Five Japanese Organizations Urge World Bank and ADB to Withdraw Nuclear Energy Support Policy – Highlighting Issues of Nuclear Waste, Terrorism and Attack Risks, and Enormous Costs
Today, five organizations—Friends of the Earth Japan, the Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES), Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center, the Liaison Committee for Organizations of Victims of the Nuclear Disaster (Hidanren), and the Citizens’ Commission on Nuclear Energy (CCNE)—sent a joint letter and questionnaire to the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB), calling for the withdrawal of their policy shift to resume financing and support for nuclear power.
On June 10, the World Bank’s Board of Directors decided to lift its prohibition on financing for nuclear power. Similarly, the ADB has indicated its intention to include support for nuclear power as part of its forthcoming review of its energy policy.
In the letter, the groups emphasize that “nuclear waste generated through reactor operations must be managed for tens of thousands of years, yet most countries have not even identified final disposal sites.” The letter also highlights the risks of “nuclear proliferation, terrorism, and potential military attacks.”
The groups further point out that the cost of constructing nuclear power plants has skyrocketed in recent years, reaching several trillion yen per unit. They argue that imposing nuclear projects on developing countries would not only expose them to grave risks but also place enormous economic burdens on them. Accordingly, they urge both banks to reverse their policy of financing and supporting nuclear power.
In addition, the five organizations submitted a questionnaire alongside the letter, requesting the two institutions to clarify their views on matters including public consultation, information disclosure, nuclear non-proliferation, risks of diversion to military use and terrorism, and final disposal of nuclear waste. The groups asked for responses by August 29, 2025.
The full letter and questionnaire are attached.
August 6, 2025
Ajay Banga
President
The World Bank Group
Request and Questionnaire Regarding the World Bank’s Policy Shift on Nuclear Energy Support
Dear President Banga,
We understand from media reports that the World Bank Board, at its June 10 meeting, decided to begin financing new nuclear projects.
As members of Japanese civil society who have been experiencing the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, we are deeply concerned by this decision.
Nuclear power, even in the form of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), releases radioactive materials at every stage: uranium mining, fuel production and processing, plant operation, decommissioning, and the disposal of spent nuclear fuels.
The Fukushima nuclear crisis clearly demonstrated that once an accident occurs, it causes widespread environmental contamination and long-lasting social and economic harm to communities.
Nuclear waste must be managed for tens of thousands of years, and yet most countries have not even identified final disposal sites. Nuclear power also carries risks of military diversion and terrorism.
In addition to that, some information is withheld for reasons of counter terrorism, and as a result, local communities and NGOs often do not have adequate access to information relevant to nuclear safety. This situation appears inconsistent with the World Bank’s safeguard policies.
In recent years, the cost of constructing a nuclear power plant has risen to several trillion yen per unit (1), often exceeding initial estimates by several times. As a result, private investment has been directed toward renewable energy rather than nuclear power, and renewable energy has grown at an accelerated rate (2). These are only some reasons among many others that we oppose World Bank financing for nuclear power.
We urge the World Bank to rule out financing for nuclear power.
We are also deeply dismayed that the World Bank has made such a major policy shift without engaging civil society.
Even at this stage, the World Bank must hold meaningful consultations and listen to the views of various people, including those affected by nuclear accidents and those affected by uranium mining.
We would be grateful if you could share your views on the above and kindly respond to the attached questionnaire. We would greatly appreciate it if we could receive your response by August 29.
Sincerely,
Note:
- The construction cost of the Vogtle nuclear power plant in the United States reached 15.5 billion dollars, the Olkiluoto nuclear power plant in Finland reached 11 billion euros, and the Flamanville nuclear power plant in France reached 13.2 billion euros.
- In 2024, the total installed capacity of solar PV and wind power was about 3.3 TW, nearly eight times that of nuclear power (about 420 GW).
Ayumi Fukakusa, Executive Director, Friends of the Earth Japan
Yuki Tanabe, Program Director, Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES)
Hajime Matsukubo, Secretary General, Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center
Ruiko Muto, Co-Chair, The Liaison Committee for Organizations of Victims of the Nuclear Disaster
Kenichi Oshima, Chair, Citizens’ Commission on Nuclear Energy (CCNE)
cc: Mr. Katsunobu Kato, Minister of Finance, Japan
Attachment
Questionnaire
- What considerations were made in making this decision? Please disclose the review process for how this decision was made.
- What discussions took place at the board meeting before the decision was made?
- Does the World Bank plan to conduct public consultations with civil society on this matter?
- What kind of procedures will be followed in the future?
- Which countries are expected to receive support under this policy shift?
- Does or will this decision involve any changes to the safeguard policy?
- Given that nuclear projects often restrict information disclosure for reasons such as anti-terrorism measures, how will the Bank guarantee adequate transparency and meaningful consultation with stakeholders?
- How does the bank address the concerns regarding nuclear non-proliferation, military diversion, terrorist risks, and the possibility of becoming a military target?
- In many countries, nuclear compensation systems and robust safety regulations are not yet in place. How does the bank view these risks?
- Most countries have not identified the final disposal site for nuclear waste. What is the Bank’s position on this?
August 6, 2025
Masato Kanda
President
The Asian Development Bank (ADB)
Request and Questionnaire Regarding the Asian Development Bank’s Policy Shift on Nuclear Energy Support
Dear President Kanda,
As members of Japanese civil society who have been experiencing the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, we are deeply concerned that the ADB is reviewing its energy policy and considering to expand a support for nuclear energy(1).
Nuclear power, even in the form of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), releases radioactive materials at every stage: uranium mining, fuel production and processing, plant operation, decommissioning, and the disposal of spent nuclear fuels.
The Fukushima nuclear crisis clearly demonstrated that once an accident occurs, it causes widespread environmental contamination and long-lasting social and economic harm to communities.
Nuclear waste must be managed for tens of thousands of years, and yet most countries have not even identified final disposal sites. Nuclear power also carries risks of military diversion and terrorism.
In addition to that, some information is withheld for reasons of counter‑terrorism, and as a result, local communities and NGOs often do not have adequate access to information relevant to nuclear safety. This situation appears inconsistent with the World Bank’s safeguard policies.
In recent years, the cost of constructing a nuclear power plant has risen to several trillion yen per unit (2), often exceeding initial estimates by several times. As a result, private investment has been directed toward renewable energy rather than nuclear power, and renewable energy has grown at an accelerated rate (3). These are only some reasons among many others that we oppose ADB support for nuclear power.
We urge the ADB not to provide any assistance to nuclear power plants.
We would be grateful if you could share your views on the above and kindly respond to the attached questionnaire. We would greatly appreciate it if we could receive your response by August 29.
Sincerely,
Note:
- Brief Note on Asian Development Bank’s Energy Policy Review , 07 and 28 July 2025
- The construction cost of the Vogtle nuclear power plant in the United States reached 15.5 billion dollars, the Olkiluoto nuclear power plant in Finland reached 11 billion euros, and the Flamanville nuclear power plant in France reached 13.2 billion euros.
- In 2024, the total installed capacity of solar PV and wind power was about 3.3 TW, nearly eight times that of nuclear power (about 420 GW).
Ayumi Fukakusa, Executive Director, Friends of the Earth Japan
Yuki Tanabe, Program Director, Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES)
Hajime Matsukubo, Secretary General, Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center
Ruiko Muto, Co-Chair, The Liaison Committee for Organizations of Victims of the Nuclear Disaster
Kenichi Oshima, Chair, Citizens’ Commission on Nuclear Energy (CCNE)
cc: Mr. Katsunobu Kato, Minister of Finance, Japan
Attachment
Questionnaire
- If the ADB intends to make such a significant policy change as allowing support for nuclear power, would it not be appropriate to conduct thorough adequate public consultation?
- What procedures will be taken going forward to operationalize this decision?
- Will any changes be made to the Safeguard Policy in this regard?
- Nuclear projects are often subject to restrictions on information disclosure for reasons such as security and counter-terrorism. How will the ADB ensure sufficient transparency and consultation with stakeholders under such circumstances?
- How does the ADB view the risks related to nuclear non-proliferation, possible military use, terrorism, and the potential of nuclear facilities becoming military targets?
- Many countries still lack adequate nuclear liability regimes and safety regulations. How does the ADB address these concerns?
- With regard to nuclear waste disposal, most countries have not yet determined a final repository site, and such decisions are expected to involve considerable difficulties and social impacts in the future. How does the ADB take this into account?
