This essay introduces Professor Tadashi Narabayashi’s article published in the April issue of WiLL, a magazine every Japanese citizen should read. It exposes the factual and logical flaws in former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi’s anti-nuclear arguments, highlighting energy security, capital outflow, and false comparisons.

2016-03-16

What follows is the paper I have been referring to in recent days.

It comes from the April issue of WiLL, which in reality is one of the monthly magazines that all Japanese citizens should read.

All emphasis within the text, except for the title, is mine.

---

Ignorance and Lack of Study
Koizumi’s (former Prime Minister’s) Anti-Nuclear Statements

奈良林直
Professor, Graduate School of Hokkaido University

A Completely Absurd Comparison

After reading “Junichiro Koizumi’s Soliloquy,” published in the January 2016 issue of Bungeishunju, I was astonished.

The content is so poor that Mr. Koizumi virtually confesses his own ignorance and lack of study regarding nuclear power.

I was left dumbfounded, thinking, “Was someone like this really serving as Prime Minister of Japan?”

“Now that two units of the Sendai Nuclear Power Plant have finally restarted, it’s clear that we can manage without nuclear power.
Even Germany, after declaring zero nuclear power, still has around eight reactors running, doesn’t it?
Japan managed for four and a half years at virtually zero without making any declaration (as of the end of November 2015, only two of the 43 domestic reactors were in commercial operation).”

“When Oi Units 3 and 4 entered periodic inspection and we again had zero nuclear power, people said, ‘Once winter comes, you’ll see that zero won’t work.’
But even through cold winters and hot summers, there were no blackouts. There was no problem.”

As of February 2016, falling crude oil prices and lower LNG prices have provided some temporary relief.
However, increased operation of thermal power plants to compensate for nuclear shutdowns caused additional fossil fuel imports, resulting in a maximum annual outflow of 3.6 trillion yen in national wealth—approximately 100 billion yen lost every day.
Mr. Koizumi has never informed the public of this fact.

In 1973, the year of the oil shock, thermal power accounted for 76 percent of total electricity generation.
Learning from this experience, Japan built nuclear power plants and worked to improve energy self-sufficiency.
As a result, nuclear power came to account for about 30 percent of generation, and just before the Great East Japan Earthquake, the share of thermal power had fallen to 62 percent.

After the disaster, however, thermal power’s share rose to 88 percent—higher than in the year of the oil shock.

Japan was taken advantage of and forced to purchase fuel at inflated prices known as the “Japan premium.”

Mr. Koizumi does not explain to the public the background that supposedly makes things “manageable.”

It is like saying, when a household is suffering from deficits, “We’re managing even by borrowing money, so what’s the problem?”

With instability in the Middle East, oil prices could surge again at any time.

There is also a complete lack of perspective on energy security.

Regarding rising fuel costs, Mr. Koizumi says:

“When I was eating, a Keidanren executive once told me, ‘If there were no nuclear power, imports of oil and coal would increase by 3.6 trillion yen—it’s a loss of national wealth.’
I replied, ‘Japan imports far more food than it exports, so it runs a food trade deficit.
Have you ever said that food imports are a “loss of national wealth”?’
After that, he never again mentioned that nuclear zero would cause a trade deficit.
He was a company president, you know. Interesting, isn’t it?”

What on earth is he talking about?

The comparison is completely absurd.

Food imports are a structural issue resulting from decades of national agricultural policy, such as trade liberalization and acreage reduction.
Comparing that with increased fuel costs caused by nuclear shutdowns—losses that would not occur if nuclear plants were operating—is fundamentally misguided.

The reason the company president stopped speaking was probably not persuasion, but resignation:
“There is no point in saying anything to Mr. Koizumi.”

To be continued.