カテゴリー: News

By Bill Lee

You’re either for nuclear power or against it (I’m for it); there’s no in between. For an expanding power, literally, like China, energy supply is crucial. Oddly enough, China is the third largest nuclear energy producer in the world behind the United States and France, and yet nuclear power accounts for only three percent of China’s total energy usage.

China wants to get oil from offshore oil fields. It wants to build infrastructure on the reclaimed islands in the South China Sea. And it wants to expand port facilities in developing countries along the Maritime Silk Road under the One Belt and One Road initiative. But it needs energy for these offshore and remote locations.

The solution its banking on is floating nuclear power stations. Smallish nuclear reactors and power plants are mounted on barge-like vessels, which can then maneuver where needed. The output is only 10-20 percent of that from larger land-based nuclear power plants, but it’s enough to power offshore drilling rigs, fuel desalinization plants on remote islands, provide emergency power to disaster-hit areas, and so on. China is planning to build 20 floating nuclear power stations by the 2020s, and the first one should be in operation by 2019.

There are problems deploying these floating nuclear reactors of course. How will the United States react if China deploys these power stations in the South China Sea? What are the risks if one is in an area hit by a typhoon? (One manufacturer, China General Nuclear Power Group, says that its station will be able to dive underwater to avoid such a situation.) And can they be protected well enough from terrorists who want their reactors?

These and other issues, such as the expensive price tag, must be resolved before they can be deployed. But considering the stakes, these offshore nuclear power stations could fit in very nicely with China’s ambitions.

Leave a comment.

Photo by Daniel Oines via Flickr

By Bill Lee

Happy New Year to all of our avid readers!

Politically, last year was the year of Donald Trump, and whatever we think of him, at least he gives us something to be annoyed about. This year looks to be more of the same.

During the New Year’s break, we took a drive along the west coast of Izu Peninsula in Shizuoka Prefecture. It’s a beautiful winding coastline, and, like a lot of regions with a line of little fishing villages, sleepy. In contrast to the well-developed Southern California west coast, where each beach area has its own distinctive social and cultural feature — from the off-limits Marine Corps beaches at the south end, up to the artsy colony of Laguna Beach, the wealthy enclave of Newport Beach, the gritty, druggy beaches above them, and so on — the Izu region is relatively homogenous. But it would seem a wonderful place to live, or at least retire to, especially if you like marine sports.

But nobody wants to live or move there. Land or building owners can’t sell their properties and prices have plummeted. The reason? Everyone is afraid of a devastating earthquake and tsunami striking the region. But their paralyzing fear is irrational. For decades, the Japanese government warned of the “Tokai Earthquake” that would strike Shizuoka. The warning has now been widened to the “Nankai Trough Earthquake,” which could strike along a much longer stretch of the Pacific coastline. Aside from creating fear among the Japanese public — so much so that they don’t want to live in a beautiful coastal region — the predictions have raised non-life insurance premiums in those regions, further discouraging people from moving, or staying, there.

The government recently issued a forecast that there is a 7-40 percent chance of a megaquake hitting off the Pacific coast of Hokkaido in the next 30 years. But as Tokyo University Emeritus Professor Robert Geller noted in the Japan Times last month, the forecast is meaninglessly vague. If one does hit, the predictors can say the forecast was correct; if one doesn’t strike, they can, at the low end, say there was really a 93 percent chance one wouldn’t hit.

It’s a shame that Japan’s local areas are being depopulated, and doubly a shame when the cause is based on misleading claims. I’m moving to Izu.

Leave a comment.

Photo by Alan Doherty via Flickr

By Bill Lee

Along with the North Korea problem, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is as vexing a geopolitical problem as there could be. Playing to his political base in America, President Trump again threatened to spark global turmoil by declaring that the US government would recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move its embassy to the divided city.

Pundits say that the reason for Trump’s decision was to bolster his support among evangelical voters in America. Die-hard evangelicals believe that Jerusalem must be the capital of Israel so that Armageddon may eventually happen and Jesus can return as the true savior accepted finally by the Jews and bring about a millennium of peace.

To me, what was disturbing was Trump’s reaction to the UN resolution declaring Trump’s decision on Jerusalem “null and void.” At a Cabinet meeting, Trump said he would be “watching those votes,” and all but threatened to cut off aid to countries that voted for the resolution and against the United States. US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley said the Trump administration would be “taking names” of countries supporting the resolution. This shows that Trump and his minions view extending foreign assistance as nothing more than an excuse to buy votes at the UN. One of Trump’s traits is his tyrannical demand for fealty from his subordinates, which means just about everyone. Trump wants to cut foreign aid; China is more than happy to fill the void and provide more aid. Which country will end up benefitting more?

Leave a comment.

Photo by Francisca12av1 via Flickr

By Bill Lee

North Korea launched another ICBM on 29 November, this time a Hwasong-15, its most powerful missile to date. Soaring to an altitude of 4,500 kilometers on a lofted trajectory, the missile, if its trajectory were normalized, could have a range of more than 8,000 miles, putting all of the continental United States, as well as the rest of the world’s major cities, within North Korea’s sights. Reaction to the launch in Japan and the United States seemed muted at first until officials figured out the capability of the missile.

The statement put out by the Korean Central News Agency was very telling, however. The statement, purportedly issued by the government, made the amazing claim that the DPRK had basically completed its missile and nuclear development. The Hwasong-15, the statement said, “meets the goal of the completion [boldface mine] of the rocket weaponry system development set by the DPRK.” Kim Jong Un was quoted as flatly saying, “We have finally realized the great historic cause of completing the state nuclear force, the cause of building a rocket power.” Very significantly, the statement also claimed that the missile carried a “super-large heavy warhead,” clearly a reference to a mock nuclear warhead. North Korea has completed its missile and rocket development.

Or has it? The three remaining technical questions are whether the nuclear warhead housing could survive the re-entry into and fall through the Earth’s atmosphere, whether they have an accurate guidance system (seems they do), and whether a nuclear device would actually detonate. To ascertain the last question, an above-ground nuclear test would be necessary.

However, the KCNA statement also struck a conciliatory note and had none of the bluster of past statements. North Korea’s development of a nuclear arsenal is to “defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country from the U.S. imperialists’ nuclear blackmail…and therefore does not pose any threat to any country and region…That is our solemn declaration.” That’s as good as it is going to get from North Korea.

Leave a comment.

Photo by BipHoo Company via Flickr

By Bill Lee

The rapidly growing list of powerful and rich men charged with sexual harassment, misconduct, and assault in the United States and elsewhere recently is astounding. Starting with beloved television star Bill Cosby, going on to Fox News giants Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly, snaring legendary movie producer Harvey Weinstein, and then recently bringing down the likes of film and theater star Kevin Spacey, liberal politicians Al Franken and John Conyers, ultra-conservative senatorial candidate Roy Moore, television news icon Charlie Rose, and others, the list disregards race, age, political creed, and sexual orientation. The necessary conditions for inclusion on the list seem to require that the harasser/attacker be male and in a position of significant power. And of course heading the list, but not suffering any of the consequences befalling the others, is the sexual predator in the White House, who, according to a recent New York Times report, has suggested, unbelievably, that the Access Hollywood tape in which he boasts about his sexual assaults, is “fake.”

The causes of the sexual predatory behavior are not obscure, but the consequences are not self-evident as they include, according to accounts from victims, (repressed) feelings of trauma and terror. And on a cheaply political level, will all of these revelations reduce the pool of future male political candidate who may be apprehensive that some inappropriate behavior done 20 years previously will come out? That reduction is a good thing, some will argue.

A controversy of sorts was sparked in China by an article in the China Daily in the wake of the allegations against Weinstein that claimed that sexual harassment does not happen in China because of cultural traditions. That caused quick and sharp repudiations of the claim, and the newspaper removed the article.

In the United States, the obtuse may shrug off the tsunami of allegations as part of the unravelling fabric of American culture or of a deeper strand of human nature, but many will see them as a learning moment that should be taken very seriously.

Leave a comment.

Photo by Cummings Franck via Flickr