29 May 2012: Analysis

A Crossroads for Japan:
Revive Nuclear or Go Green?

In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, Japan has idled all 50 of its nuclear reactors. While the central government and business leaders are warning a prolonged shutdown could spell economic doom, many Japanese and local officials see the opportunity for a renewable energy revolution.

by andrew dewit

May 5 marked the shutdown of the last of Japan’s 50 viable nuclear reactors, with poor prospects for any restarts before the summer. The central government, the nuclear industry, most big business associations, and many international observers seem convinced that this will invite chaos through escalating fossil fuel costs and the risk of blackouts.

But polls suggest a growing segment of the Japanese population see things differently. Indeed, many believe that the current crisis presents the nation with a powerful spur to go green. The long dominance of nuclear-centered power monopolies has constrained Japan’s ample capacity to ramp up efficiency, conservation, renewables, smart grids, storage innovations, and other core aspects of a sustainable, 21st-century power-generating economy. Now, led by the charismatic and highly popular right-wing mayor of Osaka, Japan’s local governments are keen to move forward in this direction, and fast. And they have eager support among the public and innovative businesses.

So more than a year after the Fukushima nuclear disaster, Japan is at a crossroads, and there is a profound division of opinion about what is going on. A suddenly nuclear-free Japan might be heading for yet another big
This aging society could be sprinting toward green growth and a sustainable future.
fall, consistent with the sorry pattern of the past two decades. Or this aging society could be sprinting toward green growth and a sustainable future, leading the way for the rest of the world. We are likely to have an indication of the outcome this summer, when Japan could either face widespread power outages or avert disaster via aggressive conservation and efficiency efforts.

One thing is clear: In a world beset by economic and environmental crises, and confronting several tough, seemingly mutually exclusive choices on energy and climate change, Japan is a key country to watch.

Japan is the world’s third-largest power-generating nation. Its economy is dominated by 10 regional monopolies, of which the biggest and best known is Tokyo Electric Power, or “Tepco.” Until last year, Tepco was also one of the triumvirate that ran Japan’s most powerful business association, Nippon Keidanren, which negotiates crucial energy and growth policies with the political and bureaucratic elite. These collusive interests have been pro-nuclear for decades. So it was no surprise in recent years when they took advantage of the rising costs and risks of fossil fuels and declared that the best balance of cost, national security, and environmental protection would be a power economy centered even more on nuclear assets.

Their goal was to raise the share of nuclear-generated electricity from roughly 30 percent in 2010 to at least 53 percent by 2030. That target, codified in the government’s 2010 “Basic Energy Plan,” became unquestioned conventional wisdom until last year. That plan melted down with the reactors at Fukushima.

Fukushima has made nuclear power unacceptable to the majority of the Japanese public, especially older citizens, who vote in the largest numbers. These voters oppose nuclear not just because its sobering costs and risks
Fukushima has made nuclear power unacceptable to the majority of Japanese.
in earthquake-prone Japan are a staple of the daily news. Anti-nuclear sentiment also runs deep because the face of nuclear power is Tepco, easily the country’s most vilified company. Tepco’s continued obstinacy and irresponsibility are breathtaking, especially for a company alive only through taxpayer bailouts. So while the regime of Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda keeps trying to scare voters into acquiescing to nuclear restarts, voters’ steadfast opposition has convinced local governments to block the Noda regime’s efforts.

But taking this non-nuclear path is a leap in the dark. Prior to last year, Japan’s pro-renewable policymaking community had no serious scenario for abruptly withdrawing from nuclear power. The core position was to block new construction of nuclear plants and impose age limits on existing plants. Galvanized by the public’s rejection of nuclear power, green power advocates are now working to cut power demand in the short run through conservation and efficiency and then ramp up renewables over the medium- and long-term. Compulsory 15-percent power cuts in Tokyo last summer kept the lights on and also eliminated much of its “heat island” difference with the surrounding suburbs. But doing anything like that again, voluntarily and nearly nationwide, will be a tall order. So will expanding the renewable energy sector, which at present produces only 10 percent of power generation, and just over one percent if hydropower is excluded.

Not surprisingly, pro-nuclear factions are predicting economic mayhem. Nobuo Tanaka, the former head of the International Energy Agency, has declared that a non-nuclear Japan would be a “disaster” since he sees no serious alternative beyond fossil fuels. And the would-be kingmaker of the
A governing party leader warned that shutting down nuclear plants is “mass suicide.”
governing Democratic Party, Yoshito Sengoku, warned in April that shutting down nuclear power plants is “mass suicide.” For its part, Nippon Keidanren has repeatedly and stridently claimed that uncertainty about power supplies and price increases due to greater reliance on gas, coal, and oil will accelerate the hollowing out of Japan’s industry. On May 22, Fitch ratings agency added to the overall impression of sheer recklessness with a downgrade of Japan’s debt to A+, ranking it just one grade above Spain.

Critics of the swift retreat from nuclear power also note that about 90 percent of Japan’s power is now generated with fossil fuels, compared to roughly 60 percent before Fukushima. In addition, they point out that Japan’s liquid natural gas imports rose a whopping 52 percent from March 2011 to March 2012.

Yet the pro-renewables sector also responds with compelling arguments. It stresses that Japan has ample financial, human, and material resources to make efficiency and renewable energy a cornerstone of its economy. Advocates of a shift to sustainable power have long envisioned a role for natural gas in this process. They point out that imported energy costs today are roughly equivalent to early 2008, when oil was above $100 and analysts were saying Japan would just get increasingly more efficient.

On the policy front, the central government’s energy plan is unraveling, and the earliest we can expect a new road map is autumn. In the meantime, the government is riven by the conflicting goals of maintaining the status quo, versus making full use of increasingly potent incentives to maximize energy efficiency and deploy sustainable energy. It is determined to coddle Tepco, having so far pumped 3.5 trillion yen ($44 billion) of public funds into a firm effectively bankrupted by the still-mushrooming costs of multiple meltdowns. The government also seeks to restart nuclear assets even though it missed its own April 1 deadline to set up an independent regulator and thus has no credible safety regime in place.

At the same time, the central government is pouring funds into sustainable cities programs, focusing on renewable power and smart grids, especially in the rebuilding of the devastated Tohoku region. In recent weeks, central agencies have introduced well over 100 deregulation measures meant to speed the diffusion of renewables, conservation, smart grids, and other initiatives.

And thanks to the stubbornness of former Prime Minister Naoto Kan, the government will implement the world’s most robust feed-in tariff on July 1,
Japan’s local governments are committed to a shift to sustainable energy.
aimed at stimulating investment in alternative energy by guaranteeing the market for renewably produced power. The feed-in-tariff requires utilities to purchase electricity generated by solar, wind, small hydro, geothermal, and biomass. It will pass on the extra costs to consumers through what is projected to be a modest increase of 100 yen — about $1.25 — in their monthly utility bills.

In contrast to the divisions in the central government, Japan’s prefectures (states), big cities, and other local governments are virtually all committed to a shift to sustainable energy. This fact matters a great deal because local governments represent about two-thirds of total government-sector spending in Japan. They are investing 52 billion yen ($654 million) of their own funds directly into renewable energy in this fiscal year, while their investments in conservation and energy efficiency are many multiples of that. They are also introducing an array of indirect supports to encourage citizen power cooperatives, bulk-buying of solar panels, and other policies to promote the diffusion of renewables.

In addition, Japan’s prefectures and cities are organizing themselves into regions, or blocs, and pressing with increasing effectiveness on the central state for energy deregulation and decentralization. They see the green economy as a source of sustainable growth, good jobs, local resilience, and reduced reliance on the power monopolies. Their initiatives to cope with power and related crises have bolstered an increasingly broad-based social movement that, among other things, mobilized for the feed-in tariff and continues to press recalcitrant or lethargic local governments to emphasize efficiency. Together, these forces may overthrow the vested energy interests that have hindered Japan from reaching its full potential in pursuing green jobs and a green economy.

In the wake of last year’s crisis, a vast, constantly expanding number of energy-related collaborative institutions have sprung up within and among local governments. These institutions organize and assist local residents and small business with conservation programs, launch renewable energy projects, set up their own power firms, diffuse energy management systems more rapidly, introduce dynamic pricing and other innovations, and work to open up more land and facilities for deploying renewables. First among local leaders — and the biggest threat to the entrenched political class — is the charismatic mayor of Osaka, Toru Hashimoto. He is not only deeply committed to a sustainable energy revolution and has national political ambitions, but he outpolls every other politician in the country.

Japan has a solid green-economy base on which to build quickly in a dash to conservation, renewables, efficiency, storage, and smart grids. A report this month by Japan’s Ministry of the Environment showed that the green economy in 2010 was already worth 69 trillion yen ($868 billion) and boasted 1.85 million jobs. And in one possible indication of the acceleration of green growth, high-efficiency LED (Light-Emitting Diode) ceiling lamps in the Japanese household market went from 2.2 percent of sales in February 2011 to 57.7 percent this May.


Japan’s Once-Powerful
Nuclear Industry is Under Siege

Japan’s Once-Powerful
Nuclear Industry is Under Siege
The disaster at the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant highlighted the importance of nuclear energy to Japan and the power long wielded by the nuclear sector. As Caroline Fraser wrote in the days after the disaster, the influence of nation’s nuclear industry was bound to wane in the aftermath of Fukushima.
Many other countries want to lead the green revolution, but are handicapped by vested interests, political dysfunction, poor capacity, and insufficient incentives. Japan now has plenty of advantages — most notably the spur of adversity created by the Fukushima disaster — that could push it to the front of the pack.

With the nuclear lobby severely weakened and its generating capacity taken offline, Japan might be in trouble. But it is also possible that it has lucked out, just as it did in the 1970s when its incentives to ramp up efficiency, cut oil use in electricity production, and build smaller cars helped it emerge from the oil shock faster than other countries. Perhaps now the nuclear shock will drive Japan much faster than anyone expected toward a renewable energy future.

POSTED ON 29 May 2012 IN Biodiversity Energy Energy Forests Policy & Politics Policy & Politics Pollution & Health Asia Central & South America Europe 


What do you think of the proposals of Masayoshi Son to build large scale renewable energy infrastructure in Mongolia and import the electricity to Japan over a "Asia Super Grid"?

Posted by Karl-Friedrich Lenz on 30 May 2012

The premise of this article is off. You won't be replacing nuclear with renewables, you'll be replacing it with fossil fuels in fact, that's already what's happened.

Or you say it will "eventually" be replaced by renewables, on the 20-ish year time scale? Well,
if you wouldn't have taken nuclear off line, wouldn't that same amount of renewables replaced fossil fuels instead? Therefore, even on the long time-scale, you're still just replacing it with fossil fuels.

Or you claim all these renewables wouldn't happen without the non-nuclear incentive? Well,
maybe a little bit, but that is far outweighed by the worldwide development of renewables and
motivation from climate change. The article even claims Japan has a "solid green-economy
base", which certainly didn't come from anti-nuclear.

Nuclear is "green", at least compared to fossil fuels. It's also statistically the safest per amount of power produced (look it up if you don't believe me). No power source is 100 percent green. Hydro wipes out huge swaths of land and habitats (even without an accident) and is one of the most deadly when accidents happen, wind uses up to 10x more raw materials (e.g. concrete) per MWh than nuclear, and solar often requires heavy metals, rare earths, and/or strip mining.

For me it's renewables AND nuclear that is the solution to climate change. Once fossil fuels are out of the picture, then start worrying about possibly replacing nuclear.

Posted by Zod on 30 May 2012

There appears to be a significant crisis in public confidence towards nuclear power in Japan. Only 4.3 percent of people indicate their support of nuclear, and 3/4 of companies "support abandoning nuclear power after last year's Fukushima disaster."



Unless these numbers change anytime soon, nuclear is effectively dead in Japan. You can move against the public will, and limit people's freedom of choice as consumers in Japanese energy markets, or you can develop alternatives, and start adding gigawatts quickly to the Japanese energy grid. Japan has some of the most advanced research in grid level storage: PHS (with seawater), NAS batteries (NGK Insulators), and more. Perhaps it's time to break the mold, and say energy storage (bringing fully independent sources of energy to the Island) is the way to go. I have a hunch we have a great deal of new research in storage technologies to look forward to in the future, and perhaps with Japan taking the lead!

Posted by EL on 30 May 2012

All this is likely some useful thinking on the part of the Japanese, however the radioactivity is being plumed into the atmosphere, radioactive run-off from the "cool down" hosing of number 4 still flows into the Pacific, and there's no mind-grabbing plan to end the danger associated with the potential damage to number 4's containment vessel, or the resulting melt-THROUGH that could create. In fact, NO ONE has suggested the likelihood, that if the melt-through occurs-hits the magma, and blows, it will take the nuclear material in the other plants with it.

And I thought Mt Fuji was where the snow was.

Posted by R Andrew Ohge on 31 May 2012

Germany is running away with the show, and Japan is mired in clean-up for the next 30 years, and a financial burden (the $137 billion bailout of TEPCO amounts to $1000/citizen) for the next several generations. Nuclear power means walking a tightrope, terrific when nothing happens, abysmal when your probability calculations show up on the wrong side of the ledger.



"The ambition of Germany's change of direction, universally called the Energiewende – energy transformation – is huge. It aims to cut overall energy consumption by 50 percent by 2050 and electricity consumption by 25 percent: the UK, which uses half the energy, is aiming for an increase in electricity use between 33 percent and 66 percent. Germany also aims to produce 80\% of electricity from renewables by the same date … Germany's sustainable energy ambition remains strong. It wants to move from 20 percent electricity to 35 percent by 2020, Two-thirds of the nation believe this will be achieved on time, or early … [last weekend] a new world record for solar power generation, equivalent to 20 nuclear power stations."

Can Japan (hamstrung by high clean-up costs and low public trust in government) compete? With decisive leadership … time will tell.

Posted by EL on 01 Jun 2012

Do web searches on co-fuels or coal-fired steam plants. A number of cities around the world use them for steam production for their central steam heat facilities and for electricity generation. Many utilize windfall and dead fall trees.All it really means is that things like shredded tires and coal for example, or trash and coal, or trash and natural gas. Many things moss peat can be burned along with coal or instead of coal to produce heat.Anyone who supports nuclear is misinformed about nuclear and those companies promoting it. It leaves a legacy that will last longer than the sun, and it is an energy source that the global society has outgrown as it has matured. Nuclear drinking water is a real possibility because so much is stored along rivers that supply or feed into rivers that supply drinking water to over half the US population. And they will be contaminated because dry cask storage was a short term fix that has become long term- they leak or now, or soon will.Nuclear gives new meaning to a beaming smile.

Posted by David on 18 Jul 2012

Comments have been closed on this feature.
andrew dewitABOUT THE AUTHOR
Andrew DeWit is a professor in the School of Policy Studies at Rikkyo University in Tokyo. With Iida Tetsunari and Kaneko Masaru, he is coauthor of “Fukushima and the Political Economy of Power Policy in Japan,” in Natural Disaster and Nuclear Crisis in Japan, edited by Jeff Kingston.



In Fukushima, A Bitter Legacy
Of Radiation, Trauma and Fear

Five years after the nuclear power plant meltdown, a journey through the Fukushima evacuation zone reveals some high levels of radiation and an overriding sense of fear. For many, the psychological damage is far more profound than the health effects.

Rocky Flats: A Wildlife Refuge
Confronts Its Radioactive Past

The Rocky Flats Plant outside Denver was a key U.S. nuclear facility during the Cold War. Now, following a $7 billion cleanup, the government is preparing to open a wildlife refuge on the site to the public, amid warnings from some scientists that residual plutonium may still pose serious health risks.

Sticker Shock: The Soaring Costs
Of Germany’s Nuclear Shutdown

German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s 2011 decision to rapidly phase out the country’s 17 nuclear power reactors has left the government and utilities with a massive challenge: How to clean up and store large amounts of nuclear waste and other radioactive material.

Are Fast-Breeder Reactors
A Nuclear Power Panacea?

Proponents of this nuclear technology argue that it can eliminate large stockpiles of nuclear waste and generate huge amounts of low-carbon electricity. But as the battle over a major fast-breeder reactor in the UK intensifies, skeptics warn that fast-breeders are neither safe nor cost-effective.

Shunning Nuclear Power
Will Lead to a Warmer World

A physicist argues that if we allow our overblown and often irrational fears of nuclear energy to block the building of a significant number of new nuclear plants, we will be choosing a far more perilous option: the intensified burning of planet-warming fossil fuels.


MORE IN Analysis

How Far Can Technology Go
To Stave Off Climate Change?

by david biello
With carbon dioxide emissions continuing to rise, an increasing number of experts believe major technological breakthroughs —such as CO2 air capture — will be necessary to slow global warming. But without the societal will to decarbonize, even the best technologies won’t be enough.

With Trump, China Emerges
As Global Leader on Climate

by isabel hilton
With Donald Trump threatening to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, China is ready to assume leadership of the world’s climate efforts. For China, it is a matter of self-interest – reducing the choking pollution in its cities and seizing the economic opportunities of a low-carbon future.

What a Trump Win Means
For the Global Climate Fight

by david victor
Donald Trump’s ascension to the presidency signals an end to American leadership on international climate policy. With the withdrawal of U.S. support, efforts to implement the Paris agreement and avoid the most devastating consequences of global warming have suffered a huge blow.

The Methane Riddle: What Is
Causing the Rise in Emissions?

by fred pearce
The cause of the rapid increase in methane emissions since 2007 has puzzled scientists. But new research finds some surprising culprits in the methane surge and shows that fossil-fuel sources have played a much larger role over time than previously estimated.

As Arctic Ocean Ice Disappears,
Global Climate Impacts Intensify

by peter wadhams
The top of the world is turning from white to blue in summer as the ice that has long covered the north polar seas melts away. This monumental change is triggering a cascade of effects that will amplify global warming and could destabilize the global climate system.

How Climate Change Could Jam
The World's Ocean Circulation

by nicola jones
Scientists are closely monitoring a key current in the North Atlantic to see if rising sea temperatures and increased freshwater from melting ice are altering the “ocean conveyor belt” — a vast oceanic stream that plays a major role in the global climate system.

Wildlife Farming: Does It Help
Or Hurt Threatened Species?

by richard conniff
Wildlife farming is being touted as a way to protect endangered species while providing food and boosting incomes in rural areas. But some conservation scientists argue that such practices fail to benefit beleaguered wildlife.

What Would a Global Warming
Increase of 1.5 Degrees Be Like?

by fred pearce
The Paris climate conference set the ambitious goal of finding ways to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, rather than the previous threshold of 2 degrees. But what would be the difference between a 1.5 and 2 degree world? And how realistic is such a target?

After Paris, A Move to Rein In
Emissions by Ships and Planes

by fred pearce
As the world moves to slash CO2 emissions, the shipping and aviation sectors have managed to remain on the sidelines. But the pressure is now on these two major polluting industries to start controlling their emissions at last.

Abrupt Sea Level Rise Looms
As Increasingly Realistic Threat

by nicola jones
Ninety-nine percent of the planet's freshwater ice is locked up in the Antarctic and Greenland ice caps. Now, a growing number of studies are raising the possibility that as those ice sheets melt, sea levels could rise by six feet this century, and far higher in the next, flooding many of the world's populated coastal areas.

e360 digest
Yale Environment 360 is
a publication of the
Yale School of Forestry
& Environmental Studies


Donate to Yale Environment 360
Yale Environment 360 Newsletter



About e360
Submission Guidelines

E360 en Español

Universia partnership
Yale Environment 360 articles are now available in Spanish and Portuguese on Universia, the online educational network.
Visit the site.


e360 Digest
Video Reports


Business & Innovation
Policy & Politics
Pollution & Health
Science & Technology


Antarctica and the Arctic
Central & South America
Middle East
North America

e360 VIDEO

A look at how acidifying oceans could threaten the Dungeness crab, one of the most valuable fisheries on the U.S. West Coast.
Watch the video.


The latest
from Yale
Environment 360
is now available for mobile devices at e360.yale.edu/mobile.


An aerial view of why Europe’s per capita carbon emissions are less than 50 percent of those in the U.S.
View the photos.

e360 VIDEO

An indigenous tribe’s deadly fight to save its ancestral land in the Amazon rainforest from logging.
Learn more.

e360 VIDEO

Food waste
An e360 video series looks at the staggering amount of food wasted in the U.S. – a problem with major human and environmental costs.
Watch the video.

e360 VIDEO

Choco rainforest Cacao
Residents of the Chocó Rainforest in Ecuador are choosing to plant cacao over logging in an effort to slow deforestation.
Watch the video.

e360 VIDEO

Tribal people and ranchers join together to stop a project that would haul coal across their Montana land.
Watch the video.