Volume 13 | Issue 33 | Number 6 | Article ID 4359 | Aug 17, 2015 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volcanic Hazards as Components of Complex Systems: The Case of Japan Gregory Smits The past year or so has been a time of the earth’s crust suggested Mt. Fuji is more particularly vigorous volcanic activity in Japan, likely to erupt owing to effects from the 2011 or at least activity that has intruded into public Tōhoku earthquake.3 Well publicized by a press awareness. Perhaps most dramatic was the release on the eve of its publication, mass deadly eruption of Mt. Ontake on September media around the world have reported this 27, 2014, whose 57 fatalities were the first finding, along with speculation regarding volcano-related deaths in Japan since 1991. On possible connections between earthquakes and May 29, 2015, Mt. Shindake, off the southern volcanic eruptions. tip of Kyushu, erupted violently, forcing the evacuation of the island of Kuchinoerabu. That As of June 30, 2015, the Japan Meteorological same day, Sakurajima, located just north in Agency (JMA) designated ten volcanoes in or Kagoshima Bay, erupted more forcefully than near the main Japanese islands as warranting usual. Sakurajima has been erupting in some levels of warning ranging from Mt. Shindake’s fashion almost continuously since 1955, but Level 5 (“Evacuate”), to Level 2 (“Do not since 2006, its activity has become relatively approach the crater”) in seven cases. more vigorous. Indeed, a May 30 Asahi shinbun Sakurajima is at Level 3 (“Do not approach the article characterized these eruptions as “the volcano”), as is Hakoneyama, located near Mt. latest ominous sign that the Earth’s crust Fuji. Despite often-sensational reports about around the archipelago is getting restless.” The Mt. Fuji, it is not currently on the JMA volcanic article argued that the twentieth century was warning list.4 an anomaly in that volcanic activity throughout Japan was relatively subdued, whereas the The aftermath of 3/11 awakened many in Japan more vigorous activity of recent years is closer and around the world to the dangers of to the long-term normal pattern.1 seismicity and nuclear power. Even if the magma beneath the Japanese islands had not Warnings of an impending eruption of the long- been so active in recent months and years, it is dormant Mt. Fuji have been commoninevitable that volcanic hazards would also throughout the years of the twenty-firstenter the public discourse on nuclear power century. After the March 11, 2011 disaster and natural disaster preparedness. Nuclear (hereafter “3/11”), the frequency ofpower, of course, generates an ideological hypothesized imminent eruptions of Mt. Fuji opposition that runs deeper than any specific increased. For example, retired professor safety claims. Paul Lorenzini, argues that this Kimura Masaaki, known for making grandiose ideological opposition to nuclear power is a predictions about earthquakes and volcanic manifestation of mistrust of modern institutions eruptions, published books on Mt. Fuji’s and mistrust of “the values of modern Western eruption (already underway according to society that these institutions embody, Kimura’s claims) in 2011 and 2112.2 Especially particularly their capitalist economics and their influential was a short July 2014 article in the reliance on science and technology.”5 In this journal Science. This study of perturbations of view, failures by relevant state institutions to 1 13 | 33 | 6 APJ | JF predict and substantially mitigate deadly or ash.”10 I explain these volcanic hazards in a destructive natural hazards can serve as later section. evidence that the state cannot be trusted to safeguard nuclear power. Because they are For many, the simple fact that Japan is serious natural hazards, it is possible to link vulnerable to a range of natural hazards such events like the unpredicted eruption of Mt. as earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, Ontake and anticipated events like the eruption and typhoons is sufficient to argue against of Mt. Fuji to the Fukushima disaster and to nuclear power. However, looking at the matter nuclear power.6 in a more focused manner, linking the hypothesized near-term eruption of Mt. Fuji A 2013 Mainichi shinbun survey of with a nuclear disaster requires a considerable volcanologists regarding volcanic hazards and stretch of the imagination. To be sure, a major nuclear power plants asked which plants are at eruption of Mt. Fuji would probably cause risk. The experts mentioned the Sendai plant in considerable social and economic dislocation, Kagoshima Prefecture most often. Of the 50 and it might be deadly. Moreover, the Hamaoka survey respondents, 29 specified that the nuclear plant is at great risk for seismic and Sendai plant was at risk and 19 were opposed tsunami damage, particularly if the great Tōkai to its restarting. By contrast, six respondents earthquake and tsunami, which many Japanese mentioned Hamaoka in Shizuoka Prefecture, have feared as imminent since the 1970s, does the closest plant to Mt. Fuji (and toin fact happen more or less as imagined. Mt. Hakoneyama), as being at volcanic risk and two Fuji, however, is less likely to pose a serious opposed its reopening. One other significant nuclear risk. In Kyushu, on the other hand, the point about this survey of experts is that 12 of proximity of Kagoshima’s Sendai Nuclear the 50 did not list any plants, and nine Power Plant to Sakurajima and other active specifically stated that no plants were at risk. volcanoes that are part of the Aira Caldera (a Based on this survey, a majority of expert vast pool of magma) almost certainly does opinion puts volcanism in southern Kyushu constitute a major nuclear risk as well as a risk high on the list of risk to nuclear plants, but a for other forms of damage to the entire region significant number of experts do not regard of southern Kyushu. Indeed, most of the volcanic hazards as a serious threat to nuclear articles in the scientific or popular press linking power plants at all.7 English-language media volcanism in Japan to nuclear hazards sensibly widely reported select results of the survey.8 focus on Sakurajima and the Aira Caldera.11 According to another recent assessment (circa While acknowledging the importance of 2009), “virtually all operating nuclear power volcanism as a hazard to nuclear power, it is plants in Japan are potentially threatened by not the aim of this article to discuss this topic the possible harmful impacts of tephra fallout, in detail. Similarly, it is not my goal here to channelized distal lava or mudflows, ormake predictions or to assess risk. Instead, I tsunami. The phenomena may easily impact advance the argument that volcanic hazards sites tens of kilometers or even hundreds of interacting with human societies results in a kilometers from the erupting volcano.”9 In complex system. Here I use “complex” system addition to manifesting itself as a range of in a technical sense, which I explain in the final physical hazards and possibly disrupting section. If indeed, volcanic hazards interacting electrical and cooling systems, volcanic ash with society constitute a complex system, then “might transport radionuclides, either as the only way to mitigate these hazards particles incorporated into tephra fragments or effectively in is to use complex systems theory. as compounds absorbed into the surfaces of In short, I introduce complex systems theory in 2 13 | 33 | 6 APJ | JF the context of volcanic hazards in Japan. earth’s heat comes from nuclear fission from radioactive elements within the asthenosphere With this argument in mind, this article has two and deeper.12 In the future, we might develop main goals. First, rather conventionally, I better ways of exploiting this natural nuclear explain the basics of volcanism and survey the energy. range of typical volcanic hazards. In addition simply to conveying information, this survey of volcanoes is intended to suggest the wide range of variables at play in the realm of geology alone. With that background in place, I make the case that volcanic hazards are part of a complex system. Finally, I briefly explain complex systems theory, and I propose a general approach to modeling the volcanic hazard-plus-society system. One point of the whole discussion is to introduce a way of thinking about volcanic hazards that is likely to be unfamiliar to many readers. The geographical focus is Japan and the particular natural hazard is volcanism, but many of the points here are applicable to other societies Figure 1. Structure of the earth. and to other types of natural hazards. ("Earth poster" by Kelvinsong - Own work. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Volcanoes and Volcanism via Wikimedia Commons). Beneath its usually calm surface, the earth is a living planet. It consists of several distinct In addition to heat from radioactivity, heat from layers defined by their composition. From the the molten iron outer core of the earth helps innermost layer of the earth moving outward is warm the mantle. The heat from the core the inner core, the outer core, the mantle, and passes through the mantle, which effectively finally, the crust. Although the entire mantle is transfers this heat toward the surface via similar in composition, it is subdivided into two convection currents in the asthenosphere. zones based on its physical properties. The These convection currents probably contribute upper part of the mantle is rigid, like the crust, to tectonic plate movement, although details of and the upper mantle and crust together the mechanism remain speculative. Combined constitute the lithosphere. The interior part of with plate movements, mantle convection the mantle, although not liquid, is softer and enables the surface of the earth to radiate ductile (flexible).