2024/1/18
The following is from an article by Taishi Sugiyama, Research Director at the Canon Institute for Global Studies.
It appeared in today’s Sankei Shimbun under the title “Do Not Let Japan Destroy Itself with the Basic Energy Plan.”
It is essential reading not only for the Japanese people but also for people around the world.
The emphasis in the text, apart from the headings, is mine.
The geopolitical situation surrounding Japan is grave.
The Seventh Basic Energy Plan must prioritize national security and the economy.
The economy is important because it is the foundation of national security.
The Great Exodus of Japanese and European Industry
Under the Paris Agreement, which is based on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, each country must submit a numerical target for CO₂ emissions in 2035 by February 2025.
The Japanese government is beginning its consideration of the Seventh Basic Energy Plan and apparently intends to submit a CO₂ target consistent with that plan.
However, this is extremely dangerous.
That is because the prevailing level of targets in international negotiations has risen sharply.
At COP28 late last year, a target was presented for a worldwide reduction of 60 percent by 2035.
This is relative to 2019 levels.
Aligning with this target is tantamount to a death sentence for industry.
Industries are already fleeing the EU and Japan, where CO₂ regulations are being tightened indiscriminately.
Germany’s chemical industry is reducing domestic production, while its largest company, BASF, is investing one billion euros to build a plant in China.
Japan’s steel industry is also closing domestic plants, building blast furnaces in India, and acquiring steel companies in the United States.
Even if the government offers subsidies to attract some companies, the money will come back to burden other companies through additional costs.
The exodus of countless companies cannot be stopped.
The nation’s very existence will be endangered.
The End of Global Decarbonization
In the EU and the United States, governments promoting left-leaning policies have been in power for the past several years.
First, however, public anger erupted over unrestricted immigration.
Then, as the public burden resulting from mandatory electric vehicle use and the introduction of renewable energy became apparent, opposition to decarbonization policies intensified.
If a Republican president, whether Trump or someone else, is elected later this year, the United States will withdraw from the Paris Agreement and repeal the Green Deal, meaning decarbonization policies.
In the EU, the right has been winning successive national elections and will likely make major gains in the European Parliament elections this June as well.
At the COP late last year, the Global South flatly rejected the G7’s call for “decarbonization by 2050.”
The Paris Agreement has reached a complete impasse, and only developed countries remain committed to self-destructive targets.
The Biden administration in the United States and Germany’s coalition government, which includes the Greens, are becoming increasingly radical in their environmentalism in international negotiations to please their left-wing support bases, even as their approval ratings stagnate.
They set “ambitious” CO₂ targets and demand that Japan follow suit.
However, if the Republicans win the presidential election, the United States will make a 180-degree turn and reign as a fossil fuel superpower.
The EU will continue its self-destruction through net-zero policies, meaning decarbonization policies.
However, following this year’s shift to the right, net zero will eventually be abandoned as well.
Decarbonization is impossible in the Global South, the United States, Europe, or any other country, and a reassessment is inevitable.
What about Japan, meanwhile?
Legislation for decarbonization, said to require 150 trillion yen over ten years, is steadily advancing.
The government’s inertia is like that of a giant ship unable to change course even when an iceberg appears.
At this rate, a reckless CO₂ target will be submitted under the Paris Agreement and allocated among sectors in the Seventh Basic Energy Plan.
What will happen?
Utility costs will soar, industrial hollowing out will accelerate, and the Japanese economy will sink.
A weakened Japan will be unable to counter China’s influence and will become a vassal state, while freedom of speech and political freedom may also be restricted.
In effect, Japan will die.
The Seventh Basic Energy Plan
What should be included in the Seventh Basic Energy Plan to avoid self-destruction through energy policy?
First, utility costs must be lowered.
Rising costs damage national strength and weaken national security.
Instead of providing temporary subsidies for utility costs, fundamental cost reductions should be pursued through the following three measures.
First, maximize the use of nuclear power.
The irrational demand for zero risk must end.
The national security and economic risks of not using nuclear power are substantial.
Fossil fuels depend on imports, while renewable energy is unstable and expensive.
Second, secure a stable supply of fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels remain the mainstay of Japan’s energy supply.
The current Sixth Basic Energy Plan underestimates supply volumes to force them into alignment with the CO₂ target, and this has hindered the stable procurement of fuel.
This folly must be avoided.
Third, develop alternatives to fossil fuels.
The hasty introduction and expansion of renewable energy and synthetic fuels should be restrained, and efforts should concentrate on technological development that lowers costs.
Technological development found to offer no prospect of cost reduction should be discontinued and returned to basic research.
Finally, the Basic Energy Plan should not allocate CO₂ emissions among sectors.
Allocations based on reckless targets amount to a death sentence for industry and will trigger a mass exodus.
Regarding the Paris Agreement, even if submitting a CO₂ target as an expression of the administration’s intentions is unavoidable, everything else should be limited to a list of measures, rendering it harmless.
However, this is a second-best option; the better option is to withdraw from this self-destructive agreement together with the United States.