Personnel strategy for international cooperation

Japan Nuclear Human Resource Development Network published a report with the title of "a new direction of human resource development in response to the accident of Fukushima nuclear power plant" (東京電力福島原子力発電所事故を踏まえた原子力人材育成の方向性について）. At the section of "future direction" in this report, the following notices are found:

In order to contribute to the development of new safety criteria in international organizations governing nuclear safety in response to the accident in Fukushima, it is required to develop human resources who have communication skills as well as technical knowledge on nuclear safety.

The central government mentioned in a report with the title of "An additional report prepared by the Japanese government to internal nuclear agency - the accident of the nuclear power plant in Fukushima- ". At the section of "securing personnel in the field of nuclear safety" in this report, the following notices are found;

We will launch a study to establish "a training center in the field of nuclear safety for international cooperation and improvement of personnel quality".

The other section of "strengthen of regulatory organization for nuclear safety" mentioned as the followings:

We aim to establish "Nuclear Safety Agency" (tentative name). Will will secure high quality personnel ,regardless of public sectors or private sectors, in order to proceed properly with our missions.

The more I encountered such kind of voices from the governmental sides or private sectors, the more I am convinced that environmental consultants will play a pivotal role to provide stakeholders with proper solutions.

Before the 3.11, the nuclear safety is not managed under conventional environmental regulations like water pollution prevention acts or soil pollution prevention acts in Japan. Environmental quality standards for radioactive substances have not yet been established. On the other hand, a set of strict regulatory frameworks on the nuclear safety is developed for radiation controlled areas. Although some people including Dr. Sakata Shoichi had suggested that the regulatory framework should be expanded in order to regulate radiation contamination outside the radiation controlled areas, there is yet no rules in Japan to regulate nuclear safety outside the radiation controlled areas.

I think that it is time for environmental consultants to work with this big issue in collaboration with experts of nuclear safety.

Personnel strategy in Fukushima

Several measures, from the central governmental level to private organization levels, with respect to personnel issues have been already taken to manage the radioactive substance contaminated soil and the ongoing accident in Fukushima.

The central government has established "Fukushima decontamination work promotion team"（福島除染推進チーム" in Fukushima prefecture. One of the missions of this team is to promote decontamination works in collaboration with local governments. Though the details of this team are still unclear, the importance of personnel issues seems to be recognized in the central government in the work of decontamination.

Fukushima prefectural government has announced that it would establish "the personnel bank for decontamination work" (除染人材バンク) in the next January. According to a basic policy of the central government, local governments has responsibility to undertake decontamination work for the areas where radiation levels are less than 20 micro Sv/year and more than 1 micro Sv/year. Fukushima prefectural government has thus decided to establish the personnel bank, seeks technical experts to be registered in the bank, and conduct decontamination works with the help of knowledge of the bank.

There is other movement in a private field. Skilled Veteran Corps for Fukushima （福島原発行動隊） is not a governmental organization, but a source of skilled personnel. People who are over 60 years old, have technical skills and mission based minds are permitted to join  this corps. One of the missions of this corps is to provide advice with respect to decontamination works for governmental bodies and private companies and even send the registered personnel to decontamination works.

Perception of Radiation Risk

Four months have passed since the nuclear accident occurred in Fukushima. A huge number of information flows with respect to radiation risks is still spreading our society. A remarkable point of the information flow is that the radiation risks are expressed purely based on scientific languages. This makes it difficult for me to understand and evaluate current and prospective risks; thus, I cannot make a priority how to respond this issue.

This sounds contradiction. Scientific language should provide us with reasonable explanations, and I believe that other languages, such as intuitions, arts, astrology, cannot play the same role as science. Then, why cannot I grasp the radiation risks surrounding me even though I am in a position where I can gain scientific information? An answer is easy. My scientific literacy is limited, and a complexity of the radiation risks exceeds my limitation.

“No acute toxicity arising from the radioactive substances to our health is expected”, the Japanese government have been repeatedly expressing to its citizens. However, the government statement lacks scientific explanations; thus, I cannot accept the government explanation without hesitations.

For example, last night I bought a pack of cherries, which have been produced in Yamagata prefecture. If the cherries were to be produced in Fukushima, I would have hesitated to buy them. However, I cannot make a reasonable decision in buying the one produced in Yamagata. I do not know whether or not agricultural products produced outside Fukushima prefecture are safe. Thus, I stop thinking the safety issues in buying the cherries. That was not an act that those who have scientific knowledge should have done.

Since March 11, 2011, I started studying safety issues relating to radioactive substances in my private time. However, I am still uncertain whether or not my life in this Tokyo is safe.

In any way, if similar accidents to the one in Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant occur in Japan in future, the Japanese government will collapse easily. No more nuclear power plants are requested, and current operating nuclear power plants should be abolished in an adequate manner in near future.

Deleting maps showing radiation contamination distribution

I have deleted all the maps showing radiation contaminatin distribution posted in this blog. The similar maps will be published on appropriate websites in the future.

Personal Impression on Nuclear Power

Before March 11, 2011, I have paid little attentions to potential risks arising from nuclear power plants, and I have not cared about why nuclear power industries have been or have not been required by our society. On the other hand, I have received a couple of orders from nuclear power related industries in my job in the past. In this sense, the nuclear power industry was one of my clients, and along with this line, I have not had strong negative impressions on this industry.

However, after the accident of Fukushima Daiichi, I started to gather information relating to nuclear power safety issues. During this process, I found that a small number of individuals, some from science and others from engineering, have kept insisting potential risks of nuclear power energy for a long time – more than 10 years.

Before March 11, such anti-nuclear activists seemed to be minority, and major opinions prevailing over our society was that “we need nuclear power in order to sustain our current level of life, then why should we abandon the nuclear power?” Probably, reflecting to such negligence to voices from the minority part, I have not set aside enough time to hear opinions posed from the anti-nuclear activists.

However, today on the Internet, I heard discussions held in the Upper house on May 23, 2011. The purpose of the discussion was that members of the House of Councilors could scrutinize the first response to the nuclear accident in Fukushima by the Japanese government and look into past and current status regarding nuclear energy policy in Japan.

The following four people were invited for the discussion as an information holder:

-       Hiroaki Koide (Assistant Professor at Kyoto University) (小出裕章 (京都大学原子炉実験所助教))

-       Masashi Goto (Part-time lecturer at Shibaura Institute of Technology) (後藤政志 (芝浦工業大学非常勤講師))

-       Katsuhiko Ishibashi (Emeritus Professor at Kobe University) (石橋克彦 (神戸大学名誉教授))

-       Masayoshi Son (President at Soft Bank) (孫正義 (ソフトバンク株式会社代表取締役社長))

After quick search by Google, I found that the first three people were, as it is called, anti-nuclear activists. They have been raising an alarm mainly over safety issues of nuclear power plants for a long time. One of the worse scenarios which they had forecasted to occur in the near future was really realized in Fukushima on March 11.

After hearing the discussion, I found that I did not have any reasons to disagree the standpoint that there seem to be little locations suitable for nuclear power plants in Japan because Japan is one of the most earthquake-prone countries in the world.

The fact that Japan is a quake prone country seems to be scientifically fact. In addition, power and scale of earthquake and its subsequent event by tsunami were proved to be extraordinary on March 11. I am not sure whether current safety measures prepared in nuclear power plants in Japan are capable of future earthquake and tsunami.

Radiation Contaminated Waste (Part 1)

No one can neglect his/her fears arising from radioactive contamination. We can relief ourselves only when scientific insight tells us how safe or how dangerous the contamination is in a quantitative context.

In a near future, a good number of workers will be needed when the Japanese government proceeds with a task to remediate or remove a large amount of radiation contaminated soil in or around Fukushima Prefecture.

Under the Radiation Hazards Prevention Law enacted in Japan, a radiation protection supervisor is defined as a specialist who shall be in charge of the safe management of radioactive substances. One can become a radiation protection supervisor when he/she passes a national examination and take a set of lectures.

Nuclear Safety Technology Center (usually called as NUSTEC) is a responsible organization for the national examination as well as the set of lectures regarding the radiation protection supervisor. According to the website of the NUSTEC, 8607 people have passed the national examination for the last 10 years from 2001 to 2010.

I will discuss a shortage of the number of a radiation protection supervisor at this moment in some days on this blog.