"Nuclear Ghost: Atomic Livelihoods in Fukushima's Gray Zone in 2023" (Ryo Morimoto)
By Sophie Welsh
In this seminar, Ryo Morimoto presented on a few themes from his recent book, Nuclear Ghost: Atomic Livelihoods in Fukushima’s Gray Zone, which examined how the 2011 disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant impacted its surrounding communities, ordinary citizens, and their recovery. The 3/11 nuclear accident posed many challenges Japan’s recovery and rebuilding. There has been much talk about a “creative reconstruction” since the 1995 Hanshin Earthquake in Japan. But Morimoto pointed out that in the context of the Fukushima nuclear accident, we should ask ourselves what the phrase “build back better” would mean – better for whom? better in what way? He also asked, how can we overcome the social issues and divisions that emerge in the wake of these disasters?
Morimoto focused on two main areas: the nuclear compensation policy, which distributed financial payments to those who were affected; and the decision to discharge the treated water which had been used to cool the meltdown. His fieldwork and findings are from Minamisoma, a town close to Fukushima Daiichi, and one of the few towns which did not enforce total evacuation. Morimoto argued that the policies which were meant to protect and support the victims have in fact created additional burdens and tensions for the survivors.
The nuclear compensation policy, while acknowledging the psychological and physical damages from the temporary displacement in March 2011, generally did not address the broader social harms, such as social isolation and alienation from ancestral lands. The requirements for compensating the families of deceased individuals also compelled the surviving family members to come to terms their loved one’s deaths, which at times opened old wounds. Some of them asked whether the payment is worth such psychological pains, especially considering that the amount of compensation varied depending on which zone they lived in. Meanwhile, some citizens have been affected by the disaster’s reputational impacts, including those who operate businesses in the contaminated area. The compensation policy has not done much to alleviate these kinds of long-term suffering.
Since the accident, it has become public knowledge that nuclear plants throughout the world are releasing higher levels of tritium than the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS)-treated water. In Morimoto’s view, it is insufficient for the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) to claim that it has complied with international standards, however low the contaminant levels may be. Instead, it must work toward creating a new standard for nuclear power plants to minimize their impact on the surrounding communities. The TEPCO accident has laid bare the fact that nuclear reactors will continue to introduce contaminants into ecosystems, and this should factor into the decisions and discussions around the topic of nuclear energy.
The Japanese government has approved the Green Energy Transformation (GX) Policy, which aims for economic growth, stable energy production and supply, and carbon neutrality by 2050. Morimoto cautioned that the “technological solutionism” of this policy ignores ongoing social and cultural impacts of nuclear energy. It also does not make explicit that building better and safer nuclear infrastructure depends in part on retiring the old ones safely. That would mean phasing out 24 old and damaged reactors from the 1970s and 1980s, including Fukushima Daiichi.
Future efforts to retire these plants is likely to include the use of robotics. The government has already established a 20-hectare robot test field and has invested a hundred billion yen for innovation and R&D for such efforts. This research is also fueling advancement in other areas of robotics in other areas, such as elderly care. With such multi-purpose robots in high demand, Morimoto raised the question of what culturally and geographically specific ideas of crisis, humans, and hazards might be coded in their design, and how this robot-centered approach to reconstructing Fukushima and Japan will influence the way Japan will imagine what it means to “build back better.” The Q&A following the seminar touched on priorities in building back communities, and questions about how to address and resolve mental health issues after disasters.