The road ahead – will Japan really make it to zero-nuclear by 2030?

The landscape of Japanese politics when it comes to nuclear policy has been leveled since last year's disaster. A largely popular proposal designed to send nuclear power's share of energy provision up past 50% now looks like one of the most gung-ho ideas of the past decade. Government and utility spokespeople, including Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda, continue to push the claim that as long as nuclear power exists in Japan, it will be made as safe as can be reasonably expected.

However, an underlying apathy toward politics amplified by a blunder-filled disaster response has kept a large portion of the populace skeptical of the party line. Confirmation by a recent government-level investigative panel that information was widely suppressed in the aftermath of Fukushima only adds to the mistrust of "the man." Being blamed for a lack of safety protocols at nuclear plants, TEPCO and by extension other utilities have little reputation in the eyes of the people. Major broadcasters keeping quiet on anti-nuclear or anti-utility talk immediately post-disaster for fear of losing valuable sponsorship money only added fuel to the fire.

The social unrest that grew out of 3.11 has slowly stoked a new fire among the grassroots, one that the powers that be are now struggling to deal with. Only a year ago, the idea of permanently shuttering all of the nation’s nuclear plants within a couple of decades as espoused by the Social Democratic Party was considered ludicrous by most in the establishment. Now, it looks like the protesters that walked politely down one lane of traffic cordoned off by police and watched by public security officers may be getting their wish.

Economic precipice

Fast-forward 18 months to September 2012. Still only a year and a half past a nation-defining moment, Japan is still cobbling together a plan for what it wants to do with its lost innocence. The Japanese public consciousness is drifting steadily toward an anti-nuclear stance largely founded on the premise of public safety as business and utility lobbies fight to spread the message that Japan is doomed without atomic energy. In all fairness, bigwigs at the Keidanren, or Japan Business Federation, do have a lot to worry about; Japan's export-led economy has continued to bear the brunt of a painfully strong yen (remember that we’ve been below 90 JPY/USD for two years now and below 80 for one year), and taxes are set to increase to help pay for this costly disaster.

The average age in Japan is still extraordinarily high and supporting old age pensioners is putting a major drag on the nation's finances that is extremely unpopular to remove. Many fear that an increase in power costs from the lack of what was Japan's only hope for cheap electricity before 2011 will be the nail in the coffin for Japan's post-3.11 recovery, leading to as many lost decades as you can count. The Keidanren is not shy about emphasizing that Japan currently has no cost-effective option outside of nuclear energy due to lack of available natural resources. Although the anti-nuclear camp points to this past summer’s lack of blackouts, utilities like TEPCO have had to restart gas turbines using largely imported fuel to keep Tokyo safe. Energy reliance and pollution issues aside, trillions of yen in sunk costs are lying fallow across the nation as older turbines run at relatively inefficient levels.

Where to now?

Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda and the DPJ have been presented with a quandary with enormous implications. Either they can show tough love to the grassroots and preserve a significant portion of the nation's nuclear reactors, or throw caution to the wind and make a stand for a nuclear-free Japan. Neither option is particularly appealing; even only limiting nuclear will not delay a loss to the conservative LDP and its coalition or even to a camp led by rising but untested star, Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto. Eradicating nuclear completely, as Noda and company have chosen, risks an immediate and harsh backlash from domestic businesses looking to counter rising energy costs by moving jobs overseas. The economic implications of a nuclear-free Japan may not be well-quantified, but they are certainly not insignificant.

The solution politically for the DPJ is clear. Taking Japan nuclear-free is the only way to maintain enough popularity to survive the next election and potentially restore some faith on the ground floor in the political process, whether or not Japan suffers economically as a result of the decision. Unfortunately, achieving non-reliance will be tough to achieve and maintain over the short to medium term. Business lobbies will doubtlessly continue to lobby hard against the decision; if the DPJ buckles or another party takes over and nullifies the policy, what little faith is left in the Japanese government would doubtlessly crumble. The bitter pill of Noda’s tax hike is proving to be a hard one to swallow for all parties involved, but the coming years will see if the DPJ and Japan by extension can handle such an ambitious energy policy.

In for a penny, in for a pound

The goal of ending nuclear reliance “by 2030” being changed to “in the 2030s” is the first sign that the DPJ may not be fully committed to more than moving the goal posts at this stage. Unfortunately, there are very few viable options in the eyes of anti-nuclear proponents. The Liberal Democratic Party (the relatively conservative party here in Japan, which as an American, confused me quite a bit at first) is largely mired in decades-old historical disputes and sticks more closely to farm and corporate interests. Questionably wacky Hashimoto’s new Japan Restoration Party is poised to field hundreds of candidates nationwide, but his policies and performance as a major mover are untested to say the very least. Even if it manages to drive the Japanese economy into the ground, the DPJ has now been charged with restoring Japan’s faith in the system.

© Japan Today