“What—Me Worry?”1“Why So Serious?”:2 A Personal View on the Fukushima Nuclear Reactor Accidents

Infrequently, it seems that a significant accident precursor or, worse, an actual accident, involving a commercial nuclear power reactor occurs to remind us of the need to reexamine the safety of this important electrical power technology from a risk perspective. Twenty‐five years since the major core damage accident at Chernobyl in the Ukraine, the Fukushima reactor complex in Japan experienced multiple core damages as a result of an earthquake‐induced tsunami beyond either the earthquake or tsunami design basis for the site. Although the tsunami itself killed tens of thousands of people and left the area devastated and virtually uninhabitable, much concern still arose from the potential radioactive releases from the damaged reactors, even though there was little population left in the area to be affected. As a lifelong probabilistic safety analyst in nuclear engineering, even I must admit to a recurrence of the doubt regarding nuclear power safety after Fukushima that I had experienced after Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. This article is my attempt to “recover” my personal perspective on acceptable risk by examining both the domestic and worldwide history of commercial nuclear power plant accidents and attempting to quantify the risk in terms of the frequency of core damage that one might glean from a review of operational history.     

The Future of Nuclear Power: Value Orientations and Risk Perception

Since the turn of the 21st century, there has been a revival of interest in nuclear power. Two decades ago, the expansion of nuclear power in the United States was halted by widespread public opposition as well as rising costs and less than projected increases in demand for electricity. Can the renewed enthusiasm for nuclear power overcome its history of public resistance that has persisted for decades? We propose that attitudes toward nuclear power are a function of perceived risk, and that both attitudes and risk perceptions are a function of values, beliefs, and trust in the institutions that influence nuclear policy. Applying structural equation models to data from a U.S. national survey, we find that increased trust in the nuclear governance institutions reduces perceived risk of nuclear power and together higher trust and lower risk perceptions predict positive attitudes toward nuclear power. Trust in environmental institutions and perceived risks from global environmental problems do not predict attitudes toward nuclear power. Values do predict attitudes: individuals with traditional values have greater support for, while those with altruistic values have greater opposition to, nuclear power. Nuclear attitudes do not vary by gender, age, education, income, or political orientation, though nonwhites are more supportive than whites. These findings are consistent with, and provide an explanation for, a long series of public opinion polls showing public ambivalence toward nuclear power that persists even in the face of renewed interest for nuclear power in policy circles.     

How a Nuclear Power Plant Accident Influences Acceptance of Nuclear Power: Results of a Longitudinal Study Before and After the Fukushima Disaster

Major nuclear accidents, such as the recent accident in Fukushima, Japan, have been shown to decrease the public's acceptance of nuclear power. However, little is known about how a serious accident affects people's acceptance of nuclear power and the determinants of acceptance. We conducted a longitudinal study (N= 790) in Switzerland: one survey was done five months before and one directly after the accident in Fukushima. We assessed acceptance, perceived risks, perceived benefits, and trust related to nuclear power stations. In our model, we assumed that both benefit and risk perceptions determine acceptance of nuclear power. We further hypothesized that trust influences benefit and risk perceptions and that trust before a disaster relates to trust after a disaster. Results showed that the acceptance and perceptions of nuclear power as well as its trust were more negative after the accident. In our model, perceived benefits and risks determined the acceptance of nuclear power stations both before and after Fukushima. Trust had strong effects on perceived benefits and risks, at both times. People's trust before Fukushima strongly influenced their trust after the accident. In addition, perceived benefits before Fukushima correlated with perceived benefits after the accident. Thus, the nuclear accident did not seem to have changed the relations between the determinants of acceptance. Even after a severe accident, the public may still consider the benefits as relevant, and trust remains important for determining their risk and benefit perceptions. A discussion of the benefits of nuclear power seems most likely to affect the public's acceptance of nuclear power, even after a nuclear accident.     

How Close Is Close Enough: Public Perceptions of the Risks of Industrial Facilities

Public opinion poll data have consistently shown that the proportion of respondents who are willing to have a nuclear power plant in their own community is smaller than the proportion who agree that more nuclear plants should be built in this country. Respondents' judgments of the minimum safe distance from each of eight hazardous facilities confirmed that this finding results from perceived risk gradients that differ by facility (e.g., nuclear vs. natural gas power plants) and social group (e.g., chemical engineers vs. environmentalists) but are relatively stable over time. Ratings of the facilities on thirteen perceived risk dimensions were used to determine whether any of the dimensions could explain the distance data. Because the rank order of the facilities with respect to acceptable distance was very similar to the rank order on a number of the perceived risk dimensions, it is difficult to determine which of the latter is the critical determinant of acceptable distance if, indeed, there is only one. There were, however, a number of reversals of rank order that indicate that the respondents had a differentiated view of technological risk. Finally, data from this and other studies were interpreted as suggesting that perceived lack of any other form of personal control over risk exposure may be an important factor in stimulating public opposition to the siting of hazardous facilities.     

Weighing the Risks of Nuclear Energy and Climate Change: Trust in Different Information Sources,Perceived Risks,and Willingness to Pay for Alternatives to Nuclear Power

We examined how individuals perceive nuclear energy in the context of climate change mitigation and how their perceptions are associated with trust in different risk information sources. We analyzed the interrelationships between trust, perceived risk of nuclear power, climate change concern, perception of nuclear energy as an acceptable way to mitigate climate change, and willingness to pay (WTP) for alternatives to nuclear power. A nationwide survey (N = 967) collected in Finland was analyzed with structural equation modeling. The associations between trust and perceived risk of nuclear power, climate change concern, and perception of nuclear power as a way to mitigate climate change varied by the type of information source. Political party support and other background variables were associated with trust in different information sources. The effect of trust in information sources on WTP was mediated by perceived risks and benefits. The results will increase our understanding of how individuals perceive nuclear energy as a way to cut CO₂ emissions and the role of trust in different information sources in shaping nuclear risk perceptions and energy choices.     

Changes in the Factors Influencing Public Acceptance of Nuclear Power Generation in Japan Since the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Disaster

Public support for nuclear power generation has decreased in Japan since the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident in March 2011. This study examines how the factors influencing public acceptance of nuclear power changed after this event. The influence factors examined are perceived benefit, perceived risk, trust in the managing bodies, and pro‐environmental orientation (i.e., new ecological paradigm). This study is based on cross‐sectional data collected from two online nationwide surveys: one conducted in November 2009, before the nuclear accident, and the other in October 2011, after the accident. This study's target respondents were residents of Aomori, Miyagi, and Fukushima prefectures in the Tohoku region of Japan, as these areas were the epicenters of the Great East Japan Earthquake and the locations of nuclear power stations. After the accident, trust in the managing bodies was found to have a stronger influence on perceived risk, and pro‐environmental orientation was found to have a stronger influence on trust in the managing bodies; however, perceived benefit had a weaker positive influence on public acceptance. We also discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.     

Perceived Nuclear Risk, Organizational Commitment, and Appraisals of Management: A Study of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel

This study examined to what extent nuclear risk perceptions, organizational commitment (OC), and appraisals of management are associated with each other among nuclear power plant personnel. The sample consisted of 428 nuclear power plant workers who completed a questionnaire at their workplace. Perceived nuclear risk and OC were most closely related to the appraisals of the top management of the organization. As the trust in and satisfaction with the top management increased, perceived nuclear safety and acceptance of the organizational goals and values heightened. This result is discussed in the context of industrial safety management.     

Effects of the Chernobyl Accident on Public Perceptions of Nuclear Plant Accident Risks

Assessments of public perceptions of the characteristics of a nuclear power plant accident and affective responses to its likelihood were conducted 5 months before and 1 month after the Chernobyl accident. Analyses of data from 69 residents of southwestern Washington showed significant test-retest correlations for only 10 of 18 variables--accident likelihood, three measures of impact characteristics, three measures of affective reactions, and hazard knowledge by governmental sources. Of these variables, only two had significant changes in mean ratings; frequency of thought and frequency of discussion about a nearby nuclear power plant both increased. While there were significant changes only for two personal consequences (expectations of cancer and genetic effects), both of these decreased. The results of this study indicate that more attention should be given to assessing the stability of risk perceptions over time. Moreover, the data demonstrate that experience with a major accident can actually decrease rather than increase perceptions of threat.     

Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan

Nuclear power is a highly controversial and salient example of environmental risk. The siting or operating of a nuclear power plant often faces widespread public opposition. Although studies of public perceptions of nuclear power date back to 1970s, little research attempts to explain the spatial heterogeneity of risk attitude toward nuclear power among individuals or communities. This article intends to improve the knowledge about the major factors contributing to nuclear power plant risk perceptions by mapping the geographical patterns of local risk perception and examining the determinants in forming the nature and distribution of the perceived risk among potentially affected population. The analysis was conducted by a case study of the Second Nuclear Power Plant (SNPP) in Taiwan by using a novel methodology that incorporates a comprehensive risk perception (CRP) model into an ethnographic approach called risk perception mapping (RPM). First, we examined the determinants of local nuclear power risk perceptions through the CRP model and multivariate regression analysis. Second, the results were integrated with the RPM approach to map and explain the spatial pattern of risk perceptions. The findings demonstrate that the respondents regard the nuclear power plant as an extremely high‐risk facility, causing them to oppose the SNPP and reject the compensation payment to accept its continuing operation. Results also indicate that perceptions of nuclear power risk were mainly influenced by social trust, psychological and socioeconomic attributes, proximity, and the perceived effects of the SNPP on the quality of everyday life.     

Information Sources as Explanatory Variables for the Belgian Health‐Related Risk Perception of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident

The media play an important role in risk communication, providing information about accidents, both nearby and far away. Each media source has its own presentation style, which could influence how the audience perceives the presented risk. This study investigates the explanatory power of 12 information sources (traditional media, new media, social media, and interpersonal communication) for the perceived risk posed by radiation released from the damaged Fukushima nuclear power plant on respondents’ own health and that of the population in general. The analysis controlled for attitude toward nuclear energy, gender, education, satisfaction with the media coverage, and duration of attention paid to the coverage. The study uses a large empirical data set from a public opinion survey, which is representative for the Belgian population with respect to six sociodemographic variables. Results show that three information sources are significant regressors of perceived health‐related risk of the nuclear accident: television, interpersonal communication, and the category of miscellaneous online sources. More favorable attitudes toward nuclear power, longer attention to the coverage, and higher satisfaction with the provided information lead to lower risk perception. Taken together, the results suggest that the media can indeed have a modest influence on how the audience perceives a risk.     

The Health Impact of Major Nuclear Accidents: The Case Of Greece

An assessment of the radiological consequences that would result for the population of Greece from postulated major nuclear accidents in the Kozloduy nuclear power station in Bulgaria is performed. Kozloduy lies at a distance of 225 km from the northern borders of Greece and contains six reactors, all of the Russian WWER type. The postulated accidents that are classified as level 7 accidents on the International Nuclear Event Scale, involve significant releases of radioactive materials into the environment, and widespread health and environmental effects. The analysis is performed by the MACCS code. The estimated consequences are compared to the corresponding actual impact of the Chernobyl accident in Greece. The results of the analysis indicate that, under the conservative assumptions adopted, the radiological consequences of the most severe accidents considered would be about 1.5 orders of magnitude larger than the actual radiological consequences of the Chernobyl accident.     

Of Disasters and Dragon Kings: A Statistical Analysis of Nuclear Power Incidents and Accidents

We perform a statistical study of risk in nuclear energy systems. This study provides and analyzes a data set that is twice the size of the previous best data set on nuclear incidents and accidents, comparing three measures of severity: the industry standard International Nuclear Event Scale, the Nuclear Accident Magnitude Scale of radiation release, and cost in U.S. dollars. The rate of nuclear accidents with cost above 20 MM 2013 USD, per reactor per year, has decreased from the 1970s until the present time. Along the way, the rate dropped significantly after Chernobyl (April 1986) and is expected to be roughly stable around a level of 0.003, suggesting an average of just over one event per year across the current global fleet. The distribution of costs appears to have changed following the Three Mile Island major accident (March 1979). The median cost became approximately 3.5 times smaller, but an extremely heavy tail emerged, being well described by a Pareto distribution with parameter α = 0.5–0.6. For instance, the cost of the two largest events, Chernobyl and Fukushima (March 2011), is equal to nearly five times the sum of the 173 other events. We also document a significant runaway disaster regime in both radiation release and cost data, which we associate with the “dragon‐king” phenomenon. Since the major accident at Fukushima (March 2011) occurred recently, we are unable to quantify an impact of the industry response to this disaster. Excluding such improvements, in terms of costs, our range of models suggests that there is presently a 50% chance that (i) a Fukushima event (or larger) occurs every 60–150 years, and (ii) that a Three Mile Island event (or larger) occurs every 10–20 years. Further—even assuming that it is no longer possible to suffer an event more costly than Chernobyl or Fukushima—the expected annual cost and its standard error bracket the cost of a new plant. This highlights the importance of improvements not only immediately following Fukushima, but also deeper improvements to effectively exclude the possibility of “dragon‐king” disasters. Finally, we find that the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES) is inconsistent in terms of both cost and radiation released. To be consistent with cost data, the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters would need to have between an INES level of 10 and 11, rather than the maximum of 7.     

Risk Perception Among Nuclear Power Plant Personnel: A Survey

This study investigated risk perception, well-being, and organizational commitment among nuclear power plant personnel. The study group, 428 employees from a nuclear power plant, completed a questionnaire which included the same questions as those in previous surveys on risk perception of lay persons and industrial workers. Hazards at work were not seen as a sizable problem by nuclear power plant personnel. The study group estimated the safety of nuclear power plants better and the possibility of a serious nuclear accident as more unlikely than the general public. Compared to employees in other industrial companies, the overall perceived risks at work among plant personnel did not exceed the respective perceptions of the reference groups. Risk-related attitudes did not explain well-being among plant personnel, but the relationship between the perceived probability of a serious nuclear accident at work and organizational commitment yielded to a significant correlation: Those plant workers who estimated the likelihood of an accident higher were less committed to the organization.     

On-Site Storage of High Level Nuclear Waste: Attitudes and Perceptions of Local Residents

No public policy issue has been as difficult as high-level nuclear waste. Debates continue regarding Yucca Mountain as a disposal site, and—more generally—the appropriateness of geologic disposal and the need to act quickly. Previous research has focused on possible social, political, and economic consequences of a facility in Nevada. Impacts have been predicted to be potentially large and to emanate mainly from stigmatization of the region due to increased perceptions of risk. Analogous impacts from leaving waste at power plants have been either ignored or assumed to be negligible. This paper presents survey results on attitudes of residents in three counties where nuclear waste is currently stored. Topics include perceived risk, knowledge of nuclear waste and radiation, and impacts on jobs, tourism, and housing values from leaving waste on site. Results are similar to what has been reported for Nevada; the public is concerned about possible adverse effects from on-site storage of waste.     

Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis in Assessment of the Thyroid Cancer Risk Related to Chernobyl Fallout in Eastern France

The increase in the thyroid cancer incidence in France observed over the last 20 years has raised public concern about its association with the 1986 nuclear power plant accident at Chernobyl. At the request of French authorities, a first study sought to quantify the possible risk of thyroid cancer associated with the Chernobyl fallout in France. This study suffered from two limitations. The first involved the lack of knowledge of spontaneous thyroid cancer incidence rates (in the absence of exposure), which was especially necessary to take their trends into account for projections over time; the second was the failure to consider the uncertainties. The aim of this article is to enhance the initial thyroid cancer risk assessment for the period 1991-2007 in the area of France most exposed to the fallout (i.e., eastern France) and thereby mitigate these limitations. We consider the changes over time in the incidence of spontaneous thyroid cancer and conduct both uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. The number of spontaneous thyroid cancers was estimated from French cancer registries on the basis of two scenarios: one with a constant incidence, the other using the trend observed. Thyroid doses were estimated from all available data about contamination in France from Chernobyl fallout. Results from a 1995 pooled analysis published by Ron et al. were used to determine the dose-response relation. Depending on the scenario, the number of spontaneous thyroid cancer cases ranges from 894 (90% CI: 869-920) to 1,716 (90% CI: 1,691-1,741). The number of excess thyroid cancer cases predicted ranges from 5 (90% UI: 1-15) to 63 (90% UI: 12-180). All of the assumptions underlying the thyroid cancer risk assessment are discussed.     

Remedial Policies in Radiologically-Contaminated Forests: Environmental Consequences and Risk Assessment

As a result of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident in 1986, large forested areas in Europe were contaminated by radionuclides. Extensive societal pressure has been exerted to decrease the radiation dose to the population and to the environment. Thus, in making abatement and remediation policy decisions not only economic costs, but also human and environmental risk assessment are desired. Forest remediation by organic layer removal, one of the most promising cleanup policies, is considered in this paper. Ecological risk assessment requires evaluation of the radionuclide distribution in forests. The FORESTPATH model^(1,2) is used for predicting the radionuclide fate in forest compartments after deposition as well as for evaluating the application of the remedial policy. Time of intervention and radionuclide deposition profile was predicted as being crucial for the remediation efficiency. Risk assessment conducted for a critical group of forest users in Belarus shows that consumption of forest products (berries and mushrooms) leads to about 0.004% risk of a fatal cancer. Cost-benefit analysis for forest cleanup suggests that complete removal of organic layer is too expensive for application in Belarus.     

Public Response to the Tokai Nuclear Accident

This article discusses the influence of the September 30, 1999 nuclear accident in Tokai village (Japan) on the public's attitudes toward nuclear power in Japan. The data used in this report were taken from the results of two surveys conducted mainly to measure the attitudes of the Japanese public with regard to the use of nuclear power in Japan. The first survey was done before the accident in District 23 in Tokyo and also in Osaka and Nagoya. The second survey, which took place after the accident in District 23 in Tokyo and in Osaka and Nagoya, also included residents in a number of other cities of various sizes throughout Japan. The results of the two surveys showed that (1) acceptability of and trust in nuclear power operation had decreased, (2) perceived accident likelihood and public interest had significantly increased, and (3) there had been neither significant nor even a small change in the public's self-rated knowledge about nuclear power or their distrust of the government. The results also showed that the ratio of nuclear power generation opponents to total respondents had considerably increased (7% to 23%) whereas nuclear power generation supporters had moderately decreased (1% to 12%).     

Local Acceptance of a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository

The siting of nuclear waste facilities has been very difficult in all countries. Recent experience in Sweden indicates, however, that it may be possible, under certain circumstances, to gain local support for the siting of a high-level nuclear waste (HLNW) repository. The article reports on a study of attitudes and risk perceptions of people living in four municipalities in Sweden where HLNW siting was being intensely discussed at the political level, in media, and among the public. Data showed a relatively high level of consensus on acceptability of at least further investigation of the issue; in two cases local councils have since voted in favor of a go-ahead, and in one case only a very small majority defeated the issue. Models of policy attitudes showed that these were related to attitude to nuclear power, attributes of the perceived HLNW risk, and trust. Factors responsible for acceptance are discussed at several levels. One is the attitude to nuclear power, which is becoming more positive, probably because no viable alternatives are in sight. Other factors have to do with the extensive information programs conducted in these municipalities, and with the logical nature of the conclusion that they would be good candidates for hosting the national HLNW repository.     

中国核电站供应链及其风险研究

基于核燃料和设备的核电站供应链体系是实现核电站连续生产运行的基本保障,因核电站生命周期较长,随着核电企业运行时间的延续,四大核电供应链面临的矛盾,以及核电站上游环节供应链的诸多变化,如供应商倒闭、供应商价格锁定、设备和备件更新换代无法实现直接维修更换等,带来了众多的核电站供应链的风险。核电站要建立一套完善的主动供应链风险管理流程,以识别、分析、定义和规避供应链风险,确保核电站连续高效、安全运行目标的实现。     

Knowledge and Risk Perception Among Nuclear Power Plant Employees

This is a study of knowledge, risk perception, and attitudes among nuclear power plant employees. A total of 236 persons participated, belonging to 10 different professional groups and working at two Swedish power plants. Job-related radiation risks were judged about average as compared to a number of other risks. On the whole, the participants in the study were satisfied with the measures of safety at work, but there were some exceptions to this rule, especially among those hired for temporary jobs through external contractors. The experience of job-related radiation risks was related to the level of knowledge about radiation and its risks: those who knew less experienced larger risks. General level of anxiety did not correlate with risk perception. The latter was accounted for mainly by perceived radiation risks. Job satisfaction was more strongly related to perceived conventional job risks than to nuclear risks. Risk ratings were related to how subjects defined the concept of risk. Those who stressed consequences as part of their risk definition gave higher risk ratings.