Vom 10. März bis 14. März weilte der Autor des Buches Inside Fukushima – Eine Reportage aus dem Inneren der Katastrophe Suzuki Tomohiko in Deutschland. Die europaweite Buchpremiere fand am sechsten Jahrestag der Dreifachkatastrophe von Nord-Ost-Japan im Rahmen des Lesefestivals „Lesen ohne Atomstrom“ im Hamburger Völkerkundemuseum statt. Als Ergänzung zu den Anti-AKW- Demonstrationen am 11. März in mehreren deutschen Großstädten erinnerte die Veranstaltung nicht nur an die Katastrophen und deren Folgen, sondern auch daran, wie die japanische Regierung gemeinsam mit vielen weiteren Akteuren des sogenannten japanischen Atomdorfs versucht(e), die Lage im geborstenen AKW Fukushima Daiichi in den Griff zu bekommen. Suzuki Tomohiko ist genau dieser Frage nachgegangen und hat sich drei Monate nach der Katastrophe für mehr als zwei Monate im havarierten AKW Fukushima Daiichi als AKW-Arbeiter verdingt. In Japan bekannt als Journalist und Spezialist für die Yakuza, über die er seit Jahrzehnten berichtet, setzte er sich auch vor der Katastrophe mit dem gesellschaftlichen Phänomen der organisierten Kriminalität auseinander. In der Ausnahmesituation nach dem Super-GAU entschloss er sich dann genau dorthin zu gehen, wo viele seiner Kollegen sich nicht mehr hinwagten. Anfänglich als Begleiter der Yakuza in Hilfsgüterlieferungen in die betroffenen Gebiete eingebunden, merkte er schnell, dass die Verbindungen der Yakuza in das AKW-Gewerbe und die Rekrutierung von Arbeitskräften tiefer waren, als er es bisher für möglich gehalten hatte. Verstrickungen der Yakuza in viele Bereiche der Wirtschaft, wie z.B. dem Baugewerbe, dem Glücksspiel, aber auch ins Rotlichtmilieu, waren ihm auch vorher bekannt. Hellhörig wurde Suzuki Tomohiko aber, als ihn in den ersten Tagen nach der Katstrophe beständig ranghohe Mitglieder der Yakuza anriefen und ihn fragten, ob er nicht jemanden kenne, der im AKW arbeiten wolle, bzw. ob er nicht Leute kenne, die Arbeiter vermitteln könnten.
In den Diskussionen auf den Veranstaltungen kamen folgende Fragen immer wieder auf. Zum einen erklärte Suzuki den Unterschied zwischen der japanischen Yakuza im Vergleich zur italienischen Mafia. Die Frage, wieso er sich hier offen präsentieren könne und keine Angst vor Vergeltungsaktionen haben müsse, spielte dabei genauso eine Rolle, wie das Interesse daran, wie es überhaupt möglich sei, über die Yakuza zu berichten. Weitere Erklärungen stillten die Neugier des Publikums nach den Arbeitsbedingungen, den Schutzmaßnahmen vor Radioaktivität und seinem Doppelleben als AKW-Arbeiter und Journalist. All diese Fragen erläuterte Suzuki Tomohiko sowohl in Hamburg und dann am 13. März 2017 noch einmal in Berlin, bei einer Lesung im Verlag Assoziation A. Die Veranstaltung in Hamburg fand großen Zuspruch der Bürgerschaft. Ungefähr 500 Menschen kamen und wollten dabei sein. Darüber hinaus wurde die Veranstaltung aufgezeichnet und sogar live gestreamt und kann deshalb auch jetzt noch online nachgeschaut werden. Die Diskussion wurde in Hamburg von der Mitgründerin von Greenpeace Deutschland Monika Griefahn geleitet. Auf dem Podium saßen außer Suzuki Tomohiko der Präsident der Gesellschaft für Strahlenschutz Dr. Sebastian Pflugbeil und der bekannte Undercover-Journalist Günter Wallraff. Sowohl in Hamburg als auch in Berlin ging den Diskussionen eine Lesung voraus. Während in Berlin der Schauspieler Richard Schnell, der schon an der Aufführung von Stimmen aus Tschernobyl mitgewirkt hatte, eindrucksvoll und stimmgewaltig die Situation der AKW-Arbeiter in den Raum projizierte, übernahm diesen Part in Hamburg die Schauspielerin Anna Thalbach. Auch in Berlin überstieg die Besucherzahl die Erwartungen – es kamen mehr als 100 Interessierte und folgten seinen Ausführungen.
In den Medien fand die Buchpremiere ebenfalls großen Anklang.Vom 6. – 9. März lief eine vierteilige Radiosendung mit dem Titel „Weiterleben“ der Journalistin und Japanologin Judith Brandner im ORF.Darüber hinaus verfasste sie eine Rezension für die Schweizer WOZ. Der WDR berichtete in einer Radiosendung ebenso wie der NDR. Am 11. März berichtete die MOPO über das Buch im Zusammenhang mit einem Interview mit Günter Wallraff. Als Reaktion auf die Berliner Veranstaltung erschienen Beiträge in der Tageszeitung Junge Welt, und bei Telepolis. An dieser Stelle sei noch einmal allen Beteiligten von Lesen-ohne-Atomstrom, dem Verlag Assoziation A, den DolmetscherInnen und OrganisatorInnen dieser Leseveranstaltungen gedankt, ohne die das Projekt so nicht hätte realisiert werden können. Allen LeserInnen wünschen der Autor und die ÜbersetzerInnen nun viel Freude bei der Lektüre! Wer mehr über die Struktur der AKW-Industrie, den Autor oder über die weitere Diskussion des Themas AKW-Arbeit in Japan erfahren möchte, kann gern den Text des Mitübersetzers Felix Jawinski zurate ziehen.
2007 – 2011 Bachelorstudium der Japanologie und der Politikwissenschaft an der Universität Leipzig, Auslandsstudium in Japan an der Aichi Prefectural University 2009 – 2010. Thema der Masterarbeit: „Atomkraft und Arbeit: Versuch einer Annäherung am Beispiel Japans“. Seit 2010 zunächst studentische Hilfskraft, dann wissenschaftliche Hilfskraft und seit Oktober 2014 wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am Institut für Japanologie Leipzig.[:]
[:ja]３月１１日ベルリンはノイケルンのWerkstatt der Kulturenでさまざまな分野の芸術家たちによる「Fukushima the Aftermath（フクシマ、その余波）」という記念の催し物があり、この日は午後三時ごろから夜遅くまで多くの人が会場を入れ代わり立ち代わり訪れました。この公開討論はその催し物の一環として行われたものですが、企画およびそのオーガナイズにはわれわれSayonara Nukes Berlin(以後SNB)のメンバー梶川ゆうさんが精力的にアンガジェしてくれました。 続きを読む 公開討論: 破局後五年目のフクシマと今後→
なぜこのような事故になったかを考えると，その原因は以前からの積み重ね，そしてハードとソフトの両方にあった．福島の海岸はほぼ 35 m の高さがある．東電は原発を置く場所として 35 m の高さの高台を 20 m 削って低くした．東電はこれによって冷却水の汲み上げの電気代を安くしたことを利点とした．非常電源の設置場所を低い場所にするなど，ハード的に事故が起こりやすいものとなっていた．一方，ソフト的なこととしては，日本では事故は地震，津波などと同時に起こりやすいが，それが想定されていなかったこと．責任を持つ官僚にも専門家を配置していなかったこと．当時，政府の原発の事故の責任者は経済学者で原発については知らないということがあった．また原発の規制をする側と推進をする側が同一の組織であった．つまりハード，ソフト両面で事故を防げなかった．
講演後、主催者、緑の党議員たちと。 会場はドイツ人、在ベルリン日本人などでほぼいっぱいであった。[:en]Date: 2015-10-13 (Tue)
Venue: Heinrich Böll Foundation, Berlin
We had a lecture entitled “Crisis Management – Lessons Learned from the Threefold Catastrophe in March 2011” by Naoto Kan, former prime minister of Japan.
The hosts and German politicians started by introducing this lecture then explaining the current German situation. On German energy policy they mentioned the following:
Referring to Merkel’s Memorandum and her plan to replace all the German nuclear power plants with renewable energy, they said: “Concerning the fact that even one of the world’s leading technology countries like Japan has faced such a catastrophic accident, it makes sense for Germany to abandon its nuclear power plants.”
Compared to Germany, Japan has more natural energy. Japan can use wind energy, solar energy, and energy from biomass, but also geothermal and tidal energy. Moreover Japan has world class technology. The only missing piece would be the political decision.
Then, the organizer introduced Naoto Kan. The following is a summary of Kan’s lecture.
Just after the accident [March 11th, 2011], we found out there was no crisis management in Fukushima, because everything was built on the assumption that the atomic reactor was safe. Around March 22nd (2011), I asked a specialist to evaluate the worst-case scenario. He said that all the people who lived inside a circle of 250km radius from the reactors needed to be evacuated for a few decades. Tokyo lies within the circle. 50 million people would lose their home. I recognized that in fact the problem was, if Japan could continue existing. How could we manage 50 million refugees at once if the worst-case scenario happened?
At the early stage of the accident, both the government and TEPCO did not know what happened and could neither manage to circulate information about the accident. On the other hand, the plant manager called Yoshida improvised a new way to cool down the reactors because all the common methods had broken down. Japan was saved by mainly the people on the spot, including fire fighters, police, self defense forces and TEPCO workers. According to TEPCO, the melt down of nuclear fuel emits 70Sv/h radiation. The radiation can kill a nearby person within five minutes. The containment vessel was damaged due to the high pressure, but it only had holes. Therefore, fortunately, this fuel was not dispersed into the air, but melt down into the earth. We found out that there was no simulation for such a high pressure accident, since the assumption had always been, that an accident was impossible. If the containment vessel had blown up instead of just punching holes, we would have had no idea what happened. The fuel pool of reactor IV contained nuclear fuel, but the pool had no containment vessel. We worried that the water could dry, but we could not go near due to the high radiation. However, coincidentally, there was extra water due to the delay of the maintenance work that was being done there and so the meltdown was unexpectedly avoided. “I know this is not the words from a politician, but I can only think that God protected us.” Today we still need to cool down the fuel by putting 300 tons of water every day onto it. But the containment vessel has holes, so the water is leaking. We pumped up the water and put it in tanks. But we cannot pump up all the water. It is still not under control today.
Naoto Kan, Former Prime Minister of Japan （Photo：Tsukasa Yajima）
We are working on Fukushima’s decommissioning. The current plan says it will take 40 years, but I personally think we need more time to finish it.
I thought about the question why this accident happened. There was a chain of the causes. They also lie equally in hardware and software, by software human factors are meant. The average height of the shore line of Fukushima is around 35m. TEPCO lowered 20m of this height and reported how they save the pumping water costs for cooling down the reactors. They put the emergency electricity generators at a low place. This severely failed design caused the accident. These are hardware problems. On the other hand, there were also software problems. In Japan many accidents of this kind are caused by earthquakes, which are often followed by tsunamis. However, this possible situation was not considered. The bureaucrats who are responsible for the security of accident are not specialists for atomic reactors. For example, when I met the responsible person of the reactor accident, I asked the responsible person, “are you a specialist for atomic reactor?” The responsible person answered, “I graduated from the economy department of Tokyo University. I don’t know technical details about the reactor.” The organization for the reactor accident and the organization of the propelling nuclear reactors were the same organization. This chain of problems led to the accident.
Before 3.11 I have always recommended to sell Japanese reactors to other countries. But after 3.11 I completely changed this opinion.
After the accident, we first separated the department of the nuclear safety and the department propelling the nuclear reactors. We also changed the regulation so that it becomes more safety oriented. This basically shut down all the reactors in Japan.
We introduced a law to encourage green energy. We studied the German FIT system.
In the future, I want to abandon the fossil fuel and want to shift to all the sustainable energy in Japan. A research report says that the current human energy consumption is only 1/10000 of energy from the sun to the earth. If each country can support the energy by its own, one of the large international conflict source will be solved. It seems the national security will be better if we could shift to the natural energy. I admire Germany as a forerunner. I heard there are many different opinions in Germany, though I was quite impressed that Merkel changed the German energy policy to be based on the sustainable energy just after a few months after the Fukushima accident. I am disappointed with the current Japanese energy policy since it is not going only towards sustainable energy. However, it was revealed that the nuclear energy is not cheap. Thus, I expect the nuclear energy will be abandoned in this century due to economical reasons. But, there is no guarantee that there will be no other accident before it is abandoned. Let’s not wait until it is too late.
At the end of the lecture, Kan concluded “Fortunately, we could avoid the destruction of the country. I felt there was a protection of God. But, I don’t know whether there will be another protection when the next accident happens. My aim is to abandon nuclear reactors all over the world before the next accident.”
After the lecture, we had a lively question and answer session.
Q: Why is Japan still not able to abandon the nuclear power, even after the accident?
A: According to the opinion polls, a majority of Japanese wants to abandon nuclear power. However, the Japanese business community and the people who depend on nuclear power businesses are still strong. At the end, we need to promote the denuclearization by the election, but the focus of the last election was economy policy, and the LDP, which promotes nuclear power, won the election. Therefore we have not achieved the denuclearization.
Lively discussion with Kan
Q: Why do power companies, such as TEPCO, continue to promote the nuclear power even after they faced an accident like Fukushima?
A: The government wanted to promote the nuclear power, the power companies however didn’t. The government gave the power companies the authority to add up to 3% on top of the electricity costs depending on how much they invest. It is a rate-of-return regulation for power companies. In other words, if a power company has higher costs to produce power, their profits become higher. The power company can get more profit not requiring the endeavor of the company. Therefore, the power companies would like to promote the nuclear power since it can increase the profit without any effort.
The power company can abuse the rate-of-return regulation legally. For example, a power company can have an order with deliberately high cost to a general contractor. They can raise the electricity price due to the regulation, so the user must pay this cost. There could be a secret agreement that the general constructor pays back a part of the higher cost. A book recently revealed this mechanism and the pay-back is estimated at around 200 billion yen per year. The power companies use this money to promote nuclear power. Even though the accident cost 10 trillion yen, until now it was mostly covered by the tax. Therefore this situation is quite attractive for the power companies in Japan which are also favored to the many politicians.
Q: How did Japan change after 3.11?
A: I think there were many changes. One thing I would like to mention is the change in court’s attitude. The court did not use not make decisions about the safety, they used to let the experts decide since nuclear power plants are highly technical. Even though this is only true for some members, but they changed their attitude. In the future, I expect that the nuclear energy business cannot sustain due to its high costs and also the emerging of renewable energies. I believe nuclear power plants will be abandoned in this century. However, this is an economical movement and not a political movement. That is unfortunate.
Q: Will the change not happen politically?
A: I think the change might happen from grassroots movements. But they are not seen in the outcome of the national election in Japan. I heard that the German system has more weight for the proportional representation than the Japanese system. Japan uses single-member district method for election. This system has a wasted vote problem. For example, if 10% of people are against the nuclear reactor, these people’s votes are wasted in single-member district method and these 10% people are considered as 0. We need to have enough anti-nuclear people in the Japanese diet, however, Japan has not yet reached so far.
Q: How has information been verified when the accident happened?
A: At the time, critical information had been hidden, many of them are still not publically available. The communication line between TEPCO Tokyo and Fukushima site had been connected for 24 hours. However, only the information chosen by TEPCO was made public. For example, at March 15th, I visited TEPCO and asked the TEPCO officials not to retreat from Fukushima site. The video has been published without voice. TEPCO said the voice was erased by mistake, but I personally don’t believe it. Now a prosecution of the officials is carried out, so I expect more information will come to light.
Q: What kind of person is Yoshida, the general manager, who prevented the accident to become a lot worse?
A: Unfortunately Yoshida, the general manager died of cancer two years after the accident. Whether the cancer is the cause of exposure is unclear. I was able to meet him once just after the accident. I recognized immediately that he was a reliable person.
Q: How have the decisions to evacuate the site or to allow people to return been made?
A: At the time of the accident, the government’s monitoring ability was low and there was a danger that the containment vessel was going to be destroyed. So we decided to evacuate the area within a certain radius having the reactors as its center. Then, we figured out that the distributed radioactive substance depends on the wind. But this took time. Evacuation criteria differed by experts. The current criterion is 1 mSv/y. The number of children being patients is increasing, but some experts say that this is due to our checking method which is strict and makes numbers only looks like they were increasing. Municipalities tend to lower the criterion to make it easier for the people to return, since they want them to return to the area. Basically, we decide according to the experts’ opinions, but I have question this is appropriate.
Q: Why can your party (Democratic Party of Japan) not win the elections?
A: The effect of single-member district election method is strong. Within this system, we always need to get the first position in the district. Therefore, even if the 10% of the people favor our party, it is possible that we do not get a seat in the diet.
After the lecture: Kan with the host and green party politicians[:]
３月２８日の晩の７時から９時過ぎまで同氏は独日平和フォーラム（１００名ほど参加）でオイゲン・アイヒホルン(Prof. Eugen Eichhorn)氏の司会でまずフクシマについて、次に核と機密保持について話した。第一部では、日本の状況に対して非常に批判的な発言が多い同氏の皮切りは、意外にも瀬戸内海にある祝島の人々との心温まる交流の紹介だった。祝島では３．５キロの海を隔てた本土側の上関に中国電力が２基の原発を建設すべく埋め立てをしている（ただし、原発建設許可はまだおりていない）。２５年ほど前の計画当初から、祝島の島民は絶対反対の闘争を続けている。具体的な闘いの一つは漁業組合への補償金支払いの拒否であった。３・１１の後も闘いは続いているそうだ。
フクシマのブロック４が非常に危険な状況にある。現在いつ倒壊してもおかしくない４号炉の建物の上部にある燃料プールから燃料棒を敷地内の地上プールに移しているが、建物が壊れたり、あるいは多量の燃料棒が外れて落ちたりした場合には、日本だけの問題では収まらず，北半球全体が汚染されるだろう（注：この問題のジレンマは、そのまま放っておけば危険度が時間とともに高まっていくことだ）。太平洋の北米海岸で最近おかしな魚がたくさん獲られているが，フクシマの影響でなければいいがと心配している。特にストロンチウムが問題だが、日本では話題にもなっていない。福島県内では年間数十ミリシーベルトの強い放射能の環境下で多くの県民が生活しているが、政府は問題ないと言い放っている。子どもを抱えた避難家族では鬱になっているお母さんが多いと聞いている。本来ならできるだけ放射能汚染の少ない地域に避難・疎開させ，そのための補償金および資金を支給すべきなのに、政府は反対の政策を推し進めている。国際原子力機関のIAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency, 国際原子力機関)は福島県とパートナー契約を結んだりして、政府の政策の後押しをしている。
質問の時間になり、核に関しては強大な秘密組織がすべて操っているようだが，我々市民は何も出来ないのかという質問に対して、冒頭の「Ich bin ein Erbsenzähler」が彼の答だった。小生が理解するには、我々は小さな事実を見つけ、それらを積み上げて、秘密のベールに包んで核を推進している連中に対抗していかなければならないということだろう。では、我々もエンドウ豆を一粒ずつ数えていこう。
