Japan's Nuclear Apocalypse

Japan's Nuclear Apocalypse
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
March 18, 2011

A powerful earthquake measuring 9 on the Richter Scale triggered an explosion and radiation leakage at a Japanese nuclear power plant. Nations the world over are in a panic. The European Union described the huge nuclear disaster in Japan as an "apocalypse." It said Tokyo authorities have already lost control. Foreign reports call the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident one of the three worst nuclear power plant accidents in history. It is already considered more serious than the U.S. nuclear accident at Three Mile Island. If the situation deteriorates even further, it may be considered even more serious than the Russian nuclear accident at Chernobyl.

Officials are attempting to allay public fears. Over the past several days, officials from the Executive Yuan Atomic Energy Council have repeatedly assured the public that the impact of the Fukushima nuclear power plant incident on Taiwan will be limited. But this is not the reaction of governments the world over. On the 16th, during a U.S. Congressional hearing, Gregory B. Jaczko, Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said that the pool of water for storing spent fuel rods at the Number Four Reactor in the Fukushima nuclear power plant had already dried up, He said the situation was more serious than Japanese officials are willing to say. The U.S. has proposed the withdrawal of its citizens from a wider area around the Fukushima nuclear power plant than Japan has suggested.

Yukiya Amano is the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a watchdog agency for the United Nations. Amano said he is prepared to go to Japan and obtain first-hand information. Amano considers developments at the Fukushima nuclear power plant "very serious." But he says it is too early to characterize the situation as "out of control."

The European Union uses nuclear power generation more than any other region of the world. It is concerned about the fallout from this incident. One-third of the electricity used by the EU comes from nuclear power generation. It accounts for 15% of its total energy use. According to European Nuclear Society (ENS) statistics, Europe has a total of 195 nuclear reactors in operation. Of these, 143 are in EU countries. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy have agreed to include nuclear safety on the agenda at the G20 Summit, to be held in France at the end of March.

Despite intense reactions from these advanced nations, the Executive Yuan Atomic Energy Council remains firm. It has made a number of calculations based on certain assumptions. It assumed that 10 units at the Fukushima plant leaked high dosages of radioactive material. It assumed the worst, that winds blew toward Taiwan. It assumed that the radioactive material was 13 times as serious as Chernobyl. It assumed that Taiwan was located downwind from Fukushima. It assumed that the radioactive material would take 120 hours to reach Taiwan and spread through the atmosphere. Based on these assumptions, it said that over two days, the cumulative dose of radiation per hour for the public on Taiwan would be 7.3 mSv, less than the baseline measurement of 10 mSv. Over seven days the accumulated radiation dose would be 25.5 mSv, less than the 50 to 100 mSv standard mandating evacuation. It would even be less than the 100 mSv standard mandating iodine tablets.

The Atomic Energy Council concluded its remarks. But yesterday, Japan's three largest airports tested returning travelers for radiation exposure. They tested over 4000 visitors. Among them, 26 were slightly exposed. They were treated and retested. None had any problems. Nevertheless, the results show that concerns about radioactivity are not groundless.

Reactions from nations the world over show that the Fukushima nuclear power plant radiation leak has become the world's most significant nuclear power plant disaster. Even the Japanese Ministry of Education admitted that approximately 20 km northwest of the Fukushima nuclear power plant, it detected 330 mSv of radiation per hour. That is 6600 times the norm. Japan's technological standards and management capabilities are higher than those on Taiwan. When even nuclear power plants on Japan are subject to such accidents, how can nuclear power plants on Taiwan remain immune? The council's reassurances are clearly contrary to common sense. This is why the more the Atomic Energy Council urges everyone not to panic, the more the public considers the council's reassurances meaningless.

Radiative contamination is a risk management issue. Nature includes background radiation. We are exposed to radiation every time we are X-rayed. The public does not expect zero exposure to radiation. The problem is the manner in which the government has chosen to address the public. The result is inevitable. The speaker drones on, but the listener dismisses everything he has heard. Therefore, the most pressing issue in disaster prevention education is how to establish a society able to cope, through risk analysis and risk management.

Japan is a country which places a high value on risk management. A natural disaster struck, and led to a nuclear power plant radiation leak that shocked the world. The ROC government considers nuclear power a strategy to reduce carbon emissions and prevent global warming, Japan's earthquake experience tells us we must address the issues of nuclear power plant safety and radiation leakage. We must reexamine energy generation policy from the perspective of disaster management and security. We must adopt a professional perspective, weighing advantages against disadvantages. Disaster prevention and mitigation must include risk management measures. Information must be open and transparent. We must seek a public consensus. Only then can we allay public fears about the safety of nuclear power generation.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2011.03.18
日本核災「啟示錄」
本報訊

　一場規模九的大地震引發的日本核電廠爆炸輻射外洩事件，讓全世界各國一陣驚慌。歐盟以「啟示錄」（APOCALYPSE）般的大災變形容日本核電災難，指稱東京當局對福島核電事件幾已失去控制；外電亦稱日本福島核電廠事件是人類有史以來最嚴重的三大核能事故之一，其嚴重程度已超越美國三浬島核事故，如果事態惡化，也可能更甚俄國的車諾比核災事故。

　為了安撫民心，這幾天行政院原子能委員會官員一再對外說：日本福島核電廠事件對台灣，不會影響或是影響有限；反觀世界各國的反應卻非如此：美國核子管理委員會 （ＮＲＣ）主委亞茲柯十六日在美國國會聽證會上表示，福島核電廠四號反應爐廢燃料棒儲存池的水已經乾涸，災情比日本官方說法嚴重，而美方建議福島核電廠附近美僑撤離範圍比日方宣布範圍廣。

　聯合國核子監督機構「國際原子能總署」（ＩＡＥＡ）署長天野之彌則表示，他準備前往日本，掌握第一手資訊。天野之彌認為，日本福島核電廠的情勢發展「非常嚴重」，但還不是斷言「失控」的時候。

　全世界使用核能發電最多的歐盟更關心此一事件後續發展。目前歐盟所使用的電力，三分之一來自核能發電，占能源使用總量的十五％。根據「歐洲核能學會」（ＥＮＳ）統計，目前歐洲共有一九五座運作中的核子反應爐，其中一四三座位於歐盟國家內。德國總理梅克爾和法國總統薩科奇並已同意，共同推動把核能安全列入三月底於法國舉行的廿大工業國（Ｇ二十）領袖峰會議程。

　儘管先進國家反應激烈，但行政院原子能委員會說，經過模式計算，假設日本福島電廠十座機組全都外洩高劑量的放射性物質，且風向吹向台灣的最壞情況下，估計輻射汙染值為車諾比事件的十三倍，而台灣位在福島下風處、由日本飄到台灣的時間約為一百二十小時，再藉由大氣擴散，得出台灣民眾兩天內的輻射累積劑量將為每小時七．三毫西弗，不到十毫西弗的掩蔽措施基準；而七天的輻射累積劑量為二五．五毫西弗，也不到五十至一百毫西弗的疏散標準，更不到一百毫西弗需要服用碘片的情況。

　原能會話才剛說完，昨天國內三大機場針對日本返國旅客輻射檢測，受檢的四千多名旅客中，就有二十六人受輕微汙染，雖然經過處理後，再次量測，都沒有問題。但此一檢測結果，說明了輻射外洩顯非空穴來風。

　從外電與世界各國的訊息顯示，福島核電廠輻射外洩事件已經是全球重大核電廠災變事件，即使是日本文部科學省亦不得不承認，在福島核電廠西北方約廿公里處，偵測到最高每小時三三○毫西弗輻射量，是平常值的六千六百倍。日本的科技水平與管理能力都遠較台灣高出許多，如果連日本的核電廠都會出事，卻要國人接受台灣核電廠不會出事的說法，顯然有違一般民眾認知。這也是為何行政院原子能委員會愈強調不用恐慌，但一般民眾卻愈無法接受。

　輻射汙染問題是一個風險管理的課題，自然背景中就有輻射，平常我們照Ｘ光也會接受到輻射汙染，但目前社會氛圍似乎是要求沒有輻射汙染，這樣的風險溝通，結果一定是言者諄諄，聽者藐藐，因此當前防災教育最迫切的課題就是如何透過風險分析與風險管理而建立一個風險社會。

　日本是最重視風險管理的國家之一，一場天災下來，還是發生了舉世震驚的核電廠輻射外洩事件。而當前的台灣政府亦考慮以核能發電做為達到減碳防止地球暖化的策略之一，從日本的地震經驗告訴我們，核電廠安全與輻射外洩問題是我們必須正視的課題，重新以災難管理及安全的角度檢視能源發電政策，先從專業角度分析各方利弊得失，應採取防災與減災的風險管理措施以及風險多寡，再將資訊完全公開透明，尋求全民共識，這樣才有可能化解民眾對核電安全的疑慮。