Urgent Proposal Regarding theAccident at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant
June 2011
Institute for International Policy Studies
1. Although the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant was caused by a massive,
unprecedented earthquake and the tsunami that followed, the core meltdowns andemissions of radioactive substances and the large-scale evacuation of local inhabitants
rendered it a major nuclear power plant accident on a par with Chernobyl. It isextremely regrettable that this accident resulted in a loss of confidence in the safety ofnuclear power generation, as the Fukushima area, understandably, became an exampleof the threat of nuclear hazard to the people of Japan and the world.
The Japanese government and Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) have aduty to continue maximum efforts to prevent the spread of the damage, to reflect deeply
on what brought about this situation, and to thoroughly probe the causes of the accident
in cooperation with other concerned nations and international institutions—such as theIAEA—that not only maintain copious information on previous nuclear accidents butare also closely involved in the peaceful use of nuclear power. Beyond this, however,they also have an obligation to conduct scientific investigations and assessments on thesuitability of their crisis avoidance measures, the appropriateness of the local populace
evacuation, and the measures taken to prevent damage caused by radiation. They should
publish the results and draw lessons from them. In particular, it is essential that they
provide detailed information to other nations and make a contribution to safety of
nuclear power generation worldwide.
2. The most serious problem in the recent accident was that there was no singlecommand-and-control function for disaster countermeasures—instead, the command
structure was complicated, and the precise authority and obligations of the different
leaders concerned were unclear in the extreme. The facilities and mechanisms which
had been developed for anticipating a nuclear disaster were not fully utilized; in
addition, problems were compounded by the ad hoc organizations and executive
positions that were created at the time. Attempts must be made to fully comprehend therealities of this system and to drastically revise it.
A number of government departments are involved in safety regulation for thenuclear power industry, including the Cabinet Office’s Nuclear Safety Commission; theMinistry of Economy, Trade, and Industry’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency; theMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology; and the Ministry ofHealth, Labour, and Welfare. As a result, authority is dispersed, and it is unclear whereoverall command and control reside. It became evident that not only were the standards
for safety regulation inadequate, but also that there were no standards at all regarding
radiation doses in food and soil. The administrative structure for safety regulation needs
to be thoroughly overhauled.
Japan should establish a new Emergency Management Agency (or similarly
named body), which would engage in disaster prevention activities and respond flexibly
to emergencies in times of major earthquakes, tsunamis, or typhoons that involve anuclear disaster. This newly established organization should comprise active units thatcombine personnel from the Self-Defense Forces, the Fire and Disaster Management
Agency, the National Police Agency, and the Japan Coast Guard. It should maintain theequipment necessary for special operations, engage in continuous practical training, andalso serve as an organization that would respond to requests from overseas. As well as
an administrative function, it should also maintain a first-class research function withregard to disasters and disaster prevention, which should also include participation byexperts and researchers from both Japan and overseas.
3. The government will be giving future consideration to permanent measures based on
the investigation of the causes of the accident, at which time the following points ought
to be considered:(1) Regarding the issue of where to locate nuclear power plants, safety standards
must be revised based on the latest information on earthquakes, tsunamis, and otherdisasters, with due consideration given to proper safety factors. These revisions must be
made immediately, and countermeasures against earthquakes and tsunamis (such as thefortification of breakwaters and the genuine multiplexing of emergency coolingfunctions) must be implemented at existing nuclear power plants—regardless of theexpense. It has also been pointed out that the concentrated deployment of as many as six
reactors in a single location represents a problem, and proper verification should also becarried out on this score.
It is believed that the reason why all the multiple safeguards (which represent thevery foundation of nuclear safety) malfunctioned one after the other, such that the entire
facility at Fukushima suffered a blackout, was that electrically powered equipment vitalfor powering the protection systems was situated underground.
In addition, the safety measures for the pools containing the spent fuel rods have
hitherto been inadequate compared to the safety measures for the nuclear reactors
themselves. These must be reconsidered.
(2) As well as strengthening safety measures to prevent accidents, Japan must also
radically expand and strengthen measures to limit damage to an absolute minimum
when an accident does occur.
(i) The initial reaction in response to a nuclear disaster is extremely important. On
this occasion, a combined government-TEPCO headquarters was set up to deal with theaccident; however, the government should develop an integrated rapid-response system
incorporating nuclear power operators.
The Act on Special Measures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness wasenacted as a special law based on the Basic Act on Disaster Control Measures, whichprescribes collaboration between local government and the national government
regarding measures to be taken in response to disasters such as typhoons andearthquakes. In view of the distinctive nature of nuclear disasters, this law should bereworked to enable a rapid and flexible response that is directed by the government intimes of emergency. The government should also attempt to accumulate a wide-range ofspecialist knowledge, so as to enable rapid decision-making.
(ii) In the recent accident, the Self-Defense Forces, the Fire and Disaster
Management Agency, the National Police Agency, and the Japan Coast Guard played
active roles to prevent the spread of damage. However, there was confusion over thespraying of water to cool the reactors, as there was no consensus regarding the questionof which organization bore responsibility for this. As well as revising the Act on SpecialMeasures Concerning Nuclear Emergency Preparedness and clarifying matters such as
the division of roles in times of emergency, the government should work to upgrade
equipment and improve joint training, and should rapidly implement genuinely realistic
special training for nuclear disasters, using scenarios that anticipate the worst possible
circumstances.
In particular, systemic improvements should be made so as to give theSelf-Defense Forces an independent role right from the initial stages of an emergency
that involves a nuclear disaster—in view of the highly valuable contribution which they-2-made on this occasion (dispatch to nuclear and other disasters being one of theiressential missions). This included spraying water, transporting equipment and materials,
removing obstructions, conducting decontamination operations, and cooperating with
the US military.
(iii) The Japanese have not done well in preparing for a serious situation. By wayof example, despite the fact that research and development on robots for hazardous
environments was underway in anticipation of a nuclear disaster, there was no actual
demand for them from the power companies, who judged that possessing such robots
would cause unease regarding the safety of nuclear power. In the USA and France, theopposite mindset prevails. Japan needs to change its thinking with regard to theprevention of nuclear disaster.
(iv) The decision to accept relatively little damage in order to avoid major
consequences requires decisiveness on the part of the various people in positions ofresponsibility. It is necessary to verify the appropriateness of various decisions—forexample, the injection of seawater in order to cool reactors, the venting to avoid
hydrogen explosions, and the delay in announcing the system for assessing the effectsof radioactivity (for fear of public panic). However, the relatively swift decisions toevacuate inhabitants and to have people take shelter indoors are worthy of praise.
The ability to make difficult decisions under severe conditions is ultimately aquestion of the leadership skills of the people in the various positions of responsibility.
However, in order to help them make more appropriate decisions, criteria must be
established in advance with regard to specific decisions, practical training must beconducted on a regular basis, and the skills of the people in charge must be improved. In
addition, the government must retain and nurture personnel who are knowledgeable
about the safety of the entire nuclear power system, who can make appropriate choices
and technical decisions based on limited data, and who can present the options andpoints of issue to those in charge.
(v) In the course of the relief operations for the current case, it became apparent
that protective suits, dosimeters, emergency communication devices, andradiation-proof machinery and tools were in short supply, while unmanned observation
instrumentation, work machinery, and robots were unavailable. The nine Japanese
power companies should establish a joint disaster prevention organization, for which thegovernment should assume part of the financial burden. This organization should
maintain sufficient equipment and materials, and retain specialist personnel. A systemshould be created that enables the Self-Defense Forces, the Fire and Disaster
Management Agency, the National Police Agency, and the Japan Coast Guard toparticipate in the planning for this joint disaster prevention organization, with special
consideration given to joint practical training and the transportation of equipment andmaterials.
4. Nuclear power had come to be regarded as the trump card in energy policy, in termsof a stable energy supply and the battle against global warming. However, this accident
has shaken public confidence in the safety of nuclear power. Japan must drasticallyrevise its medium- to long-term energy policy. This is not a problem that Japan faces
alone—rather, it signifies the fact that reconciling resource limitations and measures tocombat global warming with worldwide economic development (including that ofnewly emerging nations) represents an extremely difficult issue.
For the time being, dependence on fossil fuels such as oil, coal, and natural gas
continues to increase in quantitative terms; however, issues such as the depletion ofresources, skyrocketing resource prices, and the rolling back of measures to combat
global warming remain. In order to reduce the levels of carbon dioxide generated in thefuture, it will be necessary to forcefully promote zero-emission thermal powergeneration, in combination with more efficient thermal power plants, high-efficiency-3-

oil-refining, the integrated coal gasification combined cycle, and clean-coal technology,
as well as the capture and storage of carbon dioxide.
In order to increase the adoption of recyclable energy such as solar and windpower, it will be necessary to develop innovative new technologies (as well as improveexisting technology), and to actively promote the infrastructure development that willallow the introduction of distributed energy supply systems—by means of research anddevelopment work on technologies such as storage batteries, superconducting powertransmission, hydrogen supply systems, and smart grids.
5. Since Japan relies heavily on nuclear power for its electricity supply, and since theenergy demand from Japanese industry and Japanese households is principally forelectricity, there will be severely increased pressure on electricity supply and demand
over the next few years. It must be recognized that it is only the enormous efforts of theelectricity suppliers to increase the prominence of nuclear power generation that havemade electricity such an inexpensive form of energy in Japan and that have enabled
Japan to succeed in reducing its carbon dioxide emissions.
The Japanese people will need to summon the determination to endureinconvenience and high prices, and the resolution to conserve energy.
6. In its efforts to deal with the current accident, Japan benefited from superbly effective,
wide-ranging cooperation and support from other concerned nations and frominternational institutions such as the IAEA. On this evidence, Japan should actively
promote collaboration and cooperation with international institutions that possess
in-depth and wide-ranging knowledge of the peaceful use of nuclear power and withother involved nations in order to further improve the safety of nuclear power
generation. Japan must also take urgent measures to correct the damaging rumors
circulating internationally that affect Japanese products such as agricultural produce andJapan’s tourist industry.
7. Japan has embraced the peaceful use of nuclear power throughout both the public andprivate sectors as a matter of national policy. Devoid of resources after its defeat in
World War Two, Japan was able to stage a miraculous recovery and achieve high ratesof growth. These achievements were based on the development of hydraulic power on alarge scale, a switch to oil-fired thermal power, and the rapid adoption of nuclear power(despite various difficulties), which ensured that the nation was kept supplied withsufficient electricity to enable improvements in people’s lives and to allow industrialdevelopment. In marked contrast, newly emerging nations are confronted by electricity
shortages. In addition, the price of electricity affects the international competitivenessof a wide range of industries, and a high-quality electricity supply is obviously essential
to the survival of the high-tech industry. With humanity urgently needing to resolve theproblem of global warming, there have been great expectations for nuclear power interms of its ability to supply energy in abundance and to serve as the driving force
behind worldwide economic development.
However, in some senses Japan has reaped the benefits for too long, whileremaining only dimly aware of the dangers. Although a course correction in nuclear
power policy is required in Japan, any moves to cease nuclear power generation
completely would rob the nation of its strength. Science and technology are the result of
human wisdom, and the advances made contribute greatly to society’s development andwell-being; however, they can also bring about major damage—as in the current
circumstances. The key is to use wisdom in our efforts.
Using all the strength and resources of its public and private sectors, Japan mustclarify the mechanisms behind large-scale natural disasters such as earthquakes, pursue
research into the safe usage of nuclear power, promote advances in the science andtechnology for medical radiation treatment, make full use of the lessons from the recent-4-nuclear accident, overcome the effects, and make contributions to safer nuclear power
generation.

-5-