Japan muss seine Energiepolitik grundlegend ändern

In view of the nuclear catastrophe in Fukushima that resulted from the earthquake of 11 March, the compulsory evacuation of 200,000 refugees who have been deprived of every means of existence and livelihood, and the fact that nuclear power has not been restored even after 2 months; from my point of view, I can only say that nuclear power is not suitable for the earthquake-prone Japanese island chain. Japan should reconsider its energy policy in terms of moving beyond fossil fuels and nuclear energy with no delay. I also think that the nuclear power plant in Hamaoka, that belongs to the Chûbu Power Group and is ranked by seismologists as particularly at risk, must be shut down and examined for 100% security. As chairman of the Sustainable Management Forum of Japan, I published my demand for revision of a nuclear power-centred policy not only in Japanese, but also in English and French. The Japan Association on Environmental Studies also took a position on phasing out nuclear power.

In addition, Dr. Friedrich Schmidt-Bleek of Germany’s Faktor 1 Institut submitted a report according to which Japan would be able to switch to 100% renewable energy. The declaration authored by Prof. em. Dr. Dr. h.c. Udo E. Simonis, “Atomenergie in Japan, eine Exit-Strategie” was immediately translated into Japanese by Prof. Miyasaki and presented on the title page of the “Environmental News” newspaper. The following quote is from his declaration: “The fact that many people do not understand this is incomprehensible to me, too. What I mean is: how can one explain that the Japanese people, after they have overcome the violence of nuclear massacre, now accept peaceful utilisation of nuclear energy, build nuclear power plants in areas where we know there are significant movements of the earth’s crust, and above all that the Supreme Court does not issue an order to shut them down in spite of the protests of the inhabitants?”

After the nuclear and earthquake catastrophe on 11 March, the Japanese people has kept very calm, but their attitude towards nuclear power will change. To me at least, it is absolutely necessary for energy policy-makers to take a stand against nuclear power and fossil fuels. A study group on the issue of phasing out nuclear power, consisting of 26 parliament members from 10 parties, was founded for 26 April. And the Japanese government is also taking a clear-cut position in favour of revisions in energy policy. Presumably plans for a new energy policy will be formulated this year, that hopefully will find acceptance with our German friends as well.

A “no” to fossil fuels is possible

An argument that is always raised against expanding renewable energies is that the cost is very high compared to nuclear power or caloric-derived power sourcing. But if one takes into consideration the costs of damage resulting from a nuclear accident, or calculates in future increases for fossil fuels, one cannot claim with certainty that renewable energies are much more expensive. In addition, developments in technology and increased use of renewable energies will lead to a gradual reduction in price.

However, the question remains whether it is possible at all to technically, economically and politically to transition a civilisation that is dependent on fossil fuels, particularly on coal and petroleum within a relatively short period of 40-50 years, in such a way that it can base itself solely on renewable energies.

According to the proposal of the Society of Chemical Engineers in Japan, it would be possible to save 3.3 milliuon kilowatthours through the purchase of energy-saving appliances and a change in people’s life style, and as much as 7.15 million kilowatthours by altering time- and location-based electricity requirements. At the moment, the Japanese government is promoting a conservation of 15% of existing electricity requirements.

According to the calculations of Kurasaka Hidefumi of Chiba University, Japan’s transition to renewable energies will take until 2040. If one were to introduce small-scale increases in the present production of hydroelectric power by 2.1x, (10.44 million kilowatts), geothermic energy power production by 9.1x (4.3 million kilowatts), wind-sourced energy production by 18.6x (38.5 kilowatts), biomass-sourced photovoltaic power production by 40x (1.2 million kilowatts), one could reduce the energy requirements covered by fossil fuels by up to 50%, compared with 2009. Greenpeace produced a far more ambitious scenario in Harry Lehman’s report, “Energy Rich Japan.” If one were to use currently available technologies to conserve energy and were to invest in renewable energy resources, it would be possible to cover total energy requirements with renewable energies, including energy needs for transportation. And the WWF issued a report on energy in which the possibilities of a complete, world-wide conversion to renewable energies through 2050 are discussed.

In addition to a donation of 10 billion yen for reconstruction of the devastated areas in the aftermath of the massive earthquake of 11 March, with a contribution of 1 billion yen, the CEO of the telecommunications firm Softbank set up an organisation for the promotion renewable energies, thus becoming the driving force of the movement away from fossil fuels and nuclear power. I myself believe that the negative reputation of Japanese technology brought about by the accident in the Fukushima nuclear power plant is once again improving through our technological revolution, i.e. our movement away from fossil fuels and nuclear power. Of course, the transition to a society with minimal emissions of carbon dioxide also represents a change in values for us. We must move in the direction of a “low-energy society.”