123 Opinions on Chiba Prefecture Offshore CCS Test Drilling, Almost All Express Concerns or Opposition - Revealed Through Information Disclosure

The coast near Kujukuri where test drilling is planned.

When FoE Japan requested information disclosure regarding the public comment period conducted by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) for the permit of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) test drilling off the coast of Kujukuri, Chiba Prefecture, it was revealed that almost all of the 123 submitted opinions expressed concerns about the test drilling or the project, or were opposed to the test drilling itself. On the other hand, not a single opinion in favor of or welcoming the test drilling was confirmed.

METI determined that there would be "no public hindrance" and granted the permit for test drilling on April 15, 2026. Furthermore, in their "Summary and Rationale of Submitted Opinions," they summarized that they had received "6 opinions regarding test drilling," revealing that most opinions were not appropriately handled and that METI had unfairly narrowed the scope of "stakeholders" eligible to submit opinions.

FoE Japan believes that these results indicate that the concerns of residents and stakeholders have not been sufficiently reflected, and that the commencement of test drilling should be reconsidered.

The main points confirmed through information disclosure are as follows:

Number of submissions: 123 (Note: 125 opinions (documents and emails) were disclosed, but 2 were excluded because the content of the opinion was blank).

Almost all opinions expressed concerns or opposition to CCS test drilling or the project.

No opinions in favor, welcoming, or positive were confirmed.

At least 33 opinions clearly stated residency in Sōsa City, Yokoshiba Hikari Town, Sanmu City, or Kujukuri Town, which directly face the test drilling area. Including those who stated residency, employment, or use of services in coastal areas, a total of 60 were confirmed. Since the addresses of the opinion submitters were not disclosed, the number of residents may be even higher.

There were 0 opinions submitted regarding the test drilling permit in Tomakomai.

The submitted opinions particularly raised the following concerns and points:

Anxiety about safety, such as earthquakes and leaks.

Extremely insufficient information disclosure about the project and inadequate explanation/dialogue with local residents.

Impact on the environment and local industries.

Questions about the large amount of public funds invested and waste of taxpayer money.

Concerns for future generations.

Doubts about the necessity of CCS itself and its effectiveness as a climate change countermeasure.

Measures should be taken at the source of emissions.

As FoE Japan and local residents have pointed out, this test drilling is not merely a survey. Given that the applicant for the test drilling is "Shuto-ken CCS Co., Ltd.," it is clear that this test drilling is part of the Shuto-ken CCS project. Test drilling is an inseparable process that assumes the future implementation of the Shuto-ken CCS project, and it cannot be discussed separately from its validity.

"Information disclosure has revealed that almost all of the 123 submitted opinions were concerns or opposition. Despite this, the test drilling was permitted, which clearly demonstrates a lack of transparency. It can be said that resident opinions are not reflected in policy decisions at all. CCS is a project that can have long-term impacts on local communities and the marine environment. Proceeding with test drilling without sufficient information disclosure, dialogue with residents, and environmental impact assessments will leave significant future problems," commented Ayumi Fukakusa of FoE Japan.

Tomomi Shinada of "Kujukuri no Umi wo Mamoru Kai" (Save the Kujukuri Sea Association) commented, "As one of the people who submitted an opinion, I read the other comments with interest. I own a home on the immediate coast and was able to clearly state my interest from the perspective of the landscape, and I made statements specifically limited to 'test drilling,' so it seems I was included in the few opinions that were publicly released, numbering six. However, looking at the six, it seems opinions from people who frequently visit the sea were also included, and stakeholders were taken quite broadly. It is very strange that it is reported with such a small number despite this. Everyone who submitted an opinion specifically spoke about some relationship with the sea and is likely considered a stakeholder. Even opinions that mention 'test drilling' are not counted. The day the opinions were released was the same day the test drilling permit was issued. Was there perhaps a sense of guilt for issuing the permit by overriding a call for opinions that were clearly all against it? What was the purpose of soliciting opinions in the first place?" she commented.

Takako Momoi of the Climate Network stated, "Despite receiving as many as 123 opinions, METI only published 17 of them, with 106 opinions being excluded/ignored. Without clarification on why the majority of opinions were not published, one cannot help but suspect that inconvenient public voices are being intentionally obscured from policy decisions. Given that almost all of the submitted opinions were concerns or opposition, and no supporting opinions were confirmed, METI's decision to permit test drilling must be called a conclusion-driven process that does not reflect public voices in policy decisions. CCS risks becoming an excuse to preserve and prolong the use of fossil fuels, postponing emission reductions themselves. Although it is 'test drilling,' it is a very large-scale project, and it involves a significant amount of public funds from limited finances, making it a matter that concerns all citizens, and everyone can be a stakeholder. There are concerns that the test drilling will commence without sufficient explanation and opportunities for participation for citizens, transparency in the decision-making process, and responsibility to future generations, leading to a gradual shift to project commencement. METI should postpone the start of test drilling and reconsider the permit decision." she commented.

The plan is for test drilling to begin in July, and METI is urged to:

Postpone the start of test drilling.

Reconsider the permit decision based on the results of the public comment period.

Ensure sufficient information disclosure and resident participation regarding the overall CCS project.

Conduct a comprehensive impact assessment, including environmental impact assessments.

Above.

References:

FoE Japan "Submission of Opinions on Chiba Prefecture Offshore CCS Test Drilling" (February 2026) https://foejapan.org/issue/20260202/27857/

Climate Network "[Opinion Document] Opinions on the Public Notice Regarding the Permit for the Shuto-ken CCS Project Test Drilling in Chiba Prefecture Offshore" (February 3, 2026) https://kikonet.org/content/39242

Tokyo Bay Association for Thinking About Climate Change "Opinions on the Public Notice Regarding the Permit for the Shuto-ken CCS Project Test Drilling in Chiba Prefecture Offshore" https://nocoal-tokyobay.net/2026/02/04/ccs_shikutsu_iken/

FoE Japan, Tokyo Bay Association for Thinking About Climate Change, Kujukuri no Umi wo Mamoru Kai, Climate Network "Protest and Demand for Withdrawal of Chiba Prefecture Offshore CCS Test Drilling Permit" (April 2026) https://foejapan.org/issue/20260421/29297/

Kujukuri no Umi wo Mamoru Kai Website https://www.kujukuriseasideccs.net/