About us

From Natural Calamity to Divine Revelation

Published on May 7, 2018: The Denki Shimbun (The Electric Daily News)
Shojiro Matsuura
President & CEO

In the seven years since the accident at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, the reality of what actually happened during the many events has gradually been substantiated, deliberated, and clarified. Over this process, worries have also further magnified and elevated.

Speaking of worries, recent progress made in brain science research has explained some very interesting facts with respect to the characteristics of Japanese people. It is said that the hormone balance in the brain greatly influences our emotions, thoughts and behavior. Of these hormones, the level of serotonin, also known as the “happiness hormone,” in the brain is significantly affected by two genetic variants: the high capacity L allele, or type, and the low capacity S allele. Human beings are roughly classified according to which of three combinations of these alleles, LL, SL, or SS, they have. Those with an LL genotype tend to be optimistic, and those with an SS genotype tend to be nervous and anxious.

There is great variation in the regional distribution of these three genotypes. Roughly 70% of Japanese have the SS genotype, while only 2% have the LL genotype, the lowest among all regional groups worldwide. This means that Japanese people are generally characterized as being overly concerned and tend to worry about the future. This applies not only to Japanese people, but also broadly to the people of China, Korea and other East Asian countries as there is a higher percentage of people in this region who possess the SS genotype or the SL genotype than has been found in other regions.

Currently, Japan’s Basic Energy Plan is under deliberation for the second time in response to circumstances that have arisen since the Fukushima accident. Recent press coverage summarized the advisory panel’s discussions: “There will be no change in the basic policy on the use of nuclear power. Although nuclear power is regarded as an important fundamental source of electricity, its use will be reduced to the extent possible. On the other hand, renewable energies are newly positioned as important sources for electric power.” There is a sense that the aforementioned mentality of Japanese society, summed up as “It’s a worry no matter what, so let’s go ahead and do whatever looks good,” has been directly manifested in the basic energy policy deliberations.

Energy experts both in Japan and around the world have been very critical of this outcome of the panel’s discussions. The panel does not appear to have given appropriate consideration to either the achievements made in nuclear power generation around the world or the uncertainty inherent in renewable energies.

Since the Fukushima accident, a majority of Japanese people and society these days seem to be very uneasy about using nuclear power. They appear to have become fixated on these worries almost as if they had been traumatized. In such a situation, it may be unavoidable that the political option is to reduce the use of nuclear power to the degree feasible while, at the same time, leaving it as a future option.

However, if we consider Japan’s geopolitical and geographical environment as well as the long-term sustainable development of advanced civilization and social life, shouldn’t we mitigate our general negative sentiment about the use of nuclear power, which has arisen due to the Fukushima accident, and select nuclear power generation as a realistic option? In making this choice, there are two essential key issues that must be addressed.

The first is to explain in a manner which Japanese society and the world may understand that current light-water reactor technology and operational capabilities enable a sufficient response to be delivered even to address events resulting from external factors such as those that caused the Fukushima accident, and that the likelihood of an accident resulting due to such causes is realistically so low that such a possibility may be disregarded. The Nuclear Regulation Authority and the nuclear industry have been desperately endeavoring to provide this explanation.

The second is to decide on a location for disposing of high-, intermediate- and low-level radioactive waste being discharged from dismantlement of the Fukushima reactors before the reactor dismantlement and debris retrieval work are begun. Although this issue entails significantly more difficulty than the first, Japan will not be able to overcome the Fukushima accident without resolving it. Although the Fukushima accident began with a natural calamity that was a massive tsunami, if we are able to overcome the emotional proclivities of Japanese society, we may be able to register this disaster in our minds as a divine revelation.

End