Based on a Sankei Shimbun editorial, this article discusses the shutdown of Kyushu Electric Power’s Sendai Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1. It questions the reasonableness of forcing nuclear reactors offline because of delays in completing anti-terrorism facilities, pointing to the Nuclear Regulation Authority’s irrational construction deadline, one-sided criticism of utilities, the reduction of stable power sources, and negative effects on energy security and climate policy.

March 21, 2020
Since about three years passed without construction being permitted, the construction period actually given to Kyushu Electric Power was less than two years.
It is only natural that it could not be completed in time.
The following is from this morning’s Sankei Shimbun editorial.
Was this a reasonable measure?
Shutdown of the Sendai nuclear power plant
Unit 1 of Kyushu Electric Power’s Sendai Nuclear Power Plant in Kagoshima Prefecture stopped operation on the 16th.
This was because the anti-terrorism facility, whose installation was made mandatory under the new regulatory standards based on the Fukushima accident, was not completed by the deadline.
With this shutdown, the number of nuclear reactors generating electricity in Japan has fallen to six.
In May, Sendai Unit 2, and in August and October, Units 3 and 4 of Kansai Electric Power’s Takahama Nuclear Power Plant in Fukui Prefecture, will be forced to shut down one after another for the same reason.
At a time when the spread of the new coronavirus is causing the world economy, including the energy sector, to fall into disorder, the reduction of stable power sources caused by the forced shutdown of nuclear power plants is a matter for serious concern.
The official name of the anti-terrorism facility is the “specific serious accident response facility.”
Even if terrorists crash an aircraft into the plant, this facility makes it possible to prevent the release of radioactivity from the nuclear power plant by remote operation, and it corresponds to a second central control room.
The anti-terrorism facility inevitably has to be large-scale, and electric power companies have had to tackle difficult construction work such as cutting away mountains on the site and digging tunnels in order to build it.
Regarding the fact that the construction was not completed in time, the Nuclear Regulation Authority criticized Kyushu Electric Power and other utilities for having been too optimistic in their outlook for the construction work, but this is far too one-sided.
The anti-terrorism facility must be completed within five years from the approval of the “construction plan” for the nuclear reactor itself, and the approval for Sendai Unit 1 was granted in March 2015.
However, construction of the anti-terrorism facility cannot begin unless separate approval for it is newly obtained.
The Nuclear Regulation Authority approved this only from May 2018 onward.
Since about three years passed without construction being permitted, the construction period actually given to Kyushu Electric Power was less than two years.
It is only natural that it could not be completed in time.
The problem lies in how the starting point of the five-year construction period was set.
Moreover, if completion of the anti-terrorism facility is delayed beyond the deadline, does the danger of an attack suddenly increase from the very next day?
Surely not.
The irrational setting of the construction period and the coercive exercise of forcing operations to stop will not only worsen the management of electric power companies, but also shake the nation’s long-term energy policy and pour cold water on Japan’s achievement of its commitments under the Paris Agreement, which aims to prevent global warming.
The Nuclear Regulation Authority is also a national administrative organization.
We would like to ask it to sincerely reform its awareness toward placing importance on energy security.