持続可能な世界を目指して

Self-sufficient sustainable society

　A self-sufficient sustainable society is a suggested way of human society to which humanity should live up or return. It can also be referred to as retention of the earthly environment through the change of human activities or their social system.

Environmental destructions represented by global warming, which have been caused by humanity, may not be a serious problem for the Earth which, over the eon of time, has gone through upheavals incomparable to what's going on now. However, for the lives born on the earth, especially for the species that live in the same age as human beings, they are disasters leading to catastrophe. The main factor of these disasters is the growing population of human beings. Had it not been for the explosion of population after the Industrial Revolution, the consequence of human activities affecting the earth's environment might have been offset by natural purification. Yet human prosperity fueled by technological development has gone far beyond the limit the Earth can afford.

　Now, the question is whether the word ‘prosperity’ means well-being. Yuval Noah Harari points out in his book “Sapience” that cows and sheep have been increasing in number by being kept by humans as livestock, which has made their existence as a species more secure than living in the wild. However, are they really happy, robbed of the freedom to serve as food or for some other reason, and sometimes not allowed to die a natural death? The same can be said to pets like dogs and cats. In exchange for the freedom to live in the wild, they secure a stable supply of food and safe shelter. Which makes them happier, to live in the severity of mother nature or to live in comfort provided by humanity? Were the supreme goal of every single creature to be to keep existing, livestock and pets could be seen as successful ones. They might be happy, being able to live in peace and not being killed without reason. However, it is simply because they don’t know the taste of freedom that they are happy. They are practically placing their lives in somebody else’s hands. Even if freedom doesn’t bring about happiness, it is arrogant of humanity to claim that they are happy just being ignorant.

　The same thing can be said to humans. Looking back at the whole history of living things on earth, humans, who enjoy the prosperity brought about by technology, are successful species. However, it is hard to say the uncontrollable increase in population makes them happy. The prosperity of the human species has not led to the holistic well-being of the population, as seen in the case of livestock and pets. Considering that there is no absolute criteria for happiness, one can be happy by being ignorant. Taking account of the fact that our prosperity is harming the environment in which we live, we have to learn that increasing the number of people doesn’t bring about the real well-being of humanity.

　Assuming that materialistic abundance is the criterion of our wellness, those who enjoy the prerogative are nations with a relatively small population or those who are successful under the system of capitalism. Both of them are at the top of a hierarchical society. Feudal society has survived in a different form since Medieval times, and the ideal of Democracy which advocates egalitarianism is far from realized. The conflict between capitalists and proletariats, or between haves and not-haves, which represents capitalism, was pointed out by Karl Marx in the 19th century. In the 20th century, socialism and communism Marx himself advocated gained momentum, which allowed capitalism to survive as the other social system that contended against communism. The world seemed to be balanced between the two ideologies. The collapse of the Soviet Union and other communist countries was seen as the victory of capitalism, which has gone out of control throwing off the yoke of democracy. Considering their theory and practice, in the first place, it should have been easy to predict that democracy and capitalism cannot go in harmony with each other as a social system.

　It can also be explained easily that the development of capitalism is the main factor in the population explosion. Capitalism, which encourages companies to mass-produce goods using labor force, spreads seeking for larger markets. In the modern world, where all the geographical frontiers have been lost, an alternative to creating a new market is to increase the population. From a different perspective, it seems that human beings are increasing their number according to the spread of capitalism just as domestic animals increase their number for the convenience of humans. Thanks to the benefit of mass-production brought about by capitalism, humans can enjoy affluent lifestyles. In other words, humans are fed in the system of capitalism. The medical development, abundant supply of food, and the improvement of living environments are all traded off against our happiness in its true meaning, aren’t they? We need to carefully watch the proceedings of capitalism.

　In ‘Homo Deus,’ Yuval Noah Harari goes on to say that pleasure can artificially be created by the physical stimulation of the brain. An experiment shows a mouse, whose brain is connected to a power source with the electrodes which conducts electricity when it steps on a pedal, can feel pleasure at will with chemicals like dopamine and serotonin secreted in its brain. The mouse will keep stepping on the pedal until it dies in disregard of the food put in front of it. The indication that pleasure can artificially be created suggests that addiction to alcohol, drugs, gambles, games, and smartphones can be seen as a measure to induce chemicals that give you pleasure. Then, burying electrodes in your brain can be a reasonable way to get pleasure without damaging your body or spoiling your social life. Today, omnipotent science is trying to make humans immortal. Human beings might be able to overcome death to which they have been doomed. Whether by making their bodies immortal with biotechnology, by making themselves cyborgs, or mechanizing themselves, humans trying to overcome death seem to compare themselves to gods.

　This detestable idea, however, does not go with human nature. Science seems to have transcended god that has become a relic from the past, but can it bring about true happiness to human society? In its true meaning, happiness is one thing, and artificially induced pleasure is another. There is no royal road to happiness. Why did Jesus teach egalitarianism? Why did Buddha take a long way to reach realization? We live in the modern world where science seems to make everything possible, but we need to reflect on the meaning of their feats. Religious beliefs cannot be discarded without consideration.

　The sound of the bell from Jetavana Monastery tells that all things must pass and all worldly things are impermanent. The changing color of sal flowers represents the law that all that’s fair must fade. The prosperous are doomed to decline as if they are dreaming one spring night. Arrogant people will perish at length like dust blown by the wind.

(the beginning passage from the Japanese classic, Tales of Heike)

　Since ancient times, history has seen people prosper and decline. None of these declines has led to the human species’ total extinction because the prosperous civilizations or cultures were all local and didn’t have such impacts on earth's environment as to destroy the ecology. However, with modern civilization making great impacts on the whole world, human beings are now on the way to extinction involving many other species. Now, the modern civilization, on the verge of total collapse, is trying to get the ecology back to normal condition with technological innovation and social reformation stopping the environmental destruction. In my work, “the outcome of capitalism,” I wrote that if a capitalistic society continues to spread, humans will need the technological innovation that allows them to extend their habitat to outer space. Modern capitalists, such as Aeron Mask, have taken up a business in space, making plans for humans to go out of the earth. However, as long as their business is based on capitalism, they will have to depend on natural resources on earth. It will take hundreds of thousands of years for our civilization to become able to use extraterrestrial resources. It seems implausible that the earth will allow human civilization to grow until then.

　In my opinion, humans can't leave the earth to cultivate space. Were humans to build a huge space station like the one depicted in the Japanese anime “Gundam,” the facility could not be maintained due to various problems related to human society such as terrorism or wars. If we could realize the social reform to overcome them, we should do it right now on the earth.

　Then, we humans have no alternative but to search for a way to survive controlling the use of limited natural resources and keeping the inhabitable environment. The key to this goal is the word “circulation.”

　Market economy arises where people trade goods and humans have been spreading the market by enlarging the scope of commerce, consequently creating capitalism. The goal of capitalism is to increase capital, which can be realized by spreading the market. However, if products that are made in a certain closed society can be distributed across the society fulfilling people’s needs, the economic activity can be completed within the society. There used to be such a circulatory market economy anywhere in the world. Once people started to spread it outward, there arose exploitation of others which promoted the inequality between people. Still, it was possible when there was room for the economy to spread, but, today, a new frontier can no longer be found on the earth. As described before, the spread of market promotes the population growth. Now that the environment of the earth cannot afford it, there are few choices left for humans. One of the ways for humans to survive with limited resources is to establish a circulatory market economy on a global scale, which must be achieved on condition that the earthly environment is kept for humans and other species to survive.

　Once the world population reaches its maximum, it will decrease in the course of natural cleansing. We can predict in what way it will happen because humans have had the same experiences throughout their history. Excessive growth of population has been controlled by way of pandemics or wars represented by pests, small poxes, or two world wars. In terms of population adjustment, these events were not caused by human will, but by natural function. The problem is the disasters, which have occurred locally in certain regions of the world so far, are expected to occur on a global scale in the future. COVID19, which started in 2019, might be just the sign of a more serious pandemic. If the earthly natural cleansing were to work drastically, pandemics incomparable to COVID19 might take place. Humankind, who have acquired weapons of mass destruction, might do it on their own. Before such disastrous events happen, we have to give up depending on capitalism to solve the problem of population growth.

　We have to renounce the wrong idea that the pursuit of capitalism will bring happiness to humans. Not all people around the world can attain the standard of living that those in advanced countries enjoy. For capitalism is based on the exploitation of others. As long as human activities are under the system of capitalism, there remain haves and not-haves, and winners and losers. With capitalism, egalitarianism cannot be attained. Also, we have to realize that materialistic affluence, such as usefulness and comfort, does not make humans happy. Human greed knows no limits and it will never be fulfilled. The more greed you fulfill, the more you starve. Buddha preached the middle way so that we can learn to be fulfilled. Jesus left the words, “Enter through a narrow gate,” which includes the same wisdom as Buddha’s. We must not fail to see that the goal of capitalism is to increase wealth and does not aim to realize human happiness. The way to happiness can be found somewhere else. We have to discern the right direction that will lead to the continuation of humankind and the environment of the earth.

　SDGs = Sustainable Development Goals

　If this means for human society to economically keep developing, considering the ever-increasing population at the same time, the notion itself is contradictory. For sustainability and development are conflicting ideas, so as long as we stand on this premise, it is impossible to achieve these two goals at the same time.

“When you try to solve a fundamental problem of the universe just with pure reason, you will get into antinomy.”

　Kant once pointed out as if he had predicted the present human impasse.

　What we should do at this moment is not to aim at further development, but to deter the increase of population and turn it into a decrease. It has already been described that the cause of the population increase lies in capitalism. Then, what is the matter with capitalism?

　Population explosion occurs in developing countries. Japan, which achieved remarkable economic development in the 20th century, is not the exception. Japan seemed to have joined other advanced countries, but it is now facing a low birth rate and aging society. Considering that there is little room for Japan to further develop, it is evident that development inspired by population increase cannot lead to a nation’s success. Being the second-largest economic giant, Japan could not achieve the same level of GDP per capita as other developed countries. Now, in the twenty-first century, though it still holds a world-leading economy, how much longer can we call Japan a developed country, where the problem of poverty is being materialized. Isn’t it only the Japanese who don’t realize Japan is losing importance in the international society?

　China, which has been rapidly developing boosted by its enormous population, will face the same problem before long. In that country, which has had a social gap since the beginning of its development, very few people have benefited from its development. The U.S., being the greatest economic giant in the world, has far more serious problems of poverty.

　Even though economic development causes the social gap, people are still engaged in competition, wishing to be successful. Unless we stop this vicious spiral, human beings will continue to seek infeasible happiness until they become extinct. It looks as if they were rats that keep stepping on the pedal.

　Population explosion always takes place in developing countries, because people cannot have visions for their future. However, visions for the future or life planning are the fantasy of capitalist society and the prerogatives of those successful. As long as we aim at such fantasy, the social gap cannot be eliminated. What should be realized is not such a society, but one where people’s needs are met and that is stable even if its economic value is low. It is high time we discarded the idea that development brings about happiness and shifted to the new ideology that circulation will lead to the welfare of the whole society.

　Then, how can we shift from the economy based on development to the one based on circulation?

　The key to deciphering the idea of “SDGs” is the word “development”, which reminds us of capitalism. Whether intentionally or not, we use this word on the premise that we are under capitalism. To promote ideological change, we must change our attitude toward capitalism, which has taken root in modern society. Though we take capitalism for granted, it is not the best system for human beings or the entire globe. If an ideology can change society, the reformation of our mindset that connects capitalism with development could be the motivation for society to change. We might be able to find the way to which we should direct ourselves when we stop seeing development in terms of economy and regard it as a measure to realize circulatory society.

　We first have to solve the energy problems to connect technological innovation with circulatory society without trouble. There is no doubt a rapidly spreading dependence on fossil fuels like coal, oil, and natural gas since the Industrial Revolution has caused current global warming and environmental pollution. Much of fossil fuel is used to generate electricity, which can also be produced by other methods. In the first place, electricity can be used as a dynamic power source, which saves us the trouble of using a combustion engine. At present, cars are rapidly being electrified in the car industry. Needless to say, the technology to make electronic cars has already been established. The problem is how we should cope with the increasing demands for electricity. As the goal is to stop depending on fossil fuel, it is like putting the cart before the horse to burn fossil fuel to gain electricity. Thus, thermal power generation must be ruled out. Nuclear power generation has been expected to be a potential substitute for thermal power generation, but it is unfriendly to the environment in different ways, and, besides, economically inefficient, so it cannot be applied to a circulatory society. Then, it is renewable energy that is expected to replace nuclear power. At present, the amount of electricity gained from renewable energy is too little to meet the needs of entire humanity. It is possible, however, to increase the dependence on renewable energy by technological innovation. Here, we humans are required to change our way of thinking.

　If we are short of energy, we have only to stop using it. Comfort and convenience brought by mass consumption of energy, in which we indulge ourselves, has nothing to do with human happiness. Then, we are to accept the inconvenience of occasional blackouts or the restrictions on the use of electricity. Several decades ago, we took such situations for granted, and, two hundred years ago, humanity didn’t even know the convenience brought by electricity. It was not until recently that humans became able to make use of electricity. In the modern world, however, we cannot go without electricity. Even if we cannot go back to life without electricity, it is high time we thought about saving power in the whole society.

　Technological innovation, however, might overcome our dilemma.

　Before talking about renewable energy, I have to say something about nuclear energy.

　After the accident in Fukushima in 2011, all the nuclear power plants in Japan stopped their operation. In Germany, seeing the disaster, they immediately decided to stop using nuclear energy and remove all the domestic nuclear power plants. Though some criticize that Germany receives power supply from France, which is promoting nuclear power generation, it was a critical decision over energy issues. In Japan, on the other hand, ten years have passed since the accident and nuclear power plants are in operation in some places.

“Once on shore, we pray no more.”

　What the hell are the politicians in this country thinking about? Besides bringing disaster in Fukushima, which retains Japan’s traditional beauty and robbing the local people of their homes, they are still trying to use nuclear energy. Their excuse is that for Japan, which is poor in natural resources, nuclear energy is a cheaper way of power generation. They rarely mention how much national budget has been spent on the settlement of the accident. They go on to say that if the national budget cannot be spared, Tokyo Electric Power Company must take responsibility instead. However, the cost of reparation will be added to electricity charges. The general public will be burdened with the liability, eventually. Is nuclear power still a reasonable way of power generation?

　Another claim of advocates of nuclear energy is that it is clean energy that does not emit carbon dioxide. On the contrary, it is evident that once it causes an accident, the national land will be devastated. Moreover, nuclear power plants can be targets for terrorist attacks. A stretch of missile attacks on nuclear power plants across Japan will destroy the country. Nuclear warheads are not necessary to terminate Japan. The nuclear mafia in the U.S. will not worry about the devastation of Japanese lands. Now is not the time for politicians to seek concessions.

　Another flaw in the claim that nuclear energy is clean is the problem of nuclear waste. How to dispose of nuclear wastes has not been established, so we have no alternative but to store them in tentative storage. There is nuclear waste storage in Rokkasho-mura village, Aomori, Japan, which is a tentative measure until the final disposal method is invented. On Olkiluoto Island, Finland, a repository for the final disposal of nuclear wastes called Onkalo is now under construction. Japan, a volcanic island country, however, has no place that has stable bedrock solid enough to endure earthquakes. Some suggest that Japan should ask Mongolia to take nuclear wastes, but is it ethically possible to dump the domestic wastes in other countries? Given Japan’s position in the international society, a country with such deeds will not gain trust or respect from other countries.

　Advocates of nuclear power, who prioritize economic activities, seem to avoid looking at the misery of the accident and the issue involving nuclear wastes. They seem to intentionally keep their eyes off the inconvenient reality and expect the general public to act as they do. Electric power companies propagating the idea that nuclear energy is safe and clean are trying to misdirect public opinion. That is why they spare a large amount of budget to sponsor media although they are granted monopoly as public utilities. Before the accident in Fukushima, there had been voices warning about the danger of nuclear power plants. Accidents had happened in Three Mile Island, the U.S., and in Chernobyl, Ukraine (then the Soviet Union). How seriously have Japanese media reported such voices or the misery of nuclear accidents to the general public? Even if they don’t report false information, they can control information by not reporting it. After all, the credibility and importance of information are left to receivers’ judgment. But, as a way of the media report, it is unfair to appeal to the public on the safety of nuclear power plants on one hand and restrict the voices from the opposite side on the other.

　In the first place, why are the government and power companies so eager to restart nuclear plants? Their wastefulness is clear to many people’s eyes. If they have a fraction of reason, they should notice their claim’s illogicality. It is because huge capital has been invested in the nuclear industry and nuclear power plants work as an infrastructure for power supply that they dare keep their eyes off from the issues. In terms of cost-effectiveness, nuclear power plants are expected to earn a lot more money than ever. The longer the business lasts, the more money they can make. They will continue to invest money in the nuclear industry to recover their loss. The nation’s big business is being run based on the gambler’s mindset. There is no turning back for them. They just believe so as gamblers do, but it is possible to get out of this dilemma if they can have different perspectives.

　Necessity is the mother of invention.

　As the proverb goes, technological innovations have met human needs, apart from the argument over which one precedes the other. As environmental problems have become more and more serious, humanity is now at a crossroads in history. Geologically, the Earth has got into the era called Anthropocene, which means the time of humanity. Human beings, the very cause of the time, are on the verge of surviving or disappearing. It is possible to make technological innovation for human survival. The problem is whether or not we can make ideological change happen. The key to the change is the way we use energy. For example, power companies can divert the budget for the advertisement to the development and production of solar panels.

　A few years ago, the power company in the Kyushu area refused to receive the power supply from the mega-solar business on the ground of oversupply of power. This incident implies that, at a certain time of the day, solar power generation can meet all the demands of a local area. If they expanded the power supply network, the problem of oversupply could be solved. Besides, with power storage facilities, surplus power stored by day can be used at night or in bad weather when sunlight is not available. By promoting investment in this field, we will not have to depend on nuclear energy. Necessary innovation has already arisen. Now we have to think about how we make use of it. Seeing from different perspectives, we can stop depending on nuclear energy. Even if nuclear power plants are removed, our economic activity will not get stagnant. Even if the way of power generation changes, electricity demand will not reduce. Power companies that control a huge power grid will not suffer any damage.

　There are many environment-friendly ways of power generation other than solar power generation which is the most potential next-generation energy to realize SDGs.

　Wind Power

　Large ones can be built in the mountain, desert, or ocean areas that are uninhabitable for humans. Small ones can be installed on rooftops of buildings and in yards in residential areas. A start-up company named “Zephyr” is developing efficient small wind power generators.

　Geothermal Power

　A stable power supply can be expected of geothermal power generation that uses the heat of underground magma. In Japan, which consists of volcanic islands, it is a potential next-generation power supply. In Iceland, which is also a volcanic island, the geothermal power supply meets thirty percent of the total demand. At present, research and development on thermal power generation using supercritical water is underway, which is expected to generate as much power as nuclear power generation if it is put into use.

　Oceanic Current Power

　Generates power by revolving a turbine floating above the seabed like an underwater kite. A stable power supply can be expected as it uses ocean currents evenly flowing in the same direction.

　Tidal Power

　Using ebb and flow of the tide

　Wave Power

　Using wave

　Hydraulic Power Generation

　It is The main source of power supply in the countries like Switzerland and Iceland where glaciers are melting. In Japan, rich in precipitation, hydraulic power generation takes up 7.8 percent of the total power supply.

　Moreover, there is a unique idea that electricity generated by solar panels arranged in space is sent to the earth in the form of electromagnetic waves.

　Wind turbines can be put in places where wind constantly blows, solar panels in places rich in sunlight, water mills in places rich in water, geothermal power plants in volcanic areas, tidal power plants along the seaside, and so on. Thus, by choosing the most relevant method which suits the local condition, we can realize a society where renewable energy meets all the power demands. In Iceland, hydraulic power generation takes up 70 percent of the total power supply and geothermal 30 percent. From this perspective, Japan, which has been said to be poor in natural resources, can be considered a rich country. What matters is how you see things.

　Along with the use of renewable energy, it is necessary to develop the technology of storage. At present, it is common to supply power from a mega-power station to local areas via a large-scale power grid, which was realized by adopting alternating current instead of wasteful direct current. This is Nicola Tesla’s idea, which is an excellent method to evenly supply power in a large area with a power grid. Meanwhile, renewable energy is disadvantageous in a stable power supply, so it has to make up for its defect by storing electricity. What is unique about renewable energy is that it locally generates power in a way suitable for the place. Considering this, it is efficient to store the electricity in the area where it has been produced. It is inefficient, for example, to send the electricity produced in a local area to a big power station far away. It would rather be reasonable to build facilities for storage from place to place, locally consuming the generated power and storing the surplus.

　For storage, as well as for power generation, various methods are suggested.

　Battery

　Lithium-ion batteries and magnesium ion batteries are promising in this field. At the moment, lithium-ion batteries are mainly used for electric cars and secondary power sources, while magnesium ion batteries are advantageous in that the earth is rich in magnesium, which reduces the cost of production, magnesium is easy to handle as it has a lower risk of explosion or ignition, and it has larger storing capacity against volume.

　Fuel Cell

　Generates electricity using hydrogen and oxygen in the air, discharging only water. Fuel cells are power generators, but they can be used as storage when we use redundant power to extract hydrogen by electrically decomposing water.

　Flywheel

　Store energy by spinning a huge top with redundant power. To put it another way, electric power is changed into kinetic energy.

　These power storage systems can be used as secondary power sources, which enable us to take measures against sudden blackouts by putting them in houses or in local areas. In places like hospitals and factories, which require power 24/7, large storage systems must be put. The government should provide support for the investment in such equipment. It doesn’t necessarily have to be direct support like government subsidy. A corporate tax reduction would do. Large companies benefiting from tax reduction are required to bear some burdens. The government can also help the general public with subsidies or tax reductions, promoting the installation of solar panels and fuel cells.

　Humans are capable of making necessary technological innovations without depending on fossil fuels or nuclear energy. It is the ideology that lags behind. The Reformation Martin Luther started in the 16th century was a fierce denunciation against the corrupt Roman Catholic Church. He translated the Holy Bible written in Latin into German so that the German public could read it. People became able to directly read God’s words, of which they could make their interpretation. They no longer had to learn the dogma distorted by the Church. In medieval Europe, when belief in God practically mattered, this must have been real enlightenment. In other words, the translation from Latin to German marked a historical turning point, which promoted ideological change and encouraged people to convert from Catholic to Protestant. People will get stuck in old conventions and practices whatever time they live in. That time, however, Martin Luther triggered the Reformation. High priests of the Catholic Church who indulged themselves in the prerogative and huge wealth can be compared to present-day politicians. Converted protestants must have protested against this situation.

　This is not a criticism against the Catholic Church but one against people who line their own pockets taking advantage of social conventions and practices. I am posing a question that the world at present might also be controlled by some people who intentionally shape public opinions for their convenience. The Reformation led by Luther must have had a great impact on the contemporaries. The present-day humans, who face the crisis of their existence, will need as great a change in ideology as in medieval Europe. There are no right answers to religious matters, but, if we make a wrong choice in ecological matters, human extinction might come much earlier than expected.

　Even if the ideological change is an imminent issue for us humans, capitalism does not seem to give way to other ideologies. The idea of SDGs holds a dilemma because we try to maintain the global environment and, at the same time, get along with capitalism. You will see how troublesome capitalism, which appeared with the development of the market economy, is when you look at the car industry that represents capitalism.

　We humans can no longer go without cars, which is too useful to give up. Carmakers will continue to produce cars as long as there is demand. Now that the impact of human activities has become manifest, carmakers have to reach two contradictory goals, “sustainability” and “development.” They squeezed a compromise of electrifying cars. Countries around the world have set goals on electrifying cars for 2030 or after. According to this trend, many carmakers have started to produce EVs, but Toyota, the biggest carmaker in the world and a leading company in the Japanese industry, is negative. Toyota explains the reason as follows.

　1. Electrifying is turning cars not just into electric vehicles but also into hybrid vehicles or fuel-cell vehicles. To be sure, EVs move only with electricity, but, in terms of carbon-neutral, hybrid vehicles are more eco-friendly as Japan depends a lot on thermal power plants, which means it emits a great amount of carbon dioxide to produce electricity.

　2. The performance of the batteries, essential parts of a car, has not reached the desirable level, so, in terms of cruising range and charging time, some issues remain to be solved about EVs. At the moment, to achieve as high quality as normal cars or hybrid cars, EVs have to carry loads of batteries, which makes them expensive.

　Objections to 1

　Even hybrid cars need gasoline or light oil as they move with combustion engines. Taking account of the loss of electricity, thermal power generation is much more efficient than hybrid cars, each of which carries a combustion engine.

　Some claim that they can reach carbon neutral by using biofuels, but bio-diesel engines emit not only carbon dioxide but also other greenhouse gases and pollutants. Therefore, they are not clean energy sources in a real sense.

　PHEVs (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles) are to be sold after 2030 in many countries though they carry combustion engines. However, PHEVs are the same as EVs in that they charge electricity produced in power plants. Toyota’s claim that using electricity generated in thermal power plants is less efficient than using hybrid cars involves antimony in this respect. In the first place, a reduction in the dependence on fossil fuel is happening not only in the car industry but in power production. It is wrong to think that Japan will continue to depend on thermal power generation.

　Fuel cell vehicles are never to replace conventional cars due to limited deposits of platinum that is used as a catalyst in batteries. Besides, hydrogen that fuels them must be taken out by electrolyzing water, which innately involves energy loss.

　Objection to 2

　Lithium-ion batteries are getting cheaper.

　Once magnesium ion batteries, materials of which are rich in nature, are put into use, the electrification of cars will accelerate.

　If they are concerned about carbon-neutral, Toyota should consider producing power themselves as well as their main business. As a world-leading car company, they should take the initiative in introducing renewable energy.

　In terms of commerce, the electrification of cars is a global trend. The market of EVs is growing while Toyota is holding back. The later Toyota joins the market, the smaller its market share will be. Conversely, it is easy to predict how much share it can get if it joins the market right now. If it misses this trend, the Japanese car industry might be isolated from those overseas, following the electronics industry. Before long, Toyota might be falling off from the top of the industry.

　It is no exaggeration to say that hybrid vehicles created by state-of-the-art technology are the crystallization of car production for over 100 years. Toyota that clings to its past glory overlaps power companies that clings to nuclear power generation. It is easy for start-up companies to join the market of EVs whose mechanism as industrial products is much simpler than conventional cars. Tesla, which joined the car industry as a specialized maker of EVs, has grown to become as big as Toyota in aggregate market value within ten several years since its launch. How does Toyota, which went into partnership with Tesla at its launch and dismissed it later, see its growth?

　It seems difficult even for Toyota, which leads the Japanese economy, to make the right decisions. Thus, changing ideology is not an easy issue.

　-Notes-

　On the 14th of December, 2021, Toyota announced that it will change its policy on EV business in the future. It will increase the target sales of EVs in 2030 to 3.5 million. Given that the target announced last spring was 2 million including fuel-cell vehicles and PHEVs, Toyota, as a world-leading company, has changed its future course for electrifying cars. It is to invest huge capital in the research and development of batteries. Whether on purpose or not, however, Toyota has revealed its indecisiveness. I hope it will turn out a wise decision while we have a long way to go for the settlement of energy problems though it took Toyota too much time to make up their mind. I wonder if they are ready to take the initiative as a leading company in the car industry and if they are planning the future with unwavering confidence.

　Toyota sells more than ten million cars per year at the moment. Provided they retain the status quo, EVs are to take up thirty-five percent of their total sales in 2030. Considering other countries’ carbon dioxide reduction targets and the trend of the car industry, their targeted number seems too small. Perhaps, Toyota will revise the target upward.

　How will the ideological change in society happen?

　The main factor of the Reformation in medieval Europe was the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church. Martin Luther, a German theologian, challenged the Church in “the ninety-five theses” on the blasphemous practices such as cleric hierarchy related to prerogatives, trading of cleric positions, and selling of indulgence.

“Humans will be saved only by their belief in God.”

　Evangelicalism advocated by Luther must have represented contemporary people’s true feelings. The word “protestant” was born from their protest against the Roman Catholic Church. Their attitudes to follow the teachings of the Bible were reflected in their solemn and serious lifestyles, developing the society where people’s efforts are rewarded. It must have something to do with the fact that countries in northern Europe and in North America have been more successful and wealthier than those that have held beliefs in Catholicism or Orthodoxy.

　On the other hand, however, it is also true that the rationality that criticized the controversial Catholic practices and reminded themselves to live up to the original dogma allowed the rise of capitalism. Germany produced some great thinkers such as Kant and Marx besides Luther, but we must not forget that it also produced the tragedy of the Nazis. In modern America, some people explicitly declare for white supremacy. Their ideology is relevant to Nazism that affirmed persecution of Jews. It is no wonder that not a few modern evangelists support this idea, considering that their principle originated in evangelism Luther advocated. It is an irony of history that the lofty ideology that once overcame injustice under the name of the Reformation has been distorted over time.

　In Japan, as well, we seem to have forgotten something important indulged in materialism.

　Acceptance of transience and imperfection, Japanese spirit, compassion for the weak, humility…

　Such flowery words just fuel nationalism. Capitalism in the forms of globalism and neo-liberalism has become rampant, which economically polarizes society. People are divided into “haves” and “not-haves.” Devastated people’s minds cause social unrest in the air. Religion, which in itself should be the heart and soul of people, has been reduced to mere façade with shrines, temples, and churches seeking concessions.

　Something is wrong.

　Everybody feels so, but nobody knows what to do. The impasse in the modern world reminds us of that in medieval Europe when Luther started the Reformation. Now is the time for social reformation.

　First, we have to solve the energy problems. By saving and efficiently using natural resources, we have to realize a sustainable society. We must accept some inconveniences to attain this goal. Economic development might slow down, blackouts happen from time to time, cruising range of automobiles might become shorter, or we might not be able to wear clothes in fashion, which are much better than the total extinction of humanity. The convenience of life will not make people happy. If we want happiness in a real sense, we have to change our mindset first.

　I don’t mean we should get back to the lifestyles of one hundred years ago, but that we have to get away from capitalism whose priority is economic development and increase of capital. Our psychology and our way of thinking are undermined by capitalistic ideology without our perception. We are made to believe that pursuit of wealth and to fulfill our physical demands will make us happy. However, such practices enrich only a handful of people and, besides, there is no guarantee that rich people become happy. To dismantle the illusion that material affluence leads to human happiness and to make every one of us happy, what should we do? Humanity’s future hinges solely on whether or not we can find the answer to this question.

　To overcome various challenges we are facing now including energy problems, the direction in which we should go has already been shown. We are now in transition to a sustainable society. Change of ideology is necessary lest this movement end in failure. Many people have started to notice that seriously addressing unsolved problems such as environmental problems, food shortages, and improvement of agriculture and fishery will lead to holistic welfare of humanity. It is to keep the fire alive that will advance the modern civilization to the next phase and that will let Anthropocene last long.

　-Postscript-

　While I was writing this article, I read “Sapiens” and “Homo Deus,” the world best-sellers written by Yuval Noah Harari. As I quoted some ideas from them in this article, I would like to describe my interpretation of his arguments.

　First, how have human beings become the dominant species on earth?

　Until only some twenty or thirty thousand years ago, there had been several humanlike species other than Homo sapiens. The Neanderthal was among them and they had larger brains and stronger bodies than Homo sapiens. Nevertheless, they were driven away by Homo sapiens in the conflicts between different species. Although there seems to have been crossbreeding, Homo sapiens managed to survive the conflicts and become successful thanks to, they say, their communication skills. However, not only Homo sapiens but also some other species with some intelligence have communication skills. Human subspecies, naturally, must have had a good command of language. How different were Homo sapiens and other subspecies in terms of communication skills?

　Chimpanzees, often taken as a closely related species to humans, form as sophisticated a society as humans, building up intimate relationships with each other. Each individual is said to be able to have close relationships with around one hundred others. No matter how good humans’ communication skills are, the number of friends a person can make is not so different from that that a chimpanzee can. Thus, it is inconceivable that this ability alone allowed humans to get the better of other species. A factor added, however, we can see human superiority. Harari explains it by the word “intersubjectivity.” Intersubjectivity provides links between individuals that don’t have close relationships with each other. While subjectivity is individual experiences and views, intersubjectivity is collective ones. It is different from objectivity, though. Objectivity doesn’t stand without a certain viewpoint as it could be anybody’s view. For example, in the modern world, it is an objective fact that the earth is round while, in medieval Europe, where it is believed that the earth was flat, there is no objectivity in the modern view of the world. It was not until the rise of modern science that people accepted this fact. In other words, an objective fact is not necessarily a fact. It is God that only has absolute objectivity.

　Harari describes intersubjectivity as a circumstance under which multiple people believe in a certain thing that is not an objective fact but an illusion that doesn’t exist such as money, nations, and gods. People recognize these ideas as real and to share the same recognition with others connects total strangers. If human society were built up only by close relationships between individuals, humans could not have gotten the better of other species. By acquiring “intersubjectivity,” however, they were able to build up huge groups of people in which total strangers were connected. It’s no wonder that other species without this power were driven out by humans.

　At the time of hunter-gathers, intersubjectivity caused animism, which was elevated to religions with the appearance of agricultural society. The settlement brought by agriculture gave birth to the concept of a nation that was ruled under a hierarchical system. In those days, it was not humans but gods that dominated a nation. The awareness of science encouraged by the development of civilization, however, conflicted with religions in ideology, which impeded its progress for a long time. With Copernicus’s “heliocentric theory,” and Darwin’s “theory of evolution,” prevailing, at last, religion succumbed to science. In the twenty-first century, the time of omnipotent science, humans have ceased to believe in God and are trying to become gods on earth themselves.

　- Cognitive Revolution

　- Agricultural Revolution” → invention of letters and money (about 5,000 years ago)

　- Industrial Revolution

　Having gone through three epoch-making events in history, humans are now facing another challenge called “the Information Revolution.” From the end of the 20th century to the beginning of the 21st century, the performance of the computer has dramatically improved and its data processing speed is much faster than before. As a result, genomes of all creatures including humans are being deciphered. It is said that, thanks to genetic engineering, humans may get eternal lives before long. The time has come when it sounds real that humans become gods. Now that gods have disappeared, humans are trying to find their raison d’etre in becoming gods themselves. Released from gods’ restraints, humans can act not according to somebody else’s will but according to their own, which has made it possible for them to construct the world at their disposal.

　This is, so-called, “Humanism.”

　Humanism does not necessarily consider egalitarianism or philanthropy. Humanism fueled with technology will evolve some humans into more intelligent beings and people left behind will be reduced to being subject to their superiors. When we look back at the history or look at the present world, it is evident that not all can benefit from progress. In time, AI’s cognitive abilities will surpass humans’ and humans will be driven out by technology that they themselves have created. This is the end of the Anthropocene Harari predicts.

　On the other hand, however, he mentions some phenomena that occurred in the process of evolution and that might show us alternatives for our future.

　They are “consciousness” and “subjectivity.”

　Some higher forms of life including humans have consciousness. If its occurrence is the consequence of evolution, AI might have it as well in the future. But, if the purpose of life is to pass its genes down to the next generations, each individual can maintain their life activities only by reacting to outer stimuli. In maintaining life, consciousness is not only unnecessary but also sometimes works against its purpose. Consciousness might be a by-product that occurred accidentally in the process of evolution and actually be of no use. Why and how consciousness occurred is still an unsolved mystery and it stands as a barrier between AI and living things including humans.

　Harari’s explanation is elaborate and convincing. Following his logic makes you feel as if you can figure out every single mystery of the universe by logical thinking. But any thought is oriented to a certain direction, and the logic develops accordingly. That is to say, thought is more or less biased. Therefore, the future he talks about is just a possibility no matter how plausible it sounds. You must not forget about that when you listen to somebody’s argument. If you could reach the truth by cultivating your thought, the world would be full of sages. Amplifying this idea, we could say that if the cognitive ability of AI surpassed that of humans, it could figure out the universal truth. Probably, however, the way leading to the truth will not be opened by thinking. It was not by cultivating thought that Buddha achieved enlightenment and that Jesus knew God’s will. That’s why humans cannot become gods. It is arrogant of humans to think that they can become gods by polishing their cognitive abilities. The fable of the Tower of Babel was a warning against human arrogance. The ancient wisdom has long since penetrated human nature. Nevertheless, humans have been making the same mistakes again and again, which proves that the progress and development of civilization have not upgraded them to higher beings. The way to the truth must be found somewhere else and all we can do is just believe it.