Key Points
・Hitachiomiya, a city in Ibaraki Prefecture, accepted the literature survey, the first stage in Japan’s search for a high-level nuclear waste disposal site, becoming the first area on Japan’s main island of Honshu to do so. It has not been chosen as a disposal site.
・Nuclear waste already exists, produced from spent reactor fuel. After it is cooled and stored, burying it deep underground, known as geological disposal, is the approach countries have adopted to reduce the burden of management on future generations.
・Japan’s site search examines and compares several areas in stages. Whether a site is geologically suitable, how to secure funding and skilled people over decades, and whether local communities accept it are the challenges ahead.
Hitachiomiya Accepts the First Stage of Japan’s Nuclear Waste Site Search
At a press conference on September 30, 2026, Mayor Sadayuki Suzuki of Hitachiomiya, Ibaraki Prefecture, announced that the city would accept a literature survey, the first stage in selecting a final disposal site for high-level radioactive waste, often called “nuclear waste” in Japan. Japan’s Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry had asked the city to accept the survey on August 31, and according to the city’s announcement, it mailed its letter of acceptance to the ministry on October 2.
According to the city’s official statement, the mayor gave four reasons: the value of contributing to a national problem, the city’s future as its population keeps shrinking, the value of knowledge about the underground environment for disaster preparedness, and keeping the option of disposal open for future generations. He also indicated that the city would confirm residents’ wishes, for example through a referendum, before moving to the second stage, according to reports.
Hitachiomiya is the fifth area in Japan to accept a literature survey, after the towns of Suttsu and Kamoenai in Hokkaido, the town of Genkai in Saga Prefecture, and Minamitorishima, a remote island in Ogasawara Village, Tokyo. It is the first on Honshu. As of October 3, the start date of the survey had not been announced.
At his regular press conference on October 2, Ibaraki Governor Kazuhiko Oigawa said he would not consent to the next stage, the preliminary investigation. He said the prefecture already hosts many energy facilities, including the Tokai Daini nuclear power plant, and already shoulders a large burden, and that his view would not change even if a majority voted in favor in a referendum. The mayor has said the city will keep its decision to accept the literature survey.
Related Articles
Where Japan’s Nuclear Waste Comes From and Where It Is Meant to Go
A literature survey (bunken chōsa) is the first of three stages in Japan’s search for a disposal site for high-level radioactive waste, in which existing papers and records on an area’s geology are reviewed at a desk, without drilling. It does not decide where a disposal site will be built.
Nuclear waste comes from spent fuel and must first be cooled and stored
Nuclear waste is produced from fuel that has been used in a nuclear power plant. Fuel freshly removed from a reactor gives off intense heat and radiation, so it is first cooled in a pool of water inside the plant. Japan’s policy has been to reprocess this fuel and recover the parts that can still be used.
The highly radioactive liquid left over from reprocessing is mixed with glass and solidified. The result is high-level radioactive waste, which takes the form of vitrified waste canisters. This is a different material from the treated water at Fukushima Daiichi or the soil removed during decontamination. According to NUMO, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan, there were 2,530 vitrified canisters in Japan as of the end of March 2026. NUMO estimates the total at about 28,000 canisters if all the fuel used so far were reprocessed, a converted figure rather than a count of existing canisters.
Freshly made canisters are still hot, so they are stored until they cool, for example at a facility in Rokkasho Village, Aomori Prefecture. According to Aomori Prefecture, storage at Rokkasho is positioned as temporary storage for 30 to 50 years after acceptance, and Japanese media have reported a commitment to move the canisters out of the prefecture when that period ends.
Why storage alone is not enough
Current storage works as long as people can watch over it and repair it, and it does not mean there is an immediate danger. Still, it is unrealistic to assume that people will keep managing the waste for tens of thousands of years, so a place is needed that aims to reduce dependence on future monitoring and repair. Whatever Japan decides about nuclear power, the waste that already exists still has to be managed.
There is also a view that the decision should not be rushed and that storage above ground, where people can monitor it, should be kept for longer. In a 2012 response, the Science Council of Japan acknowledged the limits of science in confirming the stability of rock formations tens of thousands of years ahead and recommended that policy be rebuilt around interim storage and a cap on the total amount of waste.
Geological disposal: burying waste deep underground
The approach most countries have placed at the center is geological disposal. According to Japan’s Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, other disposal methods were also examined, and there is a shared international view that placing the waste in stable rock deep underground is the safest and most feasible option.
According to the agency’s explanation, each vitrified canister is sealed in a metal container, wrapped in clay that lets little water through, and placed in rock more than 300 meters underground. The idea is to stack several barriers so that if one weakens, the next slows the spread of radioactive material. Depth alone does not make a site safe; the geology and groundwater movement of each location have to be assessed over tens of thousands of years.
Can the waste be taken back out once it is buried? Under the basic policy the Japanese Cabinet adopted in April 2023, the waste is to remain retrievable until the facility is closed, to the extent that safe management can reasonably continue. Reprocessing or nuclear transmutation cannot make all of the waste disappear either.
A three-stage site search, with five areas at the entrance
In the literature survey, papers and records on the area’s geology are studied at a desk. In the next stage, the preliminary investigation, holes are drilled to examine the underground. In the final stage, the detailed investigation, an underground facility is built to confirm conditions. According to NUMO’s materials, the whole process takes about 20 years. Before moving to the next stage, the national government hears the opinions of the municipal mayor and the prefectural governor, and it will not proceed against their opposition.
Even if a candidate site is selected, construction is not automatically approved; an independent safety review by the Nuclear Regulation Authority follows. According to a March 2026 document from the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, an area that accepts a literature survey receives grants of up to 2 billion yen in total over the survey period. The government has published a “Nationwide Map of Scientific Features,” which color-codes underground conditions, and it intends to examine and compare several promising areas. The first area to accept is not simply chosen on a first-come, first-served basis.
| Area | Literature survey began | Procedural stage | Factors affecting the next stage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suttsu and Kamoenai, Hokkaido | November 2020 | Report published November 2024; public comment closed April 2025 | Hokkaido’s governor is reported to oppose the preliminary investigation |
| Genkai, Saga Prefecture | June 2024 | Literature survey under way | None noted |
| Minamitorishima, Ogasawara Village, Tokyo | May 2026 | Literature survey under way | None noted |
| Hitachiomiya, Ibaraki Prefecture | Not yet set | Acceptance letter sent October 2 | Ibaraki’s governor has said he will not consent to the preliminary investigation |
(As of October 3, 2026, based on materials published by NUMO and the local governments)
Every area is still at the literature survey stage, and no area has been chosen as a disposal site. In Kamoenai, the literature survey report narrowed down the range that could be a candidate, an example of how the map alone does not settle the question.
Other countries are at different stages
As far as can be confirmed, even the leading countries are just short of operating, or still building or under review, when it comes to underground disposal facilities for spent fuel and high-level waste from commercial nuclear power.
In Finland, according to the Finnish government’s August 2026 announcement, the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority issued a favorable safety statement and the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment began preparing an operating licence for Posiva’s Onkalo facility. Posiva said in September 2026 that it would focus even more strongly in 2027 on preparing for the operation phase, but it has not been confirmed that spent fuel has actually begun to be placed underground.
According to SKB, Sweden began construction in January 2025 and plans to start disposal in the 2030s. France’s Cigéo project is under licence review. Canada selected a site in 2024, and its regulatory process began in 2026. In the United States, the Yucca Mountain project has long been stalled.
The Challenges Japan Still Faces
Can a literature survey show whether a site is safe?
No. A literature survey shows only what existing records suggest about the geology. Each later stage, drilling in the preliminary investigation and going underground in the detailed investigation, removes unsuitable places and makes the assessment more concrete. Neither the literature survey nor any single later stage settles a site’s safety, and the Nuclear Regulation Authority’s review still remains after the surveys.
This is also where critics focus. In a statement published in October 2023, more than 300 geoscientists argued that, unlike the stable ground of northern Europe, the Japanese archipelago, where tectonic plates converge, has no site suitable for geological disposal. Critics also note that the effects of faults and volcanoes cannot be assessed in a desk-based literature survey and are carried over to the drilling stage.
Both supporters and critics agree that accepting a literature survey does not mean the area’s safety has been recognized.
In response, a Japanese government advisory working group has argued that in a geologically active country like Japan, keeping the waste in storage above ground for a long time is not appropriate, and that the right approach is to investigate stage by stage, remove unsuitable places, and stop when necessary. Both arguments have their reasons. The government’s design removes unsuitable places step by step, but a literature survey reveals only the outlook on paper, not Hitachiomiya’s actual geology.
Who will fund the work and keep the expertise alive for decades?
Disposal is funded by contributions that power companies set aside from electricity rates, and according to NUMO the cost runs to several trillion yen. According to the national government’s estimates, it will take more than 20 years before a disposal facility begins operating, and far longer before it is closed.
Throughout that time, Japan will need to keep training geologists and people who can handle radioactive materials without a break. Moving canisters from Rokkasho to a disposal site also involves ports and roads outside the site. The effects reach not only the disposal area but also the people who live along the transport route.
Why does Japan need both the mayor and the governor to agree?
To move to the next stage, the national government must hear the views of both the municipal mayor and the prefectural governor. Ibaraki’s governor said that the prefecture already hosts the Tokai Daini nuclear power plant and nuclear research facilities and has already accepted a large burden under national energy policy. In Hokkaido, the governor is also reported to oppose the preliminary investigation, which makes Ibaraki the second case of the same pattern.
In a question-and-answer document from a briefing for Hitachiomiya city council members, published by NUMO in September 2026, the industry ministry gave its reasons for approaching the city: the national map suggests favorable conditions, there is unused land where surface facilities could possibly be built, study sessions and requests from local volunteers had taken place in the city, and on August 21 the mayor responded positively, saying he saw value in contributing to national policy. The ministry said the unused land does not refer to a specific site and that the city has not been judged the safest location in the country.
The mayor cited the future of a city with a shrinking population and the value of contributing to a national problem. The city decided within a month of the late-August request and held no briefing sessions for residents, according to reports. Some residents have said they wanted an explanation of why their city was chosen before a decision was made.
Grants are available for the literature survey. Even so, grants and economic development measures alone may not bring local and surrounding communities to a shared view of the burden.
The mayor faces the question of having left the explanation until later. The governor faces the question of whether it is right to put the prefecture-wide burden ahead of survey results and residents’ wishes that have yet to emerge. Both show how the site selection system handles such decisions.
What would it take for Hitachiomiya to reach the next stage?
According to the national government, a literature survey takes about two years, but as of October 3 the start date for Hitachiomiya had not been announced. The governor has said he will not consent to the preliminary investigation and that his view would not change even if most residents voted in favor. The mayor is reported to intend to confirm residents’ wishes, for example through a referendum.
After the literature survey report is published, the national government will hear the views of the governor and the mayor. Under government policy, if the governor opposes at that point, the process will not move to the preliminary investigation. If the governor does not change his view, Hitachiomiya’s survey may end at the literature survey stage. Even then, the government intends to keep examining and comparing several areas, so the system continues even if one area stops.
When nuclear plants run out of space for spent fuel and when a final disposal site starts operating are separate timelines. The storage margin differs from plant to plant. For final disposal, according to NUMO’s estimates, the surveys alone take about 20 years, followed by review and construction, so disposal will start even later wherever the process moves forward.
Japanese Reactions to Hitachiomiya’s Nuclear Waste Survey
The posts below are reactions on X, not a measure of Japanese public opinion. The widely shared posts we found came mainly from news organizations and from the government side, so what follows is how the press and policymakers framed the story, not how residents of Hitachiomiya or the wider public feel. Within the search terms and candidates we checked on October 3, 2026, posts by individuals either supporting or opposing the decision were shared on a much smaller scale; that is a limit of our search, not a finding about X as a whole. Each post is presented as the account’s own statement, and this article does not vouch for figures or claims made in them.
なぜなのでしょうか？
— 東京新聞編集局 (@tokyonewsroom) September 7, 2026
「核のごみ」の最終処分場を巡る常陸大宮市議会での会合が9日にあるものの、非公開で議事録を残さない予定です。
議会の勉強会も非公開でした。
日程の関係で、一般質問の予定もありません。https://t.co/GNqUBwOvbK
東京新聞デジタル
The Tokyo Shimbun newsroom asked “Why?” on September 8. The Hitachiomiya city council’s meeting on the nuclear waste site was set to be held behind closed doors with no minutes, its earlier study session had also been closed, and no general questions to the mayor were scheduled.
Among the posts we checked, the most widely shared critical ones were about how the decision was made rather than about safety. The Tokyo Shimbun post drew about 900 likes.
「密室」で進んだ核ごみ調査受け入れ 常陸大宮、説明会開かずhttps://t.co/ad4lfISgwx
— 毎日新聞 (@mainichi) September 30, 2026
「市民の理解をどのように得るのか」と問われた鈴木氏は「原子力で亡くなっている人と自動車事故で死んでいる人のどちらが多いのかといったら自動車事故が多い」と言いました。
Mainichi Shimbun, September 30: “Nuclear waste survey accepted ‘behind closed doors’. Hitachiomiya held no briefing sessions for residents.” Asked how he would gain residents’ understanding, Mayor Suzuki replied that if you compare the number of people who have died from nuclear power with the number who die in car accidents, car accidents are more.
The mayor’s comparison is quoted here as his own statement, as the Mainichi reported it. This article does not assess the figures or the scientific basis behind the comparison. The post drew about 860 likes and more than 1,000 reposts, the largest share count among the posts we checked.
こんにちは。#報道特集
— 報道特集(JNN / TBSテレビ) (@tbs_houtoku) September 6, 2026
きのうお伝えした特集①
【「文献調査」で最大20億円の交付金も…“核のごみ”最終処分地に急浮上で揺れる町】
が動画とテキストで公開されました。ぜひご覧下さい。
Youtube：https://t.co/bKLNjxhPBu
DIG：https://t.co/Y2GECpsXZz
Yahoo!：https://t.co/iTWBIAkCpe
TBS’s investigative program Hodo Tokushu, September 6, announced the release of its segment “Up to 2 billion yen in subsidies for a ‘literature survey’… a town shaken after suddenly emerging as a nuclear waste site candidate.”
This TBS post put the grant of up to 2 billion yen for the survey period in the foreground of its segment.
本日、#鈴木定幸常陸大宮市長 が #文献調査 の受け入れを表明されたことを踏まえ #経済産業大臣 としてぶら下がり取材に応じました。国の申入れに対し、真摯に向き合って頂いたことに心から感謝。鈴木市長とのお約束について責任を持って対応しながら、常陸大宮市での文献調査の準備を進めて参ります。 pic.twitter.com/0xdMegO055
— 赤沢りょうせい (@ryosei_akazawa) September 30, 2026
Industry Minister Ryosei Akazawa, September 30, thanked Mayor Sadayuki Suzuki for “sincerely engaging with the national government’s request,” and said the ministry would prepare for the survey while taking responsibility for the commitments made to the mayor.
Among the posts we checked, this was the most widely shared one from the government side, with about 700 likes.
【速報】「概要調査、受け入れるつもりない」 大井川茨城県知事が見解 核ごみ最終処分場巡り dlvr.it/TVl32c pic.twitter.com/e7mnDYRMHi
— 茨城新聞社 (@ibarakishimbun) October 2, 2026
Ibaraki Shimbun, October 2 (breaking): Ibaraki Governor Oigawa says he has “no intention of accepting” the next-stage preliminary investigation.
This Ibaraki Shimbun post, published after the governor’s remarks on October 2, pointed to the condition for moving to the next stage rather than to how the city decided.
The Question of Existing Waste Remains
Waste management continues whatever Japan decides about nuclear power
What Hitachiomiya’s acceptance has decided is only that the area’s geological records will be studied at a desk. The location of a disposal site has not been decided, and whether the process moves to the next stage depends on residents and the prefecture.
Even so, nuclear waste that already exists remains, regardless of whether Japan keeps or reduces nuclear power. A system for cooling and storing the waste and for finding a place that aims to reduce dependence on future monitoring and repair has to continue, whether or not any area steps forward.
Japan’s current position is to dispose of the waste through geological disposal and to find a location by examining and comparing several areas in stages. Hitachiomiya’s literature survey, the first on Honshu, is one example of what can be learned at the records stage and what is left for later.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Hitachiomiya’s acceptance mean it will host Japan’s nuclear waste disposal site?
No. Hitachiomiya accepted only the literature survey, a desk review of existing geological records that is the first of three stages, and no area in Japan has been chosen as a disposal site as of October 3, 2026. Moving to the next stage requires hearing the views of both the mayor and the Ibaraki governor, and the governor said on October 2 that he would not consent.
Why does Japan plan to bury nuclear waste deep underground instead of storing it?
Storage above ground works only while people can monitor and repair it, and assuming that care continues for tens of thousands of years is unrealistic. According to Japan’s Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, geological disposal more than 300 meters underground, with metal containers, clay and rock acting as layered barriers, is the internationally shared approach, one that aims to reduce dependence on future monitoring and repair. Critics, including the Science Council of Japan in 2012, have argued for keeping interim storage longer.
Can the governor of Ibaraki stop the process?
Yes, at the next stage. According to the industry minister’s August 2026 request to Hitachiomiya, the government will not select an area for the preliminary investigation against the opinion of the prefectural governor or the municipal mayor, and Governor Kazuhiko Oigawa said on October 2, 2026 that he would not consent even if residents voted in favor.
How did Japanese social media react to Hitachiomiya’s nuclear waste survey?
Among the posts we checked on October 3, 2026, the widely shared ones came mainly from news organizations and the government side, not from residents, so they show how the press and policymakers framed the story rather than public opinion. Within that set, the Tokyo Shimbun and the Mainichi focused on how the decision was made, pointing to closed council meetings and the absence of resident briefings, and a TBS post put the grant of up to 2 billion yen in the foreground. The industry minister thanked the mayor, and an Ibaraki Shimbun post on October 2 reported the governor’s refusal to consent to the next stage. This is a comparison of those five posts, not a description of how discussion on X as a whole changed over time.
Sekahan on YouTube
We publish video summaries of articles like this one, along with short clips built around Japanese reactions.
Reference Links
- MEAE to prepare operating licence for spent nuclear fuel disposal facility of Posiva | Finnish Government
- Construction begins on Swedish spent fuel repository | SKB
- Acceptance letter for the literature survey (Japanese) | Hitachiomiya City
- On accepting the literature survey, the mayor’s reasons (Japanese) | Hitachiomiya City
- Governor’s regular press conference, October 2, 2026 (Japanese) | Ibaraki Prefecture
- Number of vitrified waste canisters (Japanese) | NUMO
- Final disposal of high-level radioactive waste (Japanese) | Agency for Natural Resources and Energy
- Basic Policy on the Final Disposal of Specified Radioactive Waste, April 2023 (Japanese) | Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
