http://elpais.com
OECDの原子力当局や、原子力安全委員会は、地に堕ちた原子力発電の安全性の信頼を回復する対策を検討
Autocrítica atómica
Los reguladores de los países nucleares buscan solución a la pérdida de crédito de esta energía
“Nadie puede garantizar que no haya un accidente grave”
atomic self-criticism
Regulators nuclear countries seek a solution to the loss of this energy credit
"No one can guarantee that there is no major accident"
"It will take years to implement improvements in Fukushima"
Rafael Mendez 9 MAY 2012 - 22:09 CET
Regulators nuclear countries seek a solution to the loss of this energy credit
"No one can guarantee that there is no major accident"
"It will take years to implement improvements in Fukushima"
Rafael Mendez 9 MAY 2012 - 22:09 CET
The world's nuclear authorities on Wednesday made a sort of public group therapy, an exercise in self-tinged amends. The agencies responsible for U.S. nuclear, India, China, France and the United Kingdom, among others, gathered by the OECD Nuclear Agency (NEA) and the Nuclear Safety Council in Madrid, noted and outlined solutions loss of credibility of nuclear power in the last year. Poor communication to a bewildered public opinion on the events triggered by the earthquake of 2011 in Japan and the Fukushima nuclear accident-the worst in decades, passed a bill to the high cost of nuclear power. A more suspicious world population has contributed to the slowdown of what the industry wanted to call the nuclear revival.
The public
and economic reasons hindering the 'nuclear renaissance' in the world
The debate over how to restore credibility comes after atomic energy has lost support among the public and among economists, the difficulty to compete with natural gas becoming cheaper and credit restrictions that make it difficult to undertake the multi-billion investment. In this context, the UK is difficult to get private companies that want to build their new reactors, Japan has turned off all his family, 59 (even momentarily), Germany announced that the train goes off atomic and France, for the first time, discussed (albeit little) about nuclear energy.
The CEO of the NEA, Spanish Luis Echavarri, launched the debate in the House of America (Madrid): Echávarri made it clear that "nuclear power is an option must be accepted by public opinion", but that fell with Fukushima. Mike Weightman, chief inspector of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory UK (ONR), agreed: "Not enough was done under the circumstances. At the national and international communications were misunderstandings, "he said, citing problems of translation.
In countries that have nuclear weapons social support is clearer
Japan reported not only looking almost exclusively to the interior (without worrying too much about the repercussions abroad), and that was one of the more or less veiled criticisms he received. The representative of the Japanese Nuclear Safety Agency (NISA), Makoto Watanabe, came to ask for understanding by pointing out how difficult it was to work against both the earthquake, tsunami and the nuclear accident. "Local authorities were taking charge of the evacuation of people and lacked many facilities," he said. In Japan, English is not widespread, although it sounds odd to say that from Spain, and Watanabe himself in his second speech answered questions in Japanese with an impromptu translation.
The president of the French Nuclear Authority (ASN), Andre-Claude Lacoste, gave an intermediate vision. "In an accident as serious as Fukushima must be very cautious to criticize. If it had happened in Europe would all be very ashamed and not just in terms of communication. But effective communication of Japan did not work well, "he told this newspaper in a slowdown.
The proof is that France said long before the accident that Japan deserved a higher rating on the international scale of nuclear accidents that gave Tokyo: "From the beginning we said, 'We can not answer everything. If the display of black smoke appears NHK or white do not know what is. ' But in three days we were able to say: 'The accident is extremely serious, but Three Mile Island [in the U.S., in 1979] and less than Chernobyl'. And as you say the accident is very serious, communication is easier. "
One sector that wouldgive an idyllic image isa bath of realism
Lacoste has an interesting theory that helps explain why the acceptance in France is easier than in Germany, which reacted to a blackout atomic Fukushima: "Who has nuclear weapons more accepting of nuclear power: see United Kingdom, USA and France . There is less difficulty. "
The president of the Nuclear Safety Council, Carmen Martínez Ten, admitted: "We must be more and better trained" to communicate.
To gain credibility, regulators should not minimize the risk. "The ASN has an image of credibility, not least because we have always said that no one can guarantee that there can be a serious nuclear accident in France. Fukushima is a drama, and never said it was something small. And we never said Fukushima is impossible for Europe, "said Lacoste. In the same vein, Echavarri said the industry should be prepared for no one can rule out further accidents, but hoped that less than that of Japan: "The nuclear human we do make mistakes." For an industry often used to sell an idyllic, that sounds like a double discourse of realism.
The Chinese representative, Liu Hua, opened his heart to admit that before the nuclear accident just worried about dealing with the press, and came to ask the representative of the U.S. that controlled how social networks.
In regulatorsabound chargescome from the industry
One of the problems of atomic bodies to gain confidence is to the close ties that often have or have had members with industry. Something that was in Japan where there is even a term for the golden retirement of senior officials and politicians in companies with which they were related: amakaduri (literally, "down from heaven." The practice was widespread in the nuclear sector .
Given the rigorous defense of independence, the communications consultant Luis Arroyo made a note of sanity: "I will not raise your hand to ask who in this room is in favor of nuclear energy, but I think everyone would know what the result ". Regulators are dotted with people from industry. And there are few nuclear engineers (if any) to oppose a technology that is formed. Besides learning from the problems of communication in Fukushima, some countries with little nuclear control systems independent of the Government have undertaken legal changes, as announced by the president of the Indian nuclear authority, S. S. Bajaj. Nuclear authorities try and repair the deep wounds left by Fukushima.
The public
and economic reasons hindering the 'nuclear renaissance' in the world
The debate over how to restore credibility comes after atomic energy has lost support among the public and among economists, the difficulty to compete with natural gas becoming cheaper and credit restrictions that make it difficult to undertake the multi-billion investment. In this context, the UK is difficult to get private companies that want to build their new reactors, Japan has turned off all his family, 59 (even momentarily), Germany announced that the train goes off atomic and France, for the first time, discussed (albeit little) about nuclear energy.
The CEO of the NEA, Spanish Luis Echavarri, launched the debate in the House of America (Madrid): Echávarri made it clear that "nuclear power is an option must be accepted by public opinion", but that fell with Fukushima. Mike Weightman, chief inspector of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory UK (ONR), agreed: "Not enough was done under the circumstances. At the national and international communications were misunderstandings, "he said, citing problems of translation.
In countries that have nuclear weapons social support is clearer
Japan reported not only looking almost exclusively to the interior (without worrying too much about the repercussions abroad), and that was one of the more or less veiled criticisms he received. The representative of the Japanese Nuclear Safety Agency (NISA), Makoto Watanabe, came to ask for understanding by pointing out how difficult it was to work against both the earthquake, tsunami and the nuclear accident. "Local authorities were taking charge of the evacuation of people and lacked many facilities," he said. In Japan, English is not widespread, although it sounds odd to say that from Spain, and Watanabe himself in his second speech answered questions in Japanese with an impromptu translation.
The president of the French Nuclear Authority (ASN), Andre-Claude Lacoste, gave an intermediate vision. "In an accident as serious as Fukushima must be very cautious to criticize. If it had happened in Europe would all be very ashamed and not just in terms of communication. But effective communication of Japan did not work well, "he told this newspaper in a slowdown.
The proof is that France said long before the accident that Japan deserved a higher rating on the international scale of nuclear accidents that gave Tokyo: "From the beginning we said, 'We can not answer everything. If the display of black smoke appears NHK or white do not know what is. ' But in three days we were able to say: 'The accident is extremely serious, but Three Mile Island [in the U.S., in 1979] and less than Chernobyl'. And as you say the accident is very serious, communication is easier. "
One sector that wouldgive an idyllic image isa bath of realism
Lacoste has an interesting theory that helps explain why the acceptance in France is easier than in Germany, which reacted to a blackout atomic Fukushima: "Who has nuclear weapons more accepting of nuclear power: see United Kingdom, USA and France . There is less difficulty. "
The president of the Nuclear Safety Council, Carmen Martínez Ten, admitted: "We must be more and better trained" to communicate.
To gain credibility, regulators should not minimize the risk. "The ASN has an image of credibility, not least because we have always said that no one can guarantee that there can be a serious nuclear accident in France. Fukushima is a drama, and never said it was something small. And we never said Fukushima is impossible for Europe, "said Lacoste. In the same vein, Echavarri said the industry should be prepared for no one can rule out further accidents, but hoped that less than that of Japan: "The nuclear human we do make mistakes." For an industry often used to sell an idyllic, that sounds like a double discourse of realism.
The Chinese representative, Liu Hua, opened his heart to admit that before the nuclear accident just worried about dealing with the press, and came to ask the representative of the U.S. that controlled how social networks.
In regulatorsabound chargescome from the industry
One of the problems of atomic bodies to gain confidence is to the close ties that often have or have had members with industry. Something that was in Japan where there is even a term for the golden retirement of senior officials and politicians in companies with which they were related: amakaduri (literally, "down from heaven." The practice was widespread in the nuclear sector .
Given the rigorous defense of independence, the communications consultant Luis Arroyo made a note of sanity: "I will not raise your hand to ask who in this room is in favor of nuclear energy, but I think everyone would know what the result ". Regulators are dotted with people from industry. And there are few nuclear engineers (if any) to oppose a technology that is formed. Besides learning from the problems of communication in Fukushima, some countries with little nuclear control systems independent of the Government have undertaken legal changes, as announced by the president of the Indian nuclear authority, S. S. Bajaj. Nuclear authorities try and repair the deep wounds left by Fukushima.
OECDの原子力当局や、原子力安全委員会は、地に堕ちた原子力発電の安全性の信頼を回復する対策を検討
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿