The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 9 | Issue 23 | Number 2 | Article ID 3543 | Jun 03, 2011

1

How Japan’s Low Carbon Society and Nuclear PowerGeneration Came Hand in Hand　　低炭素社会と原発は抱き合わせだったーー「エコ」企業を目指した東電の

Furukawa Takuya

How Japan’s Low Carbon Society andNuclear Power Generation CameHand in Hand

The “Egoism” of TEPCO ”Ecoism”

Furukawa Takuya

Translated by Kyoko Selden

While tackling global warming issues hasgained popular approval in the names of Ecoand LOHAS (Lifestyles of Health andSustainability), in recent years the voices ofcitizens against nuclear power have beensuppressed in Japan’s environmental protectionmovement. It is worth reflecting on thepossibility that Japan’s eco became warped inlight of the fact that TEPCO became its bigsponsor.

The Fuji Sankei Group sponsors a prize, theGrand Prize for the Global Environment Award,given annually to a company or a group activelyengaged in protecting against global warmingand supporting environmental protection. Thetwentieth recipient to be of the prizeannounced on February 25 this year was,ironically, the Tokyo Electric Power Company(TEPCO), that is now the party concerned withthe accident at the Fukushima Daiichi NuclearPower Plant.

According to the Sankei article announcing theprize, TEPCO built, at a Kawasaki power plant,a system that recycled the vapor produced inpower generation as an energy source.Apparently, judges on the screening committee

including Mukuta Satoshi, managing director ofKeidanren, highly evaluated this as, inMukuta’s words, “a good example of energyconservation that goes beyond a company’sborders.”

At this late point, this can only be called a blackjoke, and in April, TEPCO declined to acceptthe prize. In fact, the company had won areputation as a leading Japanese company thatinvested in nvironmental protection.

Its publication, Sustainability Report 2010,introduces approximately fifty environmentalactivities including participation in JapanGreenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, preservationactivit ies for the Oze National Park,sponsorship of the All-Japan EnvironmentalActivities Eco Conference (Eco-Con), and for afuel-saving eco school.

APJ | JF 9 | 23 | 2

2

“The Oze Summit 2006” held for thepurpose of making Oze a national park.Katsumata Tsunehisa, TEPCO president(chairperson then). (Kyodo News)

According to another TEPCO document, the2009 budget allocation for environmentalp r o t e c t i o n m e a s u r e s a m o u n t s t o179,600,000,000 yen ($220 mill ion).

Yet TEPCO now seems to wish to keep thesethings concealed. The company’s corporatesocial responsibility activities were earlierviewable on its home page. But since the GreatEast Japan Earthquake, the majority of theinformation has become unavailable. When Iasked the company the reason for the deletion,they told me that “the contents were preparedbefore the earthquake, and some were deemedout of keeping with the present situation.”(Public Relations Department)

Is total electrification LOHAS?

Since the earthquake, it has been pointed out

that TEPCO contributed large sums in the formof advertisements to major mass media. Themonthly magazine Sotokoto (Under the Tree,name based on a phrase in an African tongue)published by Kirakusha (with an officialcirculation of 100,000) is one of them.

According to its own analysis, the main readersare male businessmen in their thirties andforties, and women in their 20s and 30s whoare strongly interested in food safety and slowlife. In recent years, it is said that it has alsobeen read by venture capitalists. It can becalled a major presence among Japanesemagazines addressing environmental issues.

However, almost every month it also publishesTEPCO’s advertisement which defines totalelectrification as an Eco and LOHAS style. Thusin January 2011, it depicted “a stylish all-electrified house where one lives with pets”and in April 2011 it featured “an all-electrifiedsustainable café!”

TEPCO environmental initiatives

On inquiring into its relationship with TEPCO, Ireceived the following response from thecompany:

“It is a fact that we carriedadvertisement articles fromTEPCO, but when we publishedar t i c les on nuc lear powergeneration in our April 2008 issue,we published both pro and conpositions. We have never allowedour editor ial pol ic ies to bei n f l u e n c e d b y a c c e p t i n gadvert i s ing f rom TEPCO.”

APJ | JF 9 | 23 | 2

3

(Editorial staff member with theinitial H.)

In the March issue of the magazine, whichfeatures energy saving, however, they explainJapan’s energy situation in Q and A format. Itanswers the question “Is nuclear powernecessary?” as follows. “Some problems remaint o b e s o l v e d . B u t a t p r e s e n t , i t i sindispensable.”

The same issue carries an article on “Thefuture of totally electrified residences andJapanese style smart grids” which defines totalelectrification as a pleasant energy savingapproach, without clarifying that this is anadvertisement. Despite claiming that itssponsors never influence its editorial policies,at least in the present situation this seems tobe the magazine’s newest take on nuclearpower generation.

“Total electrification” that electric

companies have promoted. In order tos p r e a d t h e i d e a , t h e y p r o v i d e dopportunities to stay in model houses orrenovated rental apartments. (KyodoNews)

The translator of “An Inconvenient Truth”was sponsored by TEPCO

The film “An Inconvenient Truth” played alarge role in alerting the world to the role ofC02 in global warming. The environmentaljournalist Edahiro Junko, the translator of thebook version of the film, a member of theRoundtable on Global Warming during theFukuda and Aso administrations, and sponsorof a website called “My Forest: jp” (私の森 :jp)is a representative of the “e’s” (ecology,english, empowerment; イーズ), limited.

The 2006 film about Al Gore’scampaign to stop global warming

APJ | JF 9 | 23 | 2

4

When I asked her about the deletion of thedialogue between her and Kageyama Yoshihiro,head of the environmental section of TEPCO,which was carried on that site until March ofthis year, she admitted to having receivedsupport from TEPCO.

“Because I was unable to meet theexpenses myself for starting andmaintaining the website, I lookedfor corporate sponsors. Amongseveral that I approached, TEPCOsupported my idea and decided togive support. I had the idea fromthe beginning of enlisting supportfrom plural sponsors, and preparedpages to introduce their activitiesin return for their support. I spoketo a number of companies besideTEPCO, but was unable to get theircooperation. For three years, sincestart ing the s i te in 2008, Icontinued the site with supportfrom TEPCO.

I cannot reveal the amount due tothe privacy of the contract, but themajority of the money was used toconstruct, renew and maintain thesite through outsourcing. The restof the money went for symposiumsand leaflets announcing the site.”

The reason that I took down thecontents this year is that the termof the contract, which was forthree years, ended in 2010.”(Edahiro Junko)

Not limiting to Sotokoto and My Forest, what iscommon to groups handling global warming isthe fact that their websites and publicationscost money. In comparison with citizens groupsopposing nuclear power or calling for itsabolition, which fight their old age and walkaround handing out leaflets printed from

handwritten copy, it is needless to considerwhich is more likely to draw young generations.

Shiratori Yoshika of the Shizuoka Network forThinking About the Hamamatsu Nuclear Plant,a representative group calling for the abolitionof nuclear power, says that

“Groups calling for reduction ofCO2 don’t from the start conflictwith government policies. Socorporations can easily providethem with financial support. Suchgroups can expect to receivesubsidies from both TEPCO andthe government. Most of themcan’ t be compared to se l f -supporting groups opposing, orcalling for the abolition of, nuclearpower. When considering the costsof printing leaflets and lawsuits forsuspending the HamamatsuNuclear Plant, we are still indeficit.”

Japan’s environmental movement, particularlyin this century, has seemed to concentrate onprevention of global warming and achieving alow carbon society. Of course, forestation itselfshould not be criticized, and reduction of CO2should be promoted from the perspective ofsaving fossil fuels, regardless of whether CO2and global warming are directly related, assome argue.

However, such an opportunistic logic as thatdeveloped by TEPCO and the government,which use reduction of CO2 as an excuse fornuclear power generation, should not havebeen permitted from the start. If, without beingaware of that, they have accepted TEPCO’ssupport , and even given i t space foradvertisement, environmental protectiongroups should accept some responsibility.

Furukawa Tetsuya is a reporter. This articlewas published in the May 13, 2011 ShūkanKiny’ōbi.

APJ | JF 9 | 23 | 2

5

Kyoko Selden is a translator and an Asia-PacificJournal Associate. Her translations includeJapanese Women Writers: Twentieth CenturyShort Fiction and, most recently, More Storiesby Japanese Women Writers: An Anthology(both co-edited with Noriko Mizuta).

Recommended citation: Furukawa Takuya, HowJapan's Low Carbon Society and Nuclear PowerGeneration Came Hand in Hand: The "Egoism"of TEPCO "Ecoism," The Asia Pacific Journal,Volume 9, Issue 23, No. 2, June 6, 2011.