Results and analysis of survey
During 7/14~7/18, we conducted a survey of attitude toward nuclear power plants. This is because we need to know what Japanese and foreign people think about problems of Japanese NPPs and how much they know of it. This survey was targeted at every ages, men and women, every countries, literally everyone so I posted my instagram, twitter and Facebook with lots of hashtags. Fortunately, I have got 34 respondents and actually great answers.
What we asked about this survey is…
- nationality
- sex
- age
- agree or disagree with construction and use of NPPs
- which methods to generate electricity know the best
- how many NPPs in Japan are actually generating electricity
- if you are living in Japan, do you agree with restarting NPPs?
- and, how long should NPPs be operated?
<Nationality>
Most of my survey respondants are friends of mine, but some answered really nicely even though we do not know each other. Nationalities are quite spreaded than I thought. Philippines, British, Malaysia, Irish, Singapore, South Korea, China, Germany, and unknown. Though the number of each countries are 1 (Philippines are 2), I really appreciate the respondants. And I reckoned most highest access to my survey link was instagram. That is also interesting.
<Sex>
15 gentlemen and 18 ladies
<Age>
Under 18: 1
18~24: 29
25~34: 2
35~44: 1
So, actually most of opinions from this survey can be interpreted as “the youngs’ opinions”.
<agree or disagree with construction and use of NPPs>
What this question aimed at is to know their stance toward NPPs and I also asked reasons, so to know what perspectives of NPPs the respondants laid emphasis on to choose their side.
The results are below.
<statistics>
Negative side is slightly higher than positive side but 16 people answered “neither agree nor disagree”.
<Comments>
(agree)
“Other method such as thermal power cost a lot.”
“We Japanese rely on it too much so if it disappear we can’t get enough energy.”
“Because when safety standards are followed, they provide clean and efficient energy”
“They are necessary to produce energy for industry and private use in Japan.”
“Nuclear power plant, so called NPP, is useful in aspects of cost and stable supply. Japan has highest technology for that. Of course, I agree with that it is good to have more natural energy, but we should not abolish NPP completely. It can remain as a criteria for oil shock or other troubles.”
(disagree)
“because nuclear power plants is very dangerous”
“Dangerous and can cause dire consequences if it's damaged”
“not dangerous without an accident”
“It’s not safe as we can see Fukushima case. And there is no way to dispose of unclear fuels”
(Neither)
“It largely depends on the design of the power plants.”
“It is dangerous but we need it to produce electricity efficiently.”
“Because some people say nuclear power plants are dangerous, as we can see in the case of Fukushima case.”
“The differences between advantages and disadvantages are far too high.”
“Nuclear waste will be a problem for millions of years. But otherwise, nuclear energy is quite clean.”
“We should not use nuclear power plants in naturally dangerous places being likely to do harm for environment or creatures including human beings, but, in safety place, I should use this way because nuclear power can produce more electricity than other ways.”
In the agree side, they focus on the amount of electricity from NPPs and the stable and the price of electricity charge in Japan. It looks agree sides people has more knowledges than the other two groups from this comments.
In disagree side, they mentioned the dangerousness of NPPs and undecided the way to nuclear disposal.
In Neither side, I could see they showed two different perspectives and compared. Such as dangerousness and energy efficiency, or the matter of place as a earthquake country.
<which methods to generate electricity know the best>
This question is set for make sure of the understanding of other kinds of power plant or methods because I guessed that the majority of first questions’ answer would be “disagree”. If they did, I am really interested in what kind of power plant they agree with.
Even though my prediction was wrong, I have got interesting results.
<statistic>
The most popular was hydropower method which uses dam to generate electricity and solar power method. Nuclear power and thermal power follow that, and wind power, other (he wrote wave power, I know who wrote this) and geothermal is lowest. “I don’t know much about PPs” was 4 people.
First of what interesting thing is solar (and water) is higher than thermal which generates most of electricity in Japan. (I think why the water is higher because the system seems quite simple)
That is the evidence which now more and more people come to into solar power plants.
Second of interesting thing is geothermal power method is the lowest. Even though about 60% of this respondents are Japanese, and this country has potential to be a great geothermal country(I wrote about geothermal power plants in previous post), they do not know much about geothermal method. Actually in current situation, it is hard to implement geothermal system in Japan, but still at least Japanese can be more into this method.
<how many NPPs in Japan are actually generating electricity>
From here, I asked questions as a opinion, but this question is different kind. This is Factual question so there is an answer. I questioned this because I know most of you do not know the current situation of NPPs in Japan, so I want you to know the fact. This is also the clue to consider the next question.
(Answer is 8 NPPs. Because of TEPCO’s nuclear disaster, all of the 59 NPPs were stopped at first. Then gradually NPPs were restarted. Now, Genkai, Kawauchi 1,2 in Kyu-syu, Ohi 3,4 Takahama 3,4 in Kansai, Ikata in Shikoku of nuclear power plants are actually generating electricity.)
<statistic>
The quiz result is….
I think 5 would be correct because it seems as same as 8 and name of place which has NPPs are 5.
I want you to know now Japan does not work NPPs so much. So if you thought “That's it?!”, this survey’'s work is almost done.
<If you are living in Japan, would you agree with restarting NPPs?>
As I said before, the previous question was clue to answer this question. Since I conduct this survey on the internet, that means non Japanese can answer this question, so I wrote this sentence with “if”.
I asked this question because main theme of our research is “restarting nuclear power plant”. I dare to show you the three choices to pick up the one what I wanted to answer. I thought If there are only two choices such as “agree”, or “disagree”, the result would be that disagree were higher than agree. I also asked the reasons why people chose that.
<statistic>
Totally disagree side is 28%, totally agree side is 9% , and 62% of people agree with temporarily using them.
<reasons>
(totally agree)
“France has a biggest number of nuclear power plants, and I've never heard about dangerously”
“By restarting NPP, local governments can acquire large amount of money from national government.”
(temporarily using)
“New, modern power plants need to constructed to replace the ones built in the Showa Period”
“As I mentioned already, NPP is not totally bad. Natural electricity is not enough in present situation, thermal power plant needs high cost and emit greenhouse gas. Thus, until we can manage all the energy source in sustainable energy, we should leave some NPP in Japan. If we talk about different country, like Canada or Russia, there are a lot of land which no people live in. Then, if we have high quality NPP technology, it seems nice.”
“Japan is an island country with few natural resources”
“Until we can sufficiently harness solar energy, nuclear energy is out best option”
“Using nuclear power plant have risks. “
“It takes resources to find other potential ways to generate all electricity “
“With solid safety, I agree with restarting nuclear power plants. “
“cuz we need electricity”
“If we can enough energy except nuclear power plants, it’ll better to use other way. “
“There are better sources to do so”
(totally disagree)
“Japan is in a seismological area, prone to big disasters, operating nuclear plants are ticking bombs.”
“Because if I remember correctly, stopping its work is difficult when we start it once.“
”People who live in houses near the nuclear power plants feel uneasy.”
”It could be dangerous when natural disaster occurs
“I think government should develop more sustainable energy”
“There must be reasons behind stopping them. Restarting them without giving second thought would spell disaster. “
In summary of temporarily side, they wish they could stop all NPPs in Japan. However they know also the amount of electricity from current sustainable energy is really short in Japan, so their answer is stuck.
<How long should NPPs be operated?>
This is the last opinion question and what I really wanted to ask them. I showed them five options.
- 1-10 years
- more than 20 years
- 40 years
- 80 years(second generation: NPPs’ lifespan can be prolonged after safety investigation)
- till human find another great resources
My insight was 3 or 5 must be higher than others because in fact it takes long time to abolish them.
But answers are different.
<statistic>
People think 1~10 years is the best period to use NPPs. And 40 years and another resources, and 20 years are following it. No one chose 80 years of use. From here, I can say that, everyone hopes to stop NPPs in Japan in their lifetime among the people who answered agree with temporarily using.
<Reasons>
“The radioactive waste is poisonous and the safety standards must also be followed(1)”
“Current Japanese NPPs have already been used for a long time.(1)”
“I think we can use nuclear power plant until we will find other way of making electricity.(1)”
“Renewable energy plants are not sufficient(3)”
“I believe humans would find good methods to generate electricity until then.(3)”
“We should create new types of power plants before the second generation.(3)”
“there is the problem of supplying energy.(5)”
“NPP's technologies have some more rooms for improving. Nuclear fission reaction and smaller reactor is some of the example. It is too early to abandon NPP, without another stable resources.(5)”
<Comment>
First of all, I really want to say thanks to the respondants. From these precious answers, I have got some clues to write this blog.
- explanation of popular methods to generate electricity
- situation about France’s NPPs
- type of NPPs
- how long exactly takes to stop NPPs and abolish and costs
I am glad because everyone answered my questions seriously and had at least basic knowledges about NPPs and consider about the future energy. I believe this problem would be solved someday and I hope that will happen in my lifetime.
Thank you for finishing reading. Taiyo
Comments
Post a Comment