Japan anti-nuclear movement gains traction as crisis drags on

TOKYO, April 8 Fri Apr 8, 2011 3:47am EDT

TOKYO, April 8 (Reuters) - Japan's anti-nuclear movement, small and ignored by the general public, is gaining traction as a crisis at a tsunami-stricken nuclear power plant drags on for weeks with no clear end in sight.

The growing debate will make it difficult for the government to meet its target securing 50 percent of national electricty from nuclear power by 2030, up from 30 percent now.

The public has watched nervously as engineers battle radiation leaks, hydrogen explosions and overheating fuel rods at the Fukushima Daiichi plant on the northeast coast after it was hit by a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and tsunami on March 11.

With updates on the world's worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in 1986 now daily fare on TV, more Japanese are questioning the safety of the quake-prone country's 54 nuclear reactors and the government's plans to build more.

"As a person who has had a pro-nuclear stance, I'm totally at a loss at the moment whether we should promote Japan's nuclear policy," Masayoshi Yoshino, an MP from Fukushima prefecture where the Daiichi plant is located, told a news conference this week.

"I know in my mind that I should decide based on the results of a thorough investigation into what has happened. But my instinct tells me 'no more nuclear plants'," said Yoshino, of the main opposition Liberal Democratic Party.

In Yamaguchi prefecture, western Japan, anti-nuclear groups claimed a small victory last month after work to build a new nuclear power plant in the city of Kaminoseki was suspended, prompted by concern from local authorities. [ID:nTKZ006840]

"The mood has changed," said Tomiko Takeshige, an activist there fighting against plans for Chugoku Electric Power Co to start the plant's operations in 2018.

"Mayors and local assembly members who have repeated the government line that these plants are safe have become silent. Ordinary people too, now come to us to say that we were right, that nuclear power plants are dangerous."

In resource-poor Japan, the government has long emphasised the importance of nuclear power and prided itself on its nuclear expertise. In an energy plan unveiled last year, it aimed to build at least 14 new reactors by 2030.

Voters have also generally supported the role of nuclear energy in a country where nuclear reactors provide some 30 percent of electricity and have been counted on to help meet an international pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

But that was before the Fukushima crisis, which has forced tens of thousands of residents to evacuate from the plant's vicinity and sparked fears of radioactive contamination in water, fish and vegetables. [ID:nL3E7F72Y]

BODY SAYS 'NO'

The latest disaster at first triggered little mainstream debate over nuclear policy, but Prime Minister Naoto Kan said last week that the plan for Japan to build more nuclear reactors may need to be reviewed.

In Tokyo, nuclear power policy has featured prominently in debates ahead of a gubernatorial election on Sunday.

"We must review and eventually reduce dependence on nuclear power," candidate Hideo Higashikokubaru said this week.

He singled out the Hamaoka nuclear power plant 200 km (124 miles) southwest of Tokyo, located near the Tokai region where geologists have predicted a large quake. "All possibilities including a possible closure should be reviewed," he said.

But for all the concerns over nuclear safety, Japan still looks a long way from a mass anti-nuclear movement.

Many rural towns are dependent on subsidies and donations doled out by the government and companies to host nuclear plants.

Kunihiro Uno, a candidate trying to oust a pro-nuclear incumbent in an election for governor of Fukui prefecture, said some voters had approached him in tears to shut down reactors but others worried about the fallout on the local finances.

With 14 reactors, Fukui, in the country's west, has the most number of reactors than any other prefecture in Japan. For years, the prefecture has fed off what Uno calls "nuclear drugs" -- subsidies that fund new schools, sports facilities and roads.

"People say nuclear power plants are scary and want to stop building new ones but there's not much support yet to stop depending on the plants for business, public funding and energy needs," he said in a telephone interview ahead of the election on Sunday.

"Deep down, people know it's better not to have nuclear plants but they think about jobs and other factors, and it's considered a necessary evil." (Additional reporting by Kiyoshi Takenaka, Linda Sieg, editing by Jonathan Thatcher)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
RickCain wrote:
What drives the Nuclear Power Cult? Nuclear power isn’t cheap, it isn’t safe, it can only survive on taxpayer dollars, yet somehow it has been purported to be the savior of our power needs, so why?
Why do people all over the world profess that nuclear power is clean, nuclear power is green, nuclear power is the future, when it obviously isn’t?
Can we blame the press, can we blame our governments, can we blame the wealthy who benefit from the massive government subsidy?

After such a massive nuclear disaster that will cost the Japanese taxpayer hundreds of billions, why hasn’t the public embraced alternative energy? If not now, when will they?

Apr 08, 2011 4:18am EDT  --  Report as abuse
RickCain wrote:
What drives the Nuclear Power Cult? Nuclear power isn’t cheap, it isn’t safe, it can only survive on taxpayer dollars, yet somehow it has been purported to be the savior of our power needs, so why?
Why do people all over the world profess that nuclear power is clean, nuclear power is green, nuclear power is the future, when it obviously isn’t?
Can we blame the press, can we blame our governments, can we blame the wealthy who benefit from the massive government subsidy?

After such a massive nuclear disaster that will cost the Japanese taxpayer hundreds of billions, why hasn’t the public embraced alternative energy? If not now, when will they?

Apr 08, 2011 4:18am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Chris44 wrote:
There is plenty natural energy in Japan – see the work of Japanese and German engineers at energyrichjapan.com. There’s also a lot more jobs in solar and wind than in nuclear (Germany: 300,000 vs. 30,000).
Just say goodbye to corruption.
http://www.causes.com/causes/594657-nuclear-free-japan/about

Apr 08, 2011 4:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.