realize that anti-nuclear disinformation is placing the nation’s future in jeopardy and act urgently

Every Japanese Citizen Who Reads This Essay Will Bow Their Heads in Respect, Realizing That Here Stands a True Patriot—And a Woman Who Is Also Our Senior
August 6, 2018

The essay by Ms. Yoshiko Sakurai, published on the front page of this morning’s Nikkei Shimbun, is a must-read for every Japanese citizen who can read print.

Everyone who reads this essay will recognize that here is a true patriot—a woman and our senior—and will bow their heads in deep respect.

All emphasis within the main text is mine.

An Exact Mirror of the Kan Naoto Administration

Amid an abnormal heatwave in some regions with temperatures exceeding 41°C, the government in July approved at a Cabinet meeting the Fifth Strategic Energy Plan, looking ahead to 2030 and 2050.

The Japan-U.S. Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, which reached its 30-year term, was also automatically extended.

At the same time, the Atomic Energy Commission of Japan announced in a new guideline that it would “reduce the amount of plutonium held.” Chairman Yoshiaki Okamoto expressed concern over the more than 47 tons of plutonium currently stockpiled.

This may seem like a complex issue to the general public, but in fact, it raises a critically important question: can Japan continue to ensure the stable supply of electricity— the very foundation of a prosperous and secure life?

Looking into energy policy reveals a surprising truth.

The policy of the current LDP-Komeito coalition government overlaps perfectly with that of the former Kan Naoto administration under the Democratic Party.

The ruling coalition has inherited the core framework of Kan’s anti-nuclear policy, prioritizing ideological opposition to nuclear power over national interest and public welfare. This energy policy is now fundamentally broken.

The Fifth Strategic Energy Plan, intended to provide a vision for Japan’s future, is already unworkable.

The plan proclaims that by 2030, renewable energy—mainly solar and wind—will become a major power source, supplying 22–24% of total electricity. This would meet two conditions: economic independence without government subsidies, and a key role in decarbonization.

Currently, solar power provides 4.4% and wind power just 0.6% of Japan’s total electricity.

While renewable energy is vital for the future and should be a pillar of national strategy supported by robust R&D, it is extremely difficult to make variable sources like solar and wind the main supply in the near future—whether from a meteorological or economic perspective.

Can we really achieve this in just over ten years? Experts remain skeptical.

Renewable energy should be positioned as a long-term goal.

Meanwhile, nuclear power is a source that can provide immediate supply.

Yet the Fifth Plan avoids facing this issue head-on. It merely states that nuclear power will be restarted after enhancing safety while reducing dependence as much as possible. It gives no indication of what percentage of power generation should come from nuclear.

The initial draft included a target of 20–22%, but this was deleted from the final plan.

Taken together with the aforementioned policy to reduce plutonium holdings, this suggests that Japan will inevitably increase its reliance on fossil fuels like coal to compensate for unstable renewable sources.

China, meanwhile, is advancing national development using cutting-edge nuclear power. It has announced plans to build 200 of the world’s most advanced nuclear reactors and, to drastically reduce coal-based district heating, will construct 143 small modular reactors (SMRs), each with an output of 200,000 kW.

As China and other countries march forward in building nations rooted in advanced nuclear energy, will Japan be the only one to fall completely behind?

Japan’s nuclear energy policy is on the verge of collapse at its very foundation.

Japan has long imported uranium fuel from countries like the United States, and after using it in reactors, has processed the spent fuel to extract plutonium. This process, known as the nuclear fuel cycle, involves reusing the extracted plutonium in the prototype fast-breeder reactor Monju (in Fukui Prefecture) and in standard light-water reactors through “pluthermal” (MOX fuel) operations. Japan’s nuclear policy is built upon this cycle.

However, Monju has been designated for decommissioning.

To maintain the nuclear fuel cycle, only the pluthermal method remains viable.

Of the nuclear power plants that have been restarted, only four are capable of operating under pluthermal. Each reactor consumes about 0.4 tons of plutonium annually.

When the reprocessing plant in Rokkasho Village, Aomori Prefecture, is completed in three years, it is expected to extract 8 tons of plutonium per year through the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel.

Therefore, in order to fulfill the Atomic Energy Commission’s “pledge” to reduce the amount of plutonium held, there is a growing debate over whether to halt or limit the reprocessing of spent fuel.

The commission’s stance can be interpreted as a move to sever Japan’s nuclear fuel cycle and bring an end to the nuclear power industry.

Does this not perfectly align with the ambitions of Kan Naoto?

They are imposing massive financial burdens on the public for renewable energy, failing in nuclear policy, and pushing Japan into heavy reliance on fossil fuels such as coal—thus turning the country into a major CO₂ emitter.

Why is our nation being cornered into such a foolish path?

Amid the automatic extension of the Japan–U.S. Nuclear Cooperation Agreement, figures such as “Japan’s 47 tons of plutonium,” “equivalent to about 6,000 nuclear warheads,” and “nuclear proliferation risks” have been circulating both domestically and from the U.S. side.

However, these claims are inaccurate.

The 47 tons of plutonium held by Japan is reactor-grade, not weapons-grade; its composition differs significantly, and its purity is extremely low, making it unsuitable for nuclear arms.

Of that total, about 36 tons is stored in the U.K. and France, where it was reprocessed on Japan’s behalf.

Moreover, the Rokkasho reprocessing plant is under constant surveillance by inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), placing Japan under strict international oversight.

Scientifically and physically, it is impossible for Japan to produce nuclear weapons.

There is absolutely no problem with Japan’s plutonium holdings.

The only way to resolve this issue is to launch the reprocessing plant and complete the nuclear fuel cycle.

And yet, in the face of inaccurate or intentionally manipulated information, the entire nation has shrunk back.

The media, following the automatic extension of the Japan–U.S. agreement, quickly reported on “concerns from the international community.”

NHK commentary editor Noriyuki Mizuno even criticized Japan by stating that “China and North Korea have singled out Japan, raising the possibility of nuclear weapons development” (August 1, Jiron Kōron).

The real aim of this narrative is to drive the reprocessing plant into decommissioning, collapse the nuclear fuel cycle, and bury Japan’s entire nuclear program.

The Abe administration, which bears responsibility for Japan’s energy policy, must realize that anti-nuclear disinformation is placing the nation’s future in jeopardy and act urgently to overhaul its energy strategy.