 Le Monde.
"The pain of Fukushima" attacked the nuclear industry again today when one year and a half passed from the disaster by the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster which occurred on Areva / French daily Le Monde (September 18) March 11, 2011 frightened of Japan's "it will be nuclear power plant zero to the 2030s" declaration.
It declared that Japan freed itself from atomic power by the end of the 2030s shortly following Germany, Belgium, and Switzerland.
The management of Areva is maintaining the comparatively calm attitude.
However, this Japan's declaration became a severe blow new for the company.
It is not only Areva.
It is a blow severe also for the nuclear whole industry.
Before the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster occurred, at Areva which is proud of the world's largest nuclear company, the business in Japan formed 8% of sales.
"Only Germany opted for the nuclear breakaway officially."
Areva has judged about Japan that anything is changeless.
"It did not carry out in the form which had in Japan the directivity in which the argument about a nuclear energy policy is also so clear.
It is necessary to discern carefully also about this government declaration.
When people are emotional, it can also be understood well that such declaration comes out. "
President Luke Oursel of Areva states.
"Consideration is required for the point that declaration is made several weeks before the Diet member election as well as Germany.
That is, you have to discern whether it is asserted that the following political power follows this declaration. "
In the strategic planning "action 2016" for reorganizing the financial situation of the company, Areva showed the idea that it expects that 2/3 of the nuclear power plant in Japan will re-work.
However, reality is far from the expectation.
"If re-operation is made, supply of a nuclear fuel will resume first."
President Oursel states like this.
Areva has supplied the nuclear fuel to the nuclear power plant of Japan in collaboration with the Mitsubishi group since 2008.
The president does not hide joy about having promised positively if the Japanese government continuing the nuclear fuel cycle enterprise of Aomori Prefecture again, either.
Areva has a partner relation with Japan Nuclear Fuel which manages the reprocessing plant of radioactive waste in the Rokkasho Village in Aomori Prefecture.
Areva which bears the atomic power of France is watching the whereabouts of the nuclear energy policy of Japan carefully with both of expectations of being uneasy.
- The original report "Areva which is going to minimize the shock of selection by Tokyo" / French daily Le Monde (September 18)
(Jean-Michel Bezat, « Areva tente de minimiser l’impact du choix de Tokyo », Le Monde, 2012.09.18)
pathfinderk.
Areva is keen insight truly.
That's right.
The Democratic Party Administration of Japan has no change.
Prime Minister Noda's "it will be nuclear power plant zero to the 2030s" declaration is mere lip service.
The Cabinet decision is not carried out.
He left for the U.N. speech of New York yesterday on September 25.
NHK is broadcasting on September 25 that he declares [ "it will be nuclear power plant zero to the 2030s" ] in the United Nations.
The declaration will be made.
However, probably, it is the scenario of suffering a setback after a Lower House election by the pressure from the situation of the nuclear industry in Japan, and the United States.
Probably, it is the temporizing way of only winning the following Lower House election that Prime Minister Noda would thinks.
pathfinderk.
↓
○ The Fukushima Crisis 385
A. Origin article.
B. related article
A. 09/18/2012 Le Monde.
日本の「2030年代に原発ゼロ」宣言におびえるアレバ社／ルモンド紙（9月18日）
2011年3月11日に起きた福島原発事故による惨事から1年半が過ぎた今日、「福島の痛み」が再び原子力業界を襲った。ドイツ、ベルギー、スイスに続き今度は日本が、2030年代の終わりまでに原子力から脱却することを宣言したのである。アレバ社の幹部らは比較的冷静な態度を保っている。しかし今回の日本の宣言は、同社にとって新たな厳しい一撃となった。アレバ社だけではない。原子力業界全体にとっても厳しい一撃である。
福島原発事故が起きる前、世界最大の原子力企業を誇るアレバ社では、日本での業務が売上の8%を占めていた。
「公式に原子力脱却を決めたのはドイツだけです。」
アレバ社は日本について、何も変化は無いと判断している。
「日本では、原子力政策についての議論もそれほど明確な方向性を持った形では実施されませんでした。今回の政府宣言についても慎重に見極める必要があります。人々が感情的になっている時には、こうした宣言が出てくるのもよく理解できます。」
アレバ社のルーク・ウルセル社長は述べる。
「ドイツ同様、国会議員選挙の数週間前に宣言がなされている点にも留意が必要です。つまり、次の政権がこの宣言を踏襲すると確言するかどうかを見極めなければなりません。」
アレバ社は同社の財政状況を立て直すための戦略計画「アクション2016」において、日本にある原発の3分の2が再稼働することを期待するとの考えを示した。しかし現実はその期待から程遠い。
「再稼働がなされれば、まず核燃料の供給が再開することになります。」
こうウルセル社長は述べる。アレバ社は2008年以来、三菱グループと共同で日本の原発への核燃料の供給を行っている。同社長はまた、日本政府が青森県の核燃料サイクル事業を継続するとの確約を行ったことについても喜びを隠さない。アレバ社は青森県の六ヶ所村で放射性廃棄物の再処理工場を運営する日本原燃とパートナー関係にある。フランスの原子力を担うアレバ社は、不安と期待の両方をもって日本の原子力政策の行方を注意深く見守っている。
●元の記事 「東京による選択の衝撃を最小限にとどめようとするアレバ社」／ルモンド紙（9月18日）
(Jean-Michel Bezat, « Areva tente de minimiser l’impact du choix de Tokyo », Le Monde, 2012.09.18)
アレバ社はさすが炯眼ですね。その通りです。
日本の民主党政権は何も変化はありません。
野田首相の「2030年代に原発ゼロ」宣言は単なるリップサービスです。
閣議決定をしていません。
9月25日昨日彼はニューヨークの国連演説に旅立ちました。
彼は国連で「2030年代に原発ゼロ」宣言するとNHKは9月25日に放送しています。
その宣言はするでしょう。
しかし、日本国内の原子力業界の事情とアメリカからの圧力で衆議院選挙後に頓挫するといったシナリオでしょう。
野田首相の考えていることは次の衆議院選挙に勝つことだけの姑息なやり方でしょう。
pathfinderk.
↓
○ The Fukushima Crisis 385
B. 09/22/2012 07:07 Tokyo Shimbun
'To the Jpn's Nuclear power plant zero issue.
"Don't Do that" the us says.
Jpn gov's Cabinet decision to Evasion.'
(Tokyo Shimbun) 07:07 on September 22, 2012
Just before judging the right or wrong of the Cabinet decision of the strategy in which the Noda Cabinet aims at "it will be nuclear power plant operation zero to the 2030s", it turned out on the 21st by coverage inside the government that it was being required that the U.S. government side should shelve a Cabinet decision.
It said the U.S. high official "is anxious about being unable to make it law, or carrying out a Cabinet decision and it becoming impossible to bind and improve a policy" at the place of the prior explanation by the Japan side, and was asking to leave room for Japan including the future Cabinet to change the strategy of nuclear power plant operation zero.
As for the government, the Japanese Embassy in the U.S., and the Hiroshi Ogushi Cabinet Office parliamentary official and Assistant to the Prime Minister Akihisa Nagashima that visited the U.S. repeated strategic contents explanation to the U.S. side after the 9 beginning of the month when the determination of "innovative energy and an environmental (energy ring) strategy" came to a close.
It is expressed, at the talk on the 14th, the Froment assistant official of the National Security Council (NSC), the U.S. high official, "will be anxious about carrying out the Cabinet decision of the energy ring strategy."
At this time, Mr. Ogushi says that he explained "I would like to carry out the Cabinet decision of the energy strategy."
Furthermore, the U.S. side also regarded as questionable the target which prepared the term of "the 2030s."
The think tank and the Cronin senior consultant of a new U.S. security center (CNAS) with influence strong against the U.S. Democratic Party Administration indicated on the thirteenth "The policy which a concrete distance does not have, either and shows target time is dangerous."
On the other hand, Mr. Nagashima is the meaning "people will think a nuclear power plant that the government pushes on to nuclear power plant promotion without target time when it re-works", and he had conveyed the position of the Cabinet which put in the zero target.
Moreover, it is said that the rice side expressed the concern on the security by decline of nuclear technology, etc. by negotiation.
Although the energy ring strategy was decided on the 14th, the Noda Cabinet draws up the intention by the side of rice, and it is a Cabinet decision only about one short sentence of "carrying out while an energy ring policy has pliability and a constant verification and reexamination are performed."
The Cabinet decision of the strategy itself which specified "nuclear power plant operation zero" was shelved.
Ogushi and Nagashima both have reported the contents of a visit to the U.S. to Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda after a homecoming in the official residence.
The administration official has indicated, "Although it was going to report to the rice side in advance and was going to calculate an understanding to "nuclear power plant operation zero" determination, did Japan withdraw the rice side from the nuclear power plant or the nuclear fuel cycle, did fear that the cooperative relation on a security faded, and didn't it demand evasion of the Cabinet decision?"
<> The Ogushi parliamentary official "as for whom judgment don't change"
About deliberations with the U.S. involving nuclear power plant zero, a Hiroshi Ogushi Cabinet Office parliamentary official will receive coverage of our paper on the 21st. "although the contents of the individual exchange could not be said, from the U.S. side, there was indication of various points of argument and a subject.
It was said that the Japanese government did not necessarily change judgment by the indication from the U.S. side."
<> It is the U.S. pressure to an emasculation background.
<Description> The voice of many people who ask for "nuclear power plant zero" was disregarded, the Japanese government received the demand "avoid the Cabinet decision which leads to fixation of a nuclear power plant zero policy" of the U.S., and the actual condition of having yielded to pressure as a result became clear.
Judgment of the Noda Cabinet which weakened the new strategy which hung up "nuclear power plant zero" as a matter of fact is not allowed at all by the act which tramples down the old argument which involved in people.
Though it explains that the U.S. side respects sovereignty of Japan in exchange of opinions, as a basis of the demand by the side of U.S. a decline of the nuclear technology of "Japan, It is indicated that it has a bad influence also on the U.S. nuclear power industry", "if it becomes nuclear power plant zero, continuing working a reprocessing facility, plutonium will be accumulated into Japan and the situation in which military diversion is possible will be induced", etc.
It is said that it was emphasized that it was contrary to the "national interest" by the side of rice again and again.
the Noda Cabinet which was explaining to the rice side the domestic public opinion which asks for "nuclear power plant operation zero" at the beginning.
However, the U.S. side continued shaking, saying "Leave a possibility that the person selected in the election can change a policy at any time without binding a policy."
The 160,000 people's refugees cannot return to a hometown under the influence of radioactive contamination even now, but the damage caused by rumors decayed agriculture and a fishing.
The government is obligated to achieve accountability about the reason for having shelved the very heavy judgment of [ to desertion ] the determination in a cabinet meeting for many people's serious thought.
(Mochizuki Isoko)
(Tokyo Shimbun)
B. 09/22/2012 07:07 東京新聞
原発ゼロ「変更余地残せ」 閣議決定回避 米が要求
（東京新聞）2012年9月22日 07時07分
野田内閣が「2030年代に原発稼働ゼロ」を目指す戦略の閣議決定の是非を判断する直前、米政府側が閣議決定を見送るよう要求していたことが二十一日、政府内部への取材で分かった。米高官は日本側による事前説明の場で「法律にしたり、閣議決定して政策をしばり、見直せなくなることを懸念する」と述べ、将来の内閣を含めて日本が原発稼働ゼロの戦略を変える余地を残すよう求めていた。
政府は「革新的エネルギー・環境（エネ環）戦略」の決定が大詰めを迎えた九月初め以降、在米日本大使館や、訪米した大串博志内閣府政務官、長島昭久首相補佐官らが戦略の内容説明を米側に繰り返した。
十四日の会談で、米高官の国家安全保障会議（ＮＳＣ）のフロマン補佐官はエネ環戦略を閣議決定することを「懸念する」と表明。この時点では、大串氏は「エネ戦略は閣議決定したい」と説明したという。
さらに米側は「二〇三〇年代」という期限を設けた目標も問題視した。米民主党政権に強い影響力があるシンクタンク、新米国安全保障センター（ＣＮＡＳ）のクローニン上級顧問は十三日、「具体的な行程もなく、目標時期を示す政策は危うい」と指摘した。これに対して、長島氏は「目標の時期なしで原発を再稼働した場合、国民は政府が原発推進に突き進むと受け止めてしまう」との趣旨で、ゼロ目標を入れた内閣の立場を伝えていた。また交渉で米側は、核技術の衰退による安全保障上の懸念なども表明したという。
エネ環戦略は十四日に決めたが、野田内閣は米側の意向をくみ取り、「エネ環政策は、柔軟性を持って不断の検証と見直しを行いながら遂行する」という短い一文だけを閣議決定。「原発稼働ゼロ」を明記した戦略そのものの閣議決定は見送った。
大串、長島両氏は帰国後、官邸で野田佳彦首相に訪米内容を報告している。
政府関係者は「事前に米側に報告して『原発稼働ゼロ』決定への理解を求めようとしたが、米側は日本が原発や核燃サイクルから撤退し、安全保障上の協力関係が薄れることを恐れ、閣議決定の回避を要請したのではないか」と指摘している。
◆「判断変えてない」大串政務官
原発ゼロをめぐる米国との協議について、大串博志内閣府政務官は二十一日、本紙の取材に対し「個別のやりとりの内容は申し上げられないが、米側からはさまざまな論点、課題の指摘があった。米側からの指摘で日本政府が判断を変えたということはない」と話した。
◆骨抜き背景に米圧力
＜解説＞ 「原発ゼロ」を求める多数の国民の声を無視し、日本政府が米国側の「原発ゼロ政策の固定化につながる閣議決定は回避せよ」との要求を受け、結果的に圧力に屈していた実態が明らかになった。「原発ゼロ」を掲げた新戦略を事実上、骨抜きにした野田内閣の判断は、国民を巻き込んだこれまでの議論を踏みにじる行為で到底、許されるものではない。
意見交換の中で米側は、日本の主権を尊重すると説明しながらも、米側の要求の根拠として「日本の核技術の衰退は、米国の原子力産業にも悪影響を与える」「再処理施設を稼働し続けたまま原発ゼロになるなら、プルトニウムが日本国内に蓄積され、軍事転用が可能な状況を生んでしまう」などと指摘。再三、米側の「国益」に反すると強調したという。
当初は、「原発稼働ゼロ」を求める国内世論を米側に説明していた野田内閣。しかし、米側は「政策をしばることなく、選挙で選ばれた人がいつでも政策を変えられる可能性を残すように」と揺さぶりを続けた。
放射能汚染の影響により現在でも十六万人の避難民が故郷に戻れず、風評被害は農業や漁業を衰退させた。多くの国民の切実な思いを置き去りに、閣議での決定という極めて重い判断を見送った理由について、政府は説明責任を果たす義務がある。 （望月衣塑子）
（東京新聞）
※コメント投稿者のブログIDはブログ作成者のみに通知されます