CODE IN TOKYO

The Shinkansen and Maglev Show How Convenient Human Logic Can Be

Recently, Japan has been debating which route the Hokuriku Shinkansen should take. Everyone seems to have an opinion: bring it through our area, or keep it away from us.

Watching the news made me think about how remarkably good people are at creating arguments that suit their own interests.

Japan currently has two major high-speed rail projects. For readers unfamiliar with Japanese rail terminology, the Shinkansen is Japan’s network of high-speed trains, commonly known in English as bullet trains.

One project is the extension of the Hokuriku Shinkansen to Osaka. This line serves the Hokuriku region along the Sea of Japan coast. The other is the Chuo Shinkansen maglev line, designed to connect Tokyo and Osaka at speeds of up to 500 kilometers per hour.

Comparing the reactions to these two projects offers an interesting glimpse into what different regions really want.

Kyoto and the Hokuriku Shinkansen

The route through Kyoto remains under debate.

Kyoto was Japan’s capital for more than a thousand years. It is home to countless temples and shrines, and its groundwater is essential to local industries such as sake brewing and tofu production. Concerns that tunnel construction could affect that groundwater are therefore understandable.

At the same time, Kyoto already has excellent access to the Tokaido Shinkansen. It is a short trip from both Tokyo and Osaka, and the city already receives more than enough tourists.

In Japan, local governments along a new Shinkansen route must also bear part of the construction cost. From Kyoto’s perspective, it would not be surprising to conclude that another expensive railway is unnecessary.

So far, the reasoning is perfectly coherent.

The Maglev Creates an Awkward Contrast

The situation feels different when the discussion turns to the maglev.

The Chuo Shinkansen was planned to connect Tokyo and Osaka in the shortest possible time. Its current route is expected to pass through Nara Prefecture rather than Kyoto Prefecture. Nara and Kyoto are neighboring prefectures in the Kansai region, but the choice between them matters greatly to each local government.

Yet Kyoto has long campaigned to bring the maglev through the city.

That raises a simple question. If tunneling for the Hokuriku Shinkansen could threaten Kyoto’s groundwater, would tunneling for the maglev not create similar concerns?

Of course, the construction methods and proposed routes are different. The environmental impact may genuinely differ as well. A simple comparison cannot settle the issue.

I looked into it because I was curious. Buddhist organizations in Kyoto and others have publicly opposed the Hokuriku Shinkansen route over groundwater concerns. Within the limits of my research, however, I could not find an equally strong public statement opposing efforts to bring the maglev to Kyoto.

Perhaps I missed something. Perhaps the maglev generated less debate simply because Kyoto was not included in the original route. I do not know the real reason.

Still, from the outside, the intensity of the argument appears to change depending on whether a project benefits the region.

That may be an uncharitable interpretation. But human beings are often like that.

A Railway Built for Speed Does Not Need to Be Fast

Another moment from the maglev route debate has stayed with me for more than a decade.

At the time, some people were advocating an obvious detour through Nagano Prefecture. One supporter said on television, “In the coming era, there will be no need to hurry so much.”

I could not help laughing.

The entire purpose of the maglev is to travel faster. Once you reject that objective, the discussion is effectively over.

The real argument was probably much simpler: Nagano wanted a station. A new station could attract companies, support tourism, and perhaps slow population decline. It is entirely understandable that a local government would pursue those benefits.

But presenting that interest as an argument that people no longer need to hurry makes so little logical sense that it sounds like a joke.

Infrastructure Reveals What Regions Really Want

Whenever I follow infrastructure news, I am reminded that railway planning is not merely a question of technology or engineering.

It is one of the best ways to observe what regions truly want.

Environmental protection, history, and culture all matter. But one consideration often seems even more powerful: will our region gain or lose?

In the end, many of the public arguments appear to be created afterward to justify the answer to that question.

Contact

I provide system development and technical consulting using AI, AWS, and Claude Code.

Contact form: https://holly-money-e94.notion.site/390ff30cf18c8086a676fe630d171873