Tokyo combats flood threats with second mammoth reservoir

Article: Tokyo combats flood threats with second mammoth reservoir

The article centres on the construction of Japan’s second largest underground reservoir built underneath one of the world’s second-biggest by land area after New York City (Adelman, 2014). It follows after the first underground reservoir built in 1993 in western Tokyo, to control the amount of river discharge in the Naka River Basin by channelling water underground and then funnelling the floodwaters to the nearby Edo River (Zolbert, 2012). Throughout the article, I observed how the author constantly reminds the reader on the uniqueness of the solution. There is a general idea that the flood management is designed to meet the unique needs of Japan’s relationship with its environment and at the end, paints a positive futuristic outlook for countries with similar characteristics like Hong Kong and Japan to follow suit.

Upon reading the article, I found it interesting how the author paints the world to be in awe at the remarkable solution Japan has developed in managing a problem common to many metropolitan cities in the world. The recognition of a “unique-to-Japan” strategy subtly underlines the continued existence of a stereotype towards the Japanese proposed love for nature despite many scholars like Kalland and Asquith who have called it a myth (Kalland and Asquith, 1997).  Bearing in mind that the Japanese have at some point attempted to control and dominate the environment, I wondered how they were so willing in embracing the compliments the world was throwing at them for their “note-worthy” and “ingenious” solution as many experts point out in the article. Perhaps the eagerness could be interpreted as an effort to remind the world about the “nihonjinron” values as well as how nature is embodied within the Japanese nature and gene pool which Kirby argues against (Kirby, 2011).

 While the article does not explicitly indicate Japan and the subject of “green”, it does suggest a sort of harmony in which Japan strives to achieve with its environment. From remarking at its ability to adapt to the problems created by the concrete footprint in cities, we get an idea at what the author is trying to say, “Japan has done it again”. It has once again shown us its capabilities in bringing into control the nature that the Western claim to be “wild” (Kalland and Asquith, 1997), creating an environment where people can live harmoniously with the threats of nature.

 Despite the world’s commendation of Japan’s breakthrough technology in adapting to the environment, I beg to differ that the country is as green as it portrays itself to be. Much less, its supposed love for nature. The history of Japan’s dam siting shows how this is not the first time the government is investing a large sum of money and resources in the investment of a facility said to manage flood and improve the lives of the people. But in the case of the underground reservoir, citizens not only supported the government’s decision to construct it but also made several requests for it following the destructive impacts of typhoons. Through all this, I notice the lack of concern for the possible environmental impacts of a man-made feature of such a massive scale. Much like the protests against dam siting in the 1970s and 1980s, resistance were generally against the human impacts of flooding out villages and less on the possible ecological impacts the dams would have on the river and aquatic animals (Aldrich, 2008). Similar in this article, the Japanese triumph and little is mentioned about the possible consequences of constructing such a massive underground reservoir. In fact, a quick search on the internet also revealed little protests or concerns regarding the amount of energy the facility might consume. 5 gigantic vertical shafts with turbines of 14000 horsepower, imagine the carbon footprint of that much less 2 of that. This made me consider Kirby’s argument about the Japanese engagement with nature. Perhaps being out of sight is out of mind, hence by putting such a massive facility out of sight, the government indirectly removes the mirror for them to look at themselves looking at nature (Kirby, 2011).

tecb130312

 Figure 1. Schematic of the Metropolitan Area Outer Underground Discharge Channelhttp://web-japan.org/trends/11_tech-life/tec130312.html

Bibliography:

 Aldrich, D. P. (2008). Site fights: divisive facilities and civil society in Japan and the West. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.

Adelman, J. (2014). Tokyo combats flood threats with second mammoth reservoir. The Japan Times, 17 August 2014 (accessed on 9 September 2014)

Zolbert, A., (2012) How giant tunnels protect Tokyo from flood threat. CNN Official Website, (accessed on 9 September 2014) http://edition.cnn.com/2012/10/31/world/asia/japan-flood-tunnel/

Kalland, A. and Asquith, P.J. (1997) Japanese Perceptions of Nature: ideals and illusions. Japanese Images of Nature, UK: Curzon

Kirby, P. W. (2011). Troubled natures: waste, environment, Japan. Honolulu, University of Hawai’i Press.