The magic mirror lens of Fukushima

by liberal japonicus

Russell asked if I could say something about how Fukushima is looking over here. As with most things I post, it probably less about what things look like and more like the way I look at things, so caveat lector.

After Fukushima, there were and continue to be protests that were not one off events and continue today, happening every Friday night in front of the Prime Minister's residence. Yet to me, I don't know how much these protests represent "popular" feeling. After all, the DPJ was trounced in an election in December and the LDP, which has always been the party of nuclear power, won an overwhelming victory. And 'Abenomics' seems to have gotten the country at least partially restarted. So it might be good to go back over what happened after Fukushima.

It still seems pretty clear that the DPJ and Naoto Kan were being stonewalled by the TEPCO people and Kan became more and more anti-nuclear after the Fukushima disaster. Indeed, TEPCO tried to blame (with some success) the problems of Fukushima on Kan's micro management. (Recently, Kan has discussed how he was faced with the possibility that Tokyo may have become uninhabitable, thoughts which were probably prompted by TEPCO's plans to simply abandon the Fukushima plant. Here is some background to that.)

Certainly Kan could have sat back and waited for other actors to respond, but it is understandable that he intervened to spur others into action and to try to get information that he needed to figure out what to do. Kan has been criticized for losing his temper and yelling at TEPCO staff when he visited their headquarters in Tokyo as if getting upset in the midst of an unprecedented crisis was an unforgivable breach of protocol. Kan said he met TEPCO President Shimizu Masataka on March 15, 2011 at headquarters and told him a total plant evacuation by workers was unthinkable and according to Kan, Shimizu merely replied, “Yes I understand”. (Kan 2012) Shimizu did not at that time deny these plans for total evacuation as he has done subsequently. Government officials who were in the room with Kan when he met Shimizu confirm Kan’s version of events. (Funabashi 2012) Prior to that meeting Kan was informed by METI Minister Kaeda Banri and Chief Cabinet Spokesman Edano Yukio about TEPCO calling to inform them of plans to evacuate all workers from the plant site so it is not surprising that he was irate when he visited TEPCO HQ. In Kan’s view there is no doubt whatsoever that TEPCO HQ was planning to abandon the stricken nuclear reactors and if this had happened the crisis could have spiraled out of control. Kondo Shunsuke of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission advised Kan that in a worst-case scenario there might be massive radioactive releases from the spent fuel rod pools, necessitating the evacuation of Tokyo. This nightmare scenario meant that the national government would not be able to function and Japan would not be able to bring the situation under control.

link

The fact that Kan's anger has come to be a breach of protocol rather than a perfectly understandable expression of emotion kind of tells you that you aren't in Kansas anymore. In fact, there have been a number of criminal complaints against Kan for doing or not doing various things related to Fukushima, which the prosecutor's office has announced that they are declining to prosecute. One suspects that some of these are astroturfed, but it indicates to me that the guy could not catch a break.

Kan's inability to deal with the situation, as well as an inability to make any kind of economic gains, led to falling popularity, and despite the fact that the anti-nuclear vote has become stronger, Kan's replacement, Yoshihiko Noda restarted 2 reactors in June and indicated that he was willing to compromise on the DPJ's nuclear stance. In Dec, the DPJ was turned out and the LDP, which is the party most strongly aligned with the nuclear power industry swept into power. So all of this is a bit baffling to me, though the LDP is having to moderate the plan it had earlier put in place of increasing nuclear power generation to over half(!) of the total energy for the country. In fact, in the election, nuclear power was like the 800 pound gorilla in the room: no one wanted to mention it in case it went on a rampage. Just ask Sanae Takaichi who suggested that the Fukushima disaster caused 'no deaths' among the residents. Talking about nuclear power has become a third rail of Japanese politics, it seems.

Still, bigwigs in the LDP will probably aggressively work to restart the nuclear power plants, because the nuclear energy industry is not in a position have these power plants sitting there not producing any power. You've probably read the stories about how radioactive water is now overwhelming the underground barrier and streaming out into the Pacific. Yet, it seems that this is really kabuki theatre, because TEPCO did nothing for 2 years, and now, claiming that it has a plan but has the government stating the following:

“There is no precedent in the world to create a water-shielding wall with frozen soil on such a large scale,” said Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga in an interview with Japan Times.

The project proposes creation of a roughly one mile long barrier of frozen soil by sinking pipes around key reactor facilities and then running coolant through them.

The undertaking has an estimated price tag about half a billion dollars, according to contractor Kajima Corp., which proposed the project.

Why kabuki? Because TEPCO is not able to follow the restructuring plan it agreed to, and any money it pours into Fukushima is sunk costs. Literally. It has kept the public in the dark. And you can almost smell the desperation when TEPCO hires Lady Barbara Judge to flack. Still, despite the flop sweat, they haven't lost yet and they are hoping to have the government take over the Fukushima efforts and they will concentrate on restarting their other plants, which will probably happen, so you don't know if it is flop sweat, or confidence that the fix is in.

Which leads to the other baffling thing: despite the fact that the LDP is understood to be for restarting nuclear plants, (and the market knew this as well, as TEPCO stocks jumped after the LDP election) it was still voted in. Public opinion against nuclear power was as high as 81% for phasing out nuclear power totally by 2030 (it had been 1/3 of all power generated) and is now in the 50% range. That drop is not that people now support nuclear power, it is an acceptance that some plants will be restarted in the short term.

Some suggest that the DPJ paid the price for compromising, as detailed from the same link:

These developments in the autumn of 2012 constitute a major victory for the nuclear village as the decision in favor of policy drift on energy policy is a snub to public opinion and provides opportunities for more extensive lobbying. PM Noda’s cabinet has zigzagged on nuclear energy policy and has shrugged off public opinion as it woos Keidanren, a major pillar of the nuclear village. As Jonathan Soble observes, “Under pressure from pro-nuclear business groups, it resolved to act “flexibly” and with “constant verification and revision” — hedges that might keep the nuclear industry in business indefinitely.” (Financial Times 10/24/2012) The Cabinet caved on its pledge to phase out nuclear energy just one day after the nation’s three largest business groups Keidanren (Japan Business Federation), Keizai Doyukai (Japan Association of Corporate Executives) and the Japan Chamber of Commerce and Industry issued a joint statement complaining that the government had ignored their objections to a nuclear phase-out.Keidanren Chairman Yonekura Hiromasa inveighed, "We object to the abolition of nuclear power from the standpoint of protecting jobs and people's livelihoods. It is highly regrettable that our argument was comprehensively dismissed." (Asahi 9/19/2012) Publically admonished by the nuclear village elders, the Cabinet promptly flip-flopped.

To try and figure out why the Japanese electorate would vote for a party that is 180 degrees on such an issue adjudged important in the way nuclear power has been, various folks have put forward theories.

"This election is all about whether you support Abenomics or not," said Sadafumi Kawato, professor of political science at Tokyo University. "The decision on whether to restart nuclear power plants is not really in the hands of the LDP," he said.

In a sense, that is true, but the question is then, whose hands is it in? And even though the business groups listed above are for nuclear power, what is happening is that companies and consumers are turning to renewables and alternative sources of energy. Masayoshi Son, a Korean descended Japanese businessman who is the country's 2nd richest person, is working with prefectures to create at least 10 solar farms and has detailed his vision in this piece (the translator, Andrew DeWit, has a number of articles on the changing landscape in Japan for renewables and green energy).

DeWit suggests that the decentralization and political will in sub-national groups is going to beat out the forces of the 'nuclear village'. The wrangling over the FIT (Feed in Tariff) suggests how this lines up. Japan introduced the FIT, which mandates that power companies buy back excess power in 2009, but the system hasn't been set. Germany had great success with the FIT. This Asahi Shimbun article notes that the FIT program has a number of problems, and one of those is that the government has always set a high priority on food self sufficiency. In fact, this is one of the ways the LDP has been able to hold on to its power, the subsidies for rice growing, along with the weighting of the electorate which makes rural votes worth much more than urban votes, has kept underpopulated rural areas as LDP safe seats. This Guardian article and this Japan Times piece gives the background. Part of the way rural constituencies are catered to is special consideration given to land that is classified as farmland, and the Asahi Shimbun article notes the following:

Noting the growing momentum for renewable energy, the farm ministry established a task force in September 2011 to find a way to "strike a balance between the promotion of renewables and the conservation of farmland."

But the policy does not appear to be sufficiently flexible to meet the needs of renewable energy developers.

"Even if they are abandoned, rice fields are still categorized as farmland," said Takashi Nozu, deputy director of the Renewable Energy Policy Division at the ministry's Food Industry Affairs Bureau. "We will not approve the installation of solar panels across vast tracts of farmland."

That's what makes Son's partnering with prefectural government intriguing. There are probably ways that prefectural government can reclassify, through purchase or land swaps, the land that Son wants to use for solar farms. National regulations are stopping wind, water and geothermal power though paperwork requirements, but the deployment of already developed technologies is proceeding apace and this is lowering costs. 

Another factor is the fact that most non-power Japanese companies feel they cannot pass on the higher energy costs to consumers, so are investing in renewables and green energy to keep their costs down. In fact, power costs to industrial consumers have increased 20% or so, but inflation is still low.

All this is leading to an interesting face-off, with supporters of nuclear power threatening even higher energy prices, and the power consumers, both individuals and industries, are investing in renewables and driving a lot of innovation in that sector. I think that this face-off makes the current situation like cheering at a sports event. You don't cheer during play when the outcome is in doubt, you jump up when the runner has cleared the last tackle and is streaking down the field or when the ball is arcing over the left field wall. This is not to dismiss the passion of the protesters who, every Friday from 6 to 8 pm in front of the Prime Minister's residence since early 2012, have gathered to protest. Some have argued that these events represent a new form of protest, one free from the previous associations of protests in the 60's, I tend to think that population concentration of a place like Tokyo makes it relatively 'easy' to assemble a thousand or more. It's not clear to me that the protests are having any effect or even being acknowledged. (of course, not acknowledging something doesn't mean that it isn't having an impact). So my view is that this is the bottom of the second inning with two evenly matched teams. The Nukes are desperately trying to sway public opinion so they can maintain a foothold that will allow them to expand in the future. The anti-Nukes effort is not primarily expressed by the protests, but by the actions of non-power companies and subnational units. I retain this wish that protests, and this protest in particular, would be successful, but I feel like they rarely, if ever are. 

There is one more thing to add to the mix here. Currently Japan is experiencing an unprecedented heat wave, with temps going to over 40 degrees C in several places. And while one might think that the nuclear industry could argue for more nuke plants as a response to global warming, it seems to me that they have no capital for that kind of argument anymore. Strange how you mess up just once with a nuclear reactor and no one will pay any attention to the potential benefits anymore.

Anyway, an interesting time to be here. (I tried to link to a range of articles, so if I screwed up a link or three, please let me know.)

Comments

[Laura Koerbeer]

"The fact that Kan's anger has come to be a breach of protocol rather than a perfectly understandable expression of emotion kind of tells you that you aren't in Kansas anymore."

Do you mean that this is a particlularly Japanese phenomenon? To condemn someone for bad manners because that person is emotionally exposing the nefariousness of the people doing the condemning?

It kind of reminds me of the American phenomenon of dismissing experts like Krugman as shrill or rude or abrasive when the expert gets annoyed about having to explain basic stuff over ad over to media or political ignoramuses who prefer their self-serving ignorance and don't want to learn anything.

In other words it seems like dismissing people by attacking their manners is an oft-used strategy used by people who are up to no good. Is it a strategy used more in Japan than here? Is it tied into janpanese culture in some important way?

[dr ngo]

In Chinese culture - and Japanese is even stronger in this regard, I suspect - losing your cool is equivalent to losing the argument. As a volatile barbarian, I "lost" a lot of arguments (in the minds of my audience) during my years at HKU that way, although in my heart I knew I had "won."

Yes, every society attacks manners when they can't defend substance. But in the West, a display of emotion that is perceived as genuine can sometimes be a plus; cf. Reagan "I paid for this microphone." This is rarely so in Asia (in my experience).

[Turbulence]

Have there been any TEPCO suicides yet? Sorry to be so morbid, but it seems that Japan has a culture of people committing suicide when they screw up really badly at work (see here for example). It just seems odd that TEPCO screwed up so catastrophically that they seriously had to consider evacuating a city of 35 million people but no one there takes the screw up personally. It seems like we're talking about the complete and total destruction of the Japanese economy.

Oh well. Who could have ever predicted that a tsunami might hit a coastal region around the same time that an earthquake hit?

[russell]

here's the takeaway, from my point of view:

but the question is then, whose hands is it in?

whichever way japan goes regarding nukes, it's going to effect everyone, a lot.

to say nothing of everybody else on the planet.

who decides? how is the decision made?

thanks LJ for this thoughtful and thorough post.

[Nigel]

Do you have any feel for the likelihood of Japan being able to replace nuclear with renewables in the nearish future ?
Offshore wind and solar look (on the basis of a few minutes research), to be the most realistic options for replacing bulk capacity, but offshore wind power is rather expensive, and solar capacity will take quite a long time to scale up.

I also note that Japan is at the forefront of methane hydrate research (non renewable, but potentially massive resources).

[Laura Koerbeer]

I remember reading somewhere--and this might be a lot of bullshit--that there was a fundamental difference between African American perceptions of sincerity and what I guess you could call northern European perception. Supposedly African Americans thought a speaker was sincere if the speaker was overtly emotional whereas people of northern European descent thought displays of emotion were indications of manipulativeness or lack of control. AA's supposedly read sincerity the other way around, percieving a calm demeanor as either a lack of genuine concern or a masking of the speaker's real agenda.

In contradiction with this thesis I think that displays of aggression are quite persuasive in our contemporary politics, at least to many media professionals in a profession which is dominaed by people of northenr European descent. Bully techniques seem to be processed as displays of stregnth and the bullies are rewarded by being treated as leaders. Often discussions on "news" shows are about the degree to which a politician is considered strong or powerful or effective as a communicator, with the bullies given high marks, rather than a discussion of the merits of the substance of the remarks.

[liberal japonicus]

Following on the my three sons post, Koreans tend to be more expressive. Brawls are a common feature of the Korean Parliament (see here and here) and when you see company officials apologize to parents for the loss of a child due to defective product, you often see the relatives holding the parents back, cause they would probably beat the officials to a pulp.

I came to Japan with a desire to go to China, but arrived shortly before Tiananmen square, so I spent my first 5 years only in Japan, and travelling back to the states. At the end of those 5 years, I had a job interview in the UK, and transferred in Incheon and was absolutely gobsmacked by two airline employees having a shouting match. You didn't see that kind of public anger in Japan unless someone was very very drunk (which was and is a 'excuse' for expressing one's true feelings)

The formal apology in Japanese is moshiwake arimasen, which means 'I have no excuse'. This list is on the humorous side, but gets the order and the context pretty well.

[CharlesWT]

Japan is spending a lot money on developing ways to mine natural gas from the methane hydrate deposits in the seabeds around Japan.

[bob mcmanus]

Losing Face Status Politics in Japan by Susan Pharr, is besides other things, three case studies of negotiation strategies and tactics:rebellion in the LDP, "office ladies" in a gov't division trying to escape "tea duty"; and a struggle over burakumin studies in a high school, between communist teachers and socialist burakumin. Available used for 12 cents at Amazon

The last case was very heated, and included encircling an opponent hoping they would get violent in trying to escape (countertactic was a linked-arm line); and kidnapping an opponent and yelling at them for hours or days.

These are the notes I took, not enough:

Susan Pharr

"The notion that conflict is desirable—that, like bitter medicine, it is ultimately good for body and soul, and for the state itself—is profoundly alien to Japanese, be they social theorists, politicians, or ordinary citizens. Rather than seeing conflict as creating bridges among disparate social interests or between society and the state, or as providing a crucial mechanism for change, the Japanese today still appear to adhere to the words of the seventh-century Prince Shotoku: "Above all else esteem concord; make it your first duty to avoid discord."

Even protesters voicing social concerns are apt to see conflict as negative, disruptive, and regrettable. Perhaps no major nation in the world places a greater cultural emphasis on conflict avoidance.

If finding accord through consensus within a small circle of insiders is sometimes fraught with difficulties and may lead to conflict-avoidance behavior, and if the natural reflex of authorities is
to restrict rather than open up conflict, then the problem of expanding the decision-making circle from uchi, or insiders—those included in the "we-ness" of a particular group—to soto, outsiders, emerges clearly. In short, the consensus method is inherently exclusionary: opening up the circle
to bring in outsiders who may mount a challenge to the status quo runs counter to the basic approach to dealing with conflict in Japan and to the values surrounding it. To attempt to create a permanent "universe of discourse" between insiders and outsiders—the route that Western conflict theorists point to as leading to conflict termination and resolution—would stretch the
consensus approach beyond its capacity and in a direction it is not intended to go.
The Japanese approach thus is aimed fundamentally at privatizing social conflict."

Vast over-simplification with many exceptions, etc

[Hartmut]

Nuclear (and even coal powered) power plants suffer from heatwaves too, at least, those that draw their cooling water from rivers and lakes. With increasing frequency plants have to shut down because either their water source gets itself too warm or the level drops too far, so the induction pipes run dry.
---
In Germany there was a significant perception shift as far as emotional argumentation goes, at least in politics. The Nazis discredited charged emotional rhetorics to a degree that its use alone today draws suspicion. On the other hand it made political talk so boring that it serves well as a soporific. Only a handful of public figures still has a licence to go over the top (and there is a general exception for local Bavarian elections).
General rule: Wer schreit hat Unrecht (He who shouts is in the wrong).
But that's primarily the public sphere. There is no specific culture of addiction to consent and saving face. Germans (outside politics) are known (and feared) in neighbouring countries for their direct talk that is perceived as too blunt.

[dr ngo]

Bob McManus's comment reminds me of an anecdote I heard in my first college class on Asia, half a century ago.

It seems that in the US Occupation of postwar Japan one of the aims was to introduce "democracy," defined in terms of contested elections. So open electoral events - town meetings - were to be held in every village, though there were doubts as to whether the Japanese would accept a process which inherently involved losers as well as winners. In the event, every winning candidate was elected unanimously! The night before the election, the village had got together on its own and spent all the time necessary to arrive at a consensus on who the officials should be. The Western-style "election" itself, in the presence of Occupation observers, just ratified this invisible Japanese-style decision making.

Or so I was told.