The history of the development of nuclear
power in Japan includes both international and
domestic events. Also notable is the ongoing tension between anti-nuclear activism and pro-nuclear energy pressures.
A key issue for modern Japan has been resources. Those who support nuclear power for Japan argue for energy independence. Currently, imports meet 90% of Japanese energy needs.
However, how can people in Japan support nuclear power when there is still the ongoing challenge of an incredibly expensive and vast cleanup of Fukushima Daiichi?
A big historical question is how Japan came to have nuclear power plants in the first place, considering the history of not only Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but also of the "Lucky Dragon."'Lucky Dragon'.
The story of how
communities allowed nuclear power plants
to be built had to do with local economies and the pressures put on
them, which were also linked with global movements (such as the
political control of oil).
Here is a timeline about nuclear power in Japan that we will discuss in class:
1945: Nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
1945-1952: The Allied Occupation of Japan
1952: Ban on nuclear power in Japan lifted
1954: Nakasone Yasuhiro requests yen from the National Diet for
nuclear research. In March, the "Lucky Dragon Incident" strengthens
popular resistance to nuclear power, but the Diet budgets money for
nuclear research.
1955-1965: Japan shifts from relying almost entirely upon coal to generate electricity to using more and more oil.
1973: First "oil shock"
mid-1970s: Opinion polls in Japan show that 70 percent of residents supported Japan's continued nuclear power program
1979: Second "oil shock"
1980: Three Mile Island Accident. In November, opinion polls in
Japan show that only 30 percent of residents supported Japan's continued
nuclear power program.
This history helps us understand how Japan can have a "nuclear allergy"
and yet also continue a nuclear power program. This is the history
behind the news about restarting nuclear power plants in Japan now. Knowing more about this will help you to inform your own opinion about the future of nuclear power in Japan and in the world.
Why did 70 percent of Japanese residents believe authorities despite there were three accidents before ?
ReplyDeleteWe have known that a nuclear power is dangerous since 1945.
We should not accept it as a new energy resource.
I feel so from reading this passage
From the data I saw, for the electricity,japan rely on nuclear power in the ratio of 2% in 2013. Before the disaster in Fukushima, actually 30% of the electricity were made bynuclear power. What this shows is that it is quite clear that Japan is getting free from the dependence on nuclear power at this point. But what I think is japan won't stop using it. The reason is easy. Japan doesn't have the alternative resources. They will be left behind economically if they stop using it right now , or maybe they arleady have.
ReplyDelete“By stopping nuclear power plants, national wealth of ¥3.6 trillion per year is flowing overseas”
ReplyDelete¥3.6 trillion per year is lots of money. I heard about the rate of base load power in Japan is below 50 per cent, therefore, Japanese government want rising to 60 per cent. From an economic point of view, the nuclear power plants are the most efficient energy source. However, it has a number of downsides such as radioactive waste problem. This nuclear energy dilemma is very interesting to discuss.
Japan should strengthen the equipments of nuclear power plants.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the history, the percentage of people for japan continuing nuclear program decreased after Three Mile Island Accident. I guess that people at that time did not know very much about "what is nuclear power ", for example, how nuclear power effects on our everyday life and future if there is accident.
ReplyDeleteLooking back on Japanese history, accident relating to nuclear power has been occurred on japan several times.
There are a number of unknown aspects, therefore, once it occurs, nobody knows what would happen. Though it happened so many times, i wonder some are for using nuclear power.
I heard that we can manage without nuclear power plant. But the government tie up with To-den because of subsidy. Im not sure about whether this story is true(because i don't have any evidence or statistic), but if it is true I'm totally against continuing nuclear power.
I can understand both opinion. After the disaster in Fukushima,sense of crisis about nuclear power generation is rising. A lot of problems are left. On the other hand,Japan is poor in resources. We cannot help depending on the way to produce electricity without using coal,like nuclear power generation.
ReplyDeleteI think nuclear energy in Japan must be abolished instantly. However, it would not be so easy.There are two reasons. First, the supply of energy in Japan is a big shackle. As the article shows, Japan is lacking in energy resources. Therefore,nuclear energy might be necessary even if it is only 3 percent of a whole energy supply.
ReplyDeleteSecond, there are economical reason . Once a nuclear plant is built, the first investment has to be digested. Also,the economical connection between nuclear plant and the local government can't be overlooked.
Like this, though some factors disturb the abolition of nuclear in Japan I wish it would be canceled.
In my opinion, Japan should not turn off nuclear power plants. It may seem irresponsible choice because there has been some cases that show how dangerous nuclear power is. It made a lot of victims and also costed enormous amount of money. For this reason, people maintain nuclear power plant should be turned off. However, if Japan turn off the nuclear power plant, Japan's economy will collapse down to down as there is no substituition for nuclear power. Japan has great economic power in the world and losing economic power means losing national power. It would make people more hard to live.
ReplyDeletei think we should not stop nuclear power plant. this is because we dont have any effective alternative resourses. they dont see a real situation. now,we usually use fire plant, but it takes too much cost and also fire plants could give us the bad effection as a global warming. i dont want to make another serious problem.
ReplyDeletewe already know the risks of nuclear power, so when we care these risks, we can use this power, i think,
im sorry for late to post my opinion. tatsuya.