Thank you Paul for the insightful post on geothermal power politics!
Your explanations raise several interesting points and I wonder what people think about these:

1. Grassroots' defese of their livelyhood against the developmental/construction state:

"What followed next was a successful local media campaign by hotspring interests groups against Odake, Kyushu EPCO, and the government arguing that geothermal plants would destroy Japan's traditional way of life and local communities. Protests ensued."

Assuming that the livelyhoods of onsen operators were directly threatened, the use of media campaigns and patriotism instead of legal means for the defense of property rights against infrastructure devlopment in the name of (national) economic prosperity shows significant parallels with current internet campaigns and the use of cultural heritage protection arguments by Chinese grassroots in the fight against their expropriation for real estate and industrial development. I hope there is since then some progress with the understandings of the rule of law and the consequences of developmentalism in Japan.

2. Politics of Symbolism

"After the hotspring owners lobbied successfully with media help against geothermal power plants in the 1960s, it became difficult to site geothermal plants in Kyushu and Tohoku (areas with the largest magmatic heat sources). Today, some people advocate drilling in the national parks to avoid this issue, but they also are opposed by various environmental interests who are very concerned about how drilling and exploration will effect the eco-system."

Virtually everyone I asked the question that Mark Manger raised gave me this same answer: that geothermal power threatened natural parks and onsen. Given the vast array of technologies available for harnessing geothermal power and the existence of hotsprings all over Japan (in many countries governments often subsidize drillling down to 3000 meters in order to tap aquifers with water as warm/cool as 40C for energy production), Paul's account explains where the argument comes from, but not why this seems to be the end of all wisdom and people believe that nothing else can be done (except for drilling horizontally from the outside of national park boundaries as it has recently been proposed). As such, what amounts to strong beliefs or even dogmata resembles the ideology-laden debates about whaling and North Korean abductions: instead of exploring what from the outside look like obviously promising solutions, people stick to ideas that came up at some point, were appropriated by local interest groups and eventually coopted by vested interests of national politics. According to Castells and others, this politics of symbolism seems to be a common phenomenon in late industrial societies. Also, even if pro-nuclear and fossile energy agencies and interest groups did not actively obstruct the search for alternate ways of energy production, their passivity in correcting such situations of a misinformed public is still a form of exercising political power, albeit more subtle by putting the issue low on the agenda and/or making sure that it remains a non-issue.


3. Centralization of political and electrical power

In order to replace just one conventional plant with geothermal sources, a power company would have needed to build 20 geothermal plants in surrounding locations to match the output of just one conventional or nuclear power plant.

In view of the fact that household use has, according to METI, become THE most significanltly increasing share of Japan's energy consumption, I want to question the idea that while consumption is increasingly decentralized, production needs to remain centralized.
In countries (with colder climate than Japan and a bit more advanced energy policies) it has become acknowledged that, ideally, residential buildings through various existing technical means are converted into small 'power plants', which as a net effect produce rather than consume energy.

Given the desolate situation in rural areas (I was struck by the decay of what were formerly famous hotspring resorts such as Shiobara), I wonder why it isn't possible to organize geothermal energy production in smaller dimensions, for example at the village or neighborhood-level? The generation of electricity from water and steam above 100C is one thing, but the use of warm water above 40C, too, is technically and economically very effective for other forms of consumption.
I guess the answer is rather simple:

A) EPCOs want to produce electricity, that is their mission. Therefore, they are reluctant to have power generation decentralized, in prinicple, and because it would deprive them and their political backers from pork;
B) Nobody is there to give the depopulated, aged and impoverished rural areas a voice in the politics of far-away Tokyo, and wants/is able to invest in such an uncertain economic AND political environment.
C) Geothermal power is much less fancy technology than big power plants, especially when they are nuclear.
This leads to the question whether decision-makers in Japan still believe, as Nakasone and others (who were probably traumatized by their defeat in war) did and do, that without nucelar and other technological prowess Japan would not be repected as a member of the industrialized world - or the 'international community'
led by/equal to the United States. This same point may also explain why solar power seems to be generally more present in the media and among expert discussions than geothermal and other means of generation. I was struck by a Japanese engineer/scholar's presentation at the United Nations University in 2010 (in the same panel on sustainability with MIT professor Dennis Meadows, author of The Limits of Growth): he in earnest proposed a huge solar panel in outer-space as solution for all of Japan's energy problems! Nobody questioned his idea then. Imagine how much happiness and prosperity a Japan (as opposed to Tokyo) Electric Power Company will bring us - and even more to the builders of missile defense systems, given the need to protect the panel from being shot down by some threatening neighboring countries possessing these capabilities). According to Hitoshi Yoshioka from Kyushu University nuclear advocates still believe it is necessary for Japan to develop nuclear technology for sake of being 'developed'.


In summary, the centralization of political power (including urbanization) as a consequence of Japan Inc.
seems to be at the root of Japan's problem with ecological (maybe also economical) sustainability. The fact that technological prowess is seen as more important for the future of the nation than the health of its children is another interesting phenomenon to look at from the perspective of ontological security/nationalism. So, instead of the revitaliztion of Japan through economic growth as PM Noda argued for in the Washington Post, it seems that a rejuvenation, not of the nation but of the elites, would help.

Question: is anybody working on the nuclear disaster using Ulrich Beck's Risk Society? This is obviously the example par excellence, at least until we see another nuclear power plant in South Korea, China or elsewhere explode.

Regards,
Chris Wirth