The following is a letter I wrote that appeared in the Grand Forks Herald on February 22, 2012. The title it was given is, "Just ask Japan: Stay away from nuclear power".

YURIHONJO, Japan — I'm from Grand Forks, and right now I live in northern Japan, about 155 miles from the disaster last year at the Fukushima Power Plant. When the earthquake struck, the only things that happened to me were a few days without power, a few weeks without gasoline and a few months without some vegetables the grocery stores usually stock.

But some of my coworkers' friends and families — people who lived within 19 miles of the plant — saw their lives get shattered. They had to leave their homes, and while they may be able to return some years from now, there still is no official timetable for cleaning up the radiation or restoring evacuated communities.

The power company, TEPCO, said the earthquake and tsunami together caused the power plant to break down, and that nobody could have predicted it. But some scientists did predict it, and TEPCO's own experts had heard and ignored these concerns for years.

There also is evidence to suggest that the earthquake alone caused the damage, meaning the safety standards for the entire country could be lax, and all nuclear power plants in Japan may be at risk.

Nuclear power was thought to be cheap and safe, but reality has shown us the opposite is true. If you include the cleanup costs of Fukushima (largely paid for by the government through tax dollars, and now through a 15 percent TEPCO energy price hike), nuclear power in Japan now is more expensive than wind and thermal, and by current projections, solar will be cheaper within a decade.

There is now no place in Japan that would accept a new nuclear power plant. But despite this happening across the Pacific, recent Herald stories and editorials tout the benefits of nuclear power in the Red River Valley. Of course, as energy consumption rises and old power plants close, new power has to come from somewhere. But why are we discussing nuclear without first discussing wind and solar?

North Dakota has amazing potential for wind power, and the price of producing it is dropping.

Though the nuclear power industry is quick to claim how cheap nuclear power is, this is misleading, because the nuclear industry is good at pushing hidden costs back on taxpayers. According to 2010 Department of Energy estimates, the actual cost per kilowatt hour is higher for nuclear than for wind. Plus, when wind power plants fail, entire regions aren't destroyed.

Nuclear-power advocate Duane Sand says the valley is a safe location, but aren't there ways a nuclear power plant in North Dakota could fail? Earthquakes may be unlikely, but there are other dangers: operator error, mismanagement or any number of natural disasters.

Endorsing nuclear while ignoring wind is looking at the difficult and dangerous option while ignoring the sensible, proven and safe alternative.

Why would any region stake its livelihood on a power plant never breaking down, especially if it had a better option? We shouldn't, because we do.

Perkins teaches English with the JET or Japan Exchange and Teaching Program in Japan.

The following is a letter I wrote that appeared in the Grand Forks Herald on November 14, 2011. The title it was given is, "Occupy Wall Street touches a nerve".

YURIHONJO, Japan — Jan Raaen tells us that in the 1960s, rioters were radical and anti-capitalistic, and that the same is true of the Occupy Wall Street movement today ("Occupy Wall Streeters choose wrong target," Page A4, Oct. 29).

Raaen misconstrues what’s happening.

In any movement, there is a fringe. This is true of the tea party, the National Rifle Association and the Democratic and Republican parties, and Occupy Wall Street is no exception.

So, when Herald readers see a picture of a rally and someone holding a silly sign, they should not assume the sign reflects what everyone in the rally believes.

Furthermore, some 70 percent of Occupy Wall Street participants are politically independent, according to a recent study, so certainly opinions will vary.

Still, some general ideas are quite clear and universal, and there’s no reason we can’t recognize them.

The biggest message behind Occupy Wall Street is that corporate greed is damaging our country, and we need to do something to stop it. The evidence is clear: Today, the richest 100 Americans have more wealth than the poorest 150 million Americans combined.

Some media sources say Occupy Wall Street has no constructive agenda, but that’s false. Given that the super-rich are getting richer, Occupy Wall Street participants want to see some of that money — our money — back in the hands of hard-working Americans.

When the recession hit, Washington found money to bail out the banks that caused it but did little for the millions of Americans who can’t make mortgage payments. This must change.

The American Dream is that if we work hard and get lucky, we can land a decent job, maybe buy a nice house and raise our families in happiness. But as the rich get richer and everyone else falls behind, that dream will fade. To get it back, we need to make some changes.

Right now, Occupy Wall Street is trying to start this process. Right now, it’s a lot of Americans standing up, telling us that things aren’t all right and describing the kind of country they think America should be.

Douglas Perkins

The Asahi Shinbun published this article about the Fruit Tree Project and VolunteerAKITA on June 7th, 2011. It's only in Japanese, and can be found at http://mytown.asahi.com/areanews/akita/TKY201106060550.html.

被災地に果物贈る　秋田県内のＡＬＴが活動

秋田県内の学校で英語を教える外国語指導助手（ＡＬＴ）が、被災者にバナナやミカンなどの果物を届ける活動を続けている。ボランティアで被災地を訪れ、食生活の偏りを知ったのがきっかけだった。これまでに宮城県気仙沼市や岩手県陸前高田市で配った果物は１万５千個以上になる。

活動名は「フルーツ・ツリー・プロジェクト」。由利本荘市の小中学校で英語を教えるポール・ユーさん（２６）＝米国出身＝が４月初旬に始めた。

「食べ物は不自由しないけど、果物が食べたい」。ボランティアで訪れた気仙沼市の避難所で、被災者からこう聞いたのがきっかけだ。ご飯とみそ汁が炊き出しで提供されていたが、野菜や果物は不足がちだった。ユーさんは「胃袋は満たされても、栄養が偏れば健康じゃない」と考えた。

東日本大震災が発生した後に立ち上げた「ボランティア秋田」のホームページ（http://volunteerakita.org）でプロジェクトを紹介し、果物代の募金を始めた。

安く買うためのルート開拓もした。宮城県内や由利本荘市内の卸売業者に相談し、特別に安い価格で果物を譲ってもらえることになった。

バナナなどを大量に載せた車で、ユーさんら県内のＡＬＴ約１０人は大型連休中の４月２９日、気仙沼市の避難所を訪れた。被災者に果物を１個ずつ手渡すと、笑顔が広がった。避難所では調理することが難しいため、「バナナは皮をむくだけで食べられるので喜ばれた」と振り返る。

県内外のＡＬＴ仲間の口コミで賛同者は１００人を超え、募金活動で５月末までの２カ月で約８０万円が集まった。一緒に行動するＡＬＴのマーガレット・コッカーさん（２４）＝同＝は「果物は被災者との連帯を示す象徴になる」と話す。

<>被災地では、住宅にたまった泥の片付けも手伝う。震災から３カ月近くたっても全面復興にはまだ遠い。ユーさんは週末を中心に当面、活動を続ける予定だ。「被災した人が復興の手がかりをつかむまでは、果物を届けなくてはいけない」（大隈悠）

The project was also featured in the Japan Times (English edition). See http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20110611a2.html.

Group on a mission to deliver fresh fruit to disaster-zone shelters

Staff report

Survivors of the March 11 tsunami living in shelters need fresh fruit — this is what Minami Ishikawa and Paul Yoo from Akita Prefecture learned when they went to volunteer their time in Kesennuma, Miyagi Prefecture, in early April.

Ishikawa and Yoo talked to people at evacuation centers who told them the meals served there often consisted of a bowl of rice and miso soup but no fresh fruit or vegetables. They said they were craving such food, Yoo said.

Yoo, an assistant language teacher from the United States who teaches English at a school in Yuri Honjo, and Ishikawa, an office worker, started gathering volunteer workers right after the quake to help the evacuees in Miyagi and Iwate prefectures.

As part of their activities, they launched the Fruit Tree Project. They collected donations to buy fresh fruit and gathered volunteers — both Japanese and non-Japanese — to deliver it to evacuation centers in the tsunami-hit areas.

They started the fruit deliveries in Kesennuma during Golden Week in early May and later went to several shelters in other areas mainly over the weekends.

The project has involved more than 100 volunteers, and with support from Second Harvest Japan, a charity-based food bank in Tokyo, the group has collected more than ¥1 million in donations from all over the world. So far, they have delivered over 23,000 pieces of fruit.

"Everyone is so happy when we bring fruit to them. We want to continue bringing fruit to the shelters, especially to the small ones where people don't get any fresh fruit at all," said Yoo.

For more information about the project and to make a donation, email volunteerakita@gmail.com or visit its website at volunteerakita.wordpress.com.

The above newspaper articles are from the Asahi Shinbun and Japan Times, respectively. The pictures used in them, and the picture of the article itself, were taken by volunteerAKITA group members.

The following is a letter I wrote that appeared in the Grand Forks Herald on December 3, 2010. The title it was given is, "WikiLeaks offers vital global revelations".

YURIHONJO, Japan — On Dec. 2, the Herald opined, "The big surprise is that there are so few surprises. That’s the general consensus about the WikiLeaks release of diplomatic documents, most of which offer frank views ... that already had been more cautiously expressed in public" ("DL gets the WikiLeaks treatment," editorial, Page A4). Has the Herald done its research on the subject? I think not, for the above claim simply is ridiculous. It’s easy to find dozens of important global issues revealed by the Cablegate leaks. Here are a few.

** The CIA tortured many people in the past decade — which should be a headline on its own. Regardless, in the leaks, we also find out that the Obama administration pressured Spain and Germany to ignore the CIA's actions. Now we know that both Bush and Obama feel torture is justified — a sad state of American human rights.

** The leaks show that the U.S. has been conducting drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen. Many people suspected this, but now we know exactly where our military is fighting — something that Americans should have a right to know.

** The leaks show that Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice ordered our diplomats to spy on foreign leaders. The diplomats were ordered to collect biometric data, such as DNA and fingerprints, as well as credit card numbers and computer passwords of foreign leaders, including the secretary general of the United Nations. To turn our country's diplomats into poorly trained spies simply is disgraceful.

** The leaks show that Afghanistan's vice president carried $52 million to the United Arab Emirates last year. It's not clear why he had so much money — he stated no reason — but theft seems likely.

** The leaks show the leaders of Saudi Arabia and Jordan privately asking the U.S. to attack Iran while publicly saying the opposite. Such behavior makes the U.S. look bad, because Saudi and Jordanian citizens see the U.S. as the aggressor against Iran, when in fact their own leaders are in favor of an attack.

In short, the leaks reveal many important secrets about the way America and other countries have engaged in shady dealings over the past decade. As American citizens, we need to be informed about such things. When our government lies to us, we desperately need groups such as WikiLeaks to help us. If citizens don't have access to information, they cannot make good decisions. An informed public is a fundamental requirement for a stable democracy, and the Cablegate leaks are a big step in the right direction.

Douglas Perkins

The following is a letter I wrote that appeared in the Grand Forks Herald on August 17, 2010. The title it was given (not my choice) is, "Show me the evidence against gay marriage".

YURIHONJO, Japan — In his Aug. 16 column, Herald columnist Lloyd Omdahl makes the same mistake Proposition 8 supporters made in the trial ("Judge missed the compelling state purpose," Page A4).

Omdahl says that bans on gay marriage ought to be constitutional because they promote a compelling state interest — "safety of the public" — but he presents no facts to back that up.

Omdahl writes, "[Judge Walker] went far afield with a number of unfounded suppositions and conclusions without recognizing any compelling state purpose for protecting the benefits of traditional marriage."

But to be constitutional, Prop 8 needed to have a basis in something other than a private moral or religious belief.

At the trial, Prop 8 supporters argued two key points: that Prop 8 promotes stable relationships because men and women naturally produce children, and that Prop 8 promotes optimal households for raising children properly.

But expert witness testimony showed that these claims are mere guesswork, unsupported by evidence.

Thus, the judge struck down Prop 8.

Here, Omdahl briefly mentions "public safety" but never says what that means. If gay and lesbian couples get married, are they going to do something dangerous? Omdahl never explains how gay marriage is a public safety issue — probably because it isn't.

In fact, evidence in the Prop 8 trial showed that gay and lesbian parents are as good at raising children as heterosexual parents. Also in the Prop 8 trial, even the star witness for Prop 8 admitted, "Gay marriage might contribute over time to a decline in anti-gay prejudice [and] a reduction in anti-gay hate crimes." This is the exact opposite of Omdahl's claim that legalizing gay marriage threatens public safety.

States can't discriminate based on sexual orientation without a "compelling state purpose." Religion doesn't qualify, and neither do vague and unfounded assertions of "safety of the public."

If Omdahl wants to oppose gay marriage, he might start by looking for a reason grounded in fact, not thin air.

Douglas Perkins

The following is a letter I wrote that appeared in the Grand Forks Herald on June 10, 2010. The title given was, "Court left EPA with no choice on CO2".

YURIHONJO, Japan — Scott Hennen dislikes the Environmental Protection Agency, but his reasons are not grounded in reality ("Will senators stop EPA’s assault on N.D.?", Page A4, June 5).

Hennen says the EPA is "out to regulate" tons of things; but in fact, the EPA has not announced any such plans. Hennen simply is repeating empty propaganda, probably created by people who don’t want the Clean Air Act enforced.

He also claims the EPA is a rogue agency making a "power grab," but this is just not true. The EPA is considering rules on CO2 for two reasons: First, the agency is required by law to protect our air resources for public health, and second, the Supreme Court ordered it to. Regulating CO2 is the EPA’s only reasonable course of action.

Regarding the economy, the Clean Air Act has been around for 47 years. It didn’t stop business growth before, and there’s no reason to think it will now.

Does Hennen believe in regulating dangerous pollution at all? From his letter, it seems not. This is dangerous and short-sighted. Many studies show that if we don’t take reasonable steps to curb global warming, the cost to us and our children will be massive.

Douglas Perkins

The following is a letter I wrote that appeared in the Grand Forks Herald on August 15, 2008. The title it was given is, "Lower oil prices are no longer an option".

YURIHONJO, JAPAN — The August 12 Herald carried an editorial about a supposed tradeoff between lower gasoline prices and reduced dependence on foreign oil ("Energy policy has a question at its core," Page A4). In reality, there is no tradeoff. No matter what we do, gasoline prices will keep going up. The world is running out of oil, global demand for oil is increasing, and there's nothing we can do to stop it. The resources in Alaska, North Dakota and offshore seem large, but in fact the amount of oil in those places is just a fraction of global demand. And developing those resources takes a decade, so they certainly won't help us any time soon.

On the other hand, there are many good ways to deal with high oil prices. They all involve using less oil.

Douglas Perkins

The following is a letter I wrote that appeared in the Grand Forks Herald on April 27, 2008. The title is, "World can't sustain continued growth".

YURIHONJO, Japan — Brett Narloch of the North Dakota Policy Council wrote, "Sustainable development is nothing more than socialism by another name." ("'Socialism by another name' at UND," Page A4, April 22). Narloch is wrong. I don't know the group he mentions at UND; it doesn't matter. What matters is this: when you have increasing demand for resources that are running out and can't reasonably be replaced, you're setting yourself up for disaster. That's a simple fact.

Sustainable development says to develop along lines that work with this fact. For instance, continued growth is not sustainable. You run out of things such as oil, farmland, water and clean air. Unsustainable development is ... unsustainable. That means it won't work later, even if it does now. Let's face development with our heads on straight so we don't get surprised at where we end up.

Douglas Perkins