Japan Geoscience Union Meeting 2021

Presentation information

[J] Poster

H (Human Geosciences ) » H-CG Complex & General

[H-CG27] Nuclear Power and Geoscience in Japan: 10 years after the 3.11 complex disaster

Sat. Jun 5, 2021 5:15 PM - 6:30 PM Ch.12

convener:Daisuke Suetsugu(institute for Marine Geodynamics, Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology), Kohta Juraku(Department of Humanities, Social and Health Sciences, School of Engineering, Tokyo Denki University), Satoshi Kaneshima(Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Kyushu University), Takeshi Sagiya(Disaster Mitigation Research Center, Nagoya University)

5:15 PM - 6:30 PM

[HCG27-P05] Has the situation surrounding nuclear power generation and earth science changed during the last decade?

*Takeshi Sagiya1 (1.Disaster Mitigation Research Center, Nagoya University)

Keywords:earth science, nuclear power generation, public space, social responsibility of scientists

10 years have passed since the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and its disaster. After this disaster, The Seismological Society of Japan launched a special committee to discuss responses to this disaster and I served as the chair. We concluded with the following recommendation. "The seismological community should recognize the situation surrounding their research with sound criticism and we need to improve communication both inside and outside of the academic society" (Sagiya, 2012). After that, as a part of an attempt to put this recommendation in practice, we have been organizing a JpGU session where relationship between nuclear power generation and earth science is discussed. Looking back on these sessions, we can recognize various advances in earth science research and more interdisciplinary communication. On the other hand, the gap between the nuclear power generation side and general earth scientists sill exists. Scientists can mention possible future disasters, but such claim has a large uncertainty. The actual decision differs greatly depending on the treatment of the uncertainty. In order to make a proper decision, multidisciplinary discussion in a "public" space is indispensable, which has not been established yet. Considering such a situation, I would argue that the recommendation in 2012 is still valid.