Hot Air Zone

Naoto Kan’s statement taking on Japan’s nuclear industry isn’t likely to accomplish anything.

BY ROBERT DUJARRIC | JULY 14, 2011

This week, Japan's lame duck prime minister, Naoto Kan, surprised some observers by coming out against nuclear power, announcing that Japan should scrap its target of 53 percent nuclear dependency in 2030 and focus instead on fostering renewable energy sources. What this means policy-wise is still murky, given that Kan's credibility is at an all-time low and the Japanese cabinet has yet to show any sign of carrying out his plans. But it may say a lot about the mixed fortunes of Japan's so-called "nuclear village," the industrial-bureaucratic lobby that was once of the most influential utilities lobbying force in the world.

Before Fukushima, Japan was one of the countries most committed to nuclear energy, with about 30 percent of its electricity coming from atomic reactors and a regulatory structure that appeared to many to side with the nuclear industry in a close relationship that created at least the appearance of collusion. Rather than use solely the power of the state -- i.e., the courts -- to convince locals to accept the expansion of nuclear power, utilities provided massive direct and indirect subsidies to local communities to buy their acceptance. And the government looked past all this.

The breakdown at Fukushima has altered this situation. Objectively, the accident was far from cataclysmic, compared with industrial catastrophes such as the Bhopal disaster or the hard-to-quantify but surely large number of deaths from cancers and pulmonary diseases caused by the massive industrial pollution that affected Japan in the 1960s. But incidents involving atomic energy have a psychological impact that is out of proportion to the dangers involved, due to their connection to nuclear weapons and the unseen -- and thus fearsome -- nature of radiation. Had Fukushima been a chemical plant whose destruction by the tsunami had killed thousands, no one would have called for abolishing Japan's chemical industry.

Now, with politicians like Kan now eager to seek political advantage through standing up against entrenched nuclear interests (as Kan became famous for doing in his 1996 crusade against those responsible for the HIV tainted-blood scandal, including members of the Ministry of Health and Welfare he led at the time), the nuclear village could be in trouble. And yet, the Fukushima effect has largely been felt in Germany, which just announced that it would phase out nuclear power by 2022, and Switzerland, which plans to do the same by 2034, rather than in Japan.

This is due in part to the weakness of Japan's anti-nuclear movement, which has been decimated by years of industry dominance in public affairs. Several Japanese cities hosted anti-nuclear demonstrations after Fukushima, but there were relatively few participants.

Of course there's always the possibility that the anti-nuclear movement could expand, particularly if new and damaging revelations about TEPCO are released, or if the still-unstable Fukushima reactors continue to leak more radioactivity, seriously harming rescue workers or children.

TORU YAMANAKA/AFP/Getty Images

 

Robert Dujarric is director of the Institute of Contemporary Asian Studies at Temple University, Japan campus. He gave a paid lecture to Areva University in 2008.

GORASH

8:01 AM ET

July 15, 2011

Not correct

This article is wrong, the majority of the Japanese now supports at least a nuclear phase-out and NOT building any more new nuclear plants. Building new nuclear plants is now said to be a "political impossibility".

 

JJCALE

1:06 PM ET

August 9, 2011

Of course Japan needs to stop nuclear power plant construction

Japan is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Unlike the US it has very limited coal gas and oil. Renewable energy - that is a 20 years away. However as a minimum before any further nuclear power plants can be considered surely the nuclear power industry needs to face themusic over this. Where is the public enquiry? The truth is that the nuclear power industry's song and dance about how safe nuclear power was has been shown to be false. And what has happened Dr Masashi Goto, the nuclear engineer who blew the whistle on Japan's safety claims? As well as deserving our tribute lets get him to lead the public enquiry.

 

DAVIDKIM

3:49 AM ET

August 11, 2011

Japan

The Japanese don't have many options open when it comes to energy. If it wants to provide energy to its people it needs to go nuclear or renewable. Going alternative in a phase out measure would take a long time and they would need to look at population growth and dependency on energy.

Personally I think they should develop both with the same amount of interest put into both and go through safety with a fine comb due to its location. Seriously they know the dangers they have out there and they should isolate everything. That way it has the best of both worlds and subsequently they will create even more energy jobs.

 

LEATHAHARK

8:08 PM ET

August 12, 2011

Hot Air Zone

Naoto Kans statement taking on Japans nuclear industry isnt likely to accomplish anything. This article is wrong, the majority of the Japanese now supports at least a nuclear phase-out and NOT building any more new nuclear plants. Building new nuclear plants is now said to be a "political impossibility". spam filter Japan is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Unlike the US it has very limited coal gas and oil. Renewable energy - that is a 20 years away. However as a minimum before any further nuclear power plants can be considered surely the nuclear power industry needs to face themusic over this. Where is the public enquiry? The truth is that the nuclear power industry's song and dance about how safe nuc.

 

MINTI445

9:14 PM ET

August 12, 2011

Why are you calling a prime

Why are you calling a prime minister lame duck? You do not want to be called a lame duck either. Maybe you need a mediterraneandiet and then you might refrain from making this kind of remarks. I have often seen that people that critique other have something wrong with themselves.

 

MICHEALHOLDING

8:28 AM ET

August 13, 2011

Building new nuclear plants

Building new nuclear plants is now said to be a "political impossibility". spam filter Japan is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Unlike the US it has very limited coal gas and oil mediterranean diet. Renewable energy - that is a 20 years away. However as a minimum before any further nuclear power plants can be considered surely the nuclear power industry needs to face themusic over this. Where is the public enquiry?