As always, Andrew DeWit has written an eye-opening and informative post about the promise of renewable power as a replacement for nuclear power and as an answer to Japan's energy security problems. Especially interesting is his estimate that the Noda administration has budgeted $25 billion for developing renewable energy and energy efficiency.

However, this does not sit very well with the subsequent paragraph that criticizes the same Noda administration for pork barrel politics. This juxtaposition almost seems intended to illustrate the saying that one person's pork is another's strategic investment. I would say the budgeting of $25 billion shows an impressive commitment to renewable energy, as do many of the Noda cabinet's other policies, including moves to separate electricity generation from distribution. While one might hope for an ideal scenario in which all supplemental budget funds would be dedicated to renewable energy, and none for new roads, we cannot expect Noda, especially given how weak his political base is now, to be able to defy political gravity. Moreover, building new roads is not necessarily always bad for the environment or energy efficiency, especially given that Japan's car market was long ago saturated. I would add that the environmental impact of driving is changing as electric cars are spreading with surprising speed (even in Norway not a day passes when I don't see at least one Nissan Leaf on the road, and often two or three). And EVs can be more than another burden on electricity production, as they can help smooth out variations in renewable electricity production by serving as an important reserve storage source.

More generally, Noda's spending priorities begs the question of the orientation of his administration toward nuclear power and energy policy. In my eyes, the jury is still out, at least until next month, but I would say that so far his administration has been more anti-nuclear in important ways than even the Kan administration. After all, despite his famous datsu genpatsu declaration, even Kan insisted that Japan needed to rely on nuclear power in the short-run. The Noda administration moved beyond that position, allowed a nuclear zero for two months, and so far has only authorized the restart of two plants.

Finally, I would suggest that what will promote the switch to renewable energy is not a decision not to restart nuclear plants in the short-run per se, but voters who punish politicians and parties that fail to commit to a credible and reasonably rapid plan for phasing out nuclear power. There are some indications that a failure to adopt a more robust anti-nuclear stance contributed to the recent defections of many DPJ members, and certainly Ozawa's new party seems to be adopting a clearer anti-nuclear stance. Given the losses that people all over Japan have suffered as a result of the Fukushima accident, not to mention the salience of the accident itself, we should anticipate that nuclear and energy policy will be the top priority for many if not most voters in the next lower house election, especially if there are credible anti-nuclear parties and candidate on the ballot.

Paul Midford
Norwegian University for Science and Technology