Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Our society has not trusted nuclear experts due to the bad unexpected sequences
just after the Earthquake/Tsunami/Nuclear Accident, which has been rubbed into
the mind of society repeatedly. It is a serious lesson for scientists. As the first step to
get the future perspective on longer-term climate changes, it is important to carry
out joint fact finding periodically by all committed experts and convert their
findings into a set of lessons on design in general as public goods. Transparencies
on the procedure to converge into a unique voice by scientists are the key in case of
complicated issues. No one knows the right actions against climate changes with
local fluctuations, disclosures of all data and knowledge are required to organize
collaborative challenges by all people.
In short we do not know about the earth perfectly, so that we cannot predict the
next earthquake/tsunami accurately enough with respect to the magnitude, time and
place for preparation. What we can do now is to make our engineering for safety
robust enough against any big risks in the future, and especially to recover the
intrinsic resilience of people to protect themselves based on the available data by
their own capacity to read data and capability to collaborate with colleagues.
Defense-in-depth and/or fault-tolerant design approaches do not work if we
follow experience-based design staying within one specialized academic domain.
We need to prepare an open environment-data commons ironically in preparation
due to the Accident using radioactive materials as tracers, and the data commons
will give us a precise view on the dynamics of environments, especially, water, soil
and sea streams. Establishing robust enough engineering against the next big risk
and disaster is a very challenging subject, but can be done by resolving all ideas into
a set of knowledge and meta-knowledge. In this context “Fukushima” can be
articulated as a strategic procedure to derive local and global control of a complex,
heterogeneous, non-linear and dynamic multi-component environmental system by
identifying the status of the system with limited data.
People who cannot protect themselves have suffered from natural disasters. Each
individual has a fundamental human right to know his/her own risk rather than
ambiguous indices of his/her place. EU Maastricht Treaty says “The absence of
certainties, given the current state of scientific and technological knowledge, must
not delay the adoption of effective and proportionate preventive measures aimed at
forestalling a risk of grave and irreversible damage to the environment at an
economically acceptable cost.” So it looks more practical to carry out health care
of each individual who may have a risk suffered from the release of radioactive
materials, rather than of an unspecified large number of people with a poor statistics.
This way of thinking is true also health issues by any means of environmental issues
as PM2.5 although it is important to control the source term.
Scientific research is required to maintain the public health focusing on individ-
ual care, which may explore another dimension for the public care. In case of
Chernobyl, a holistic approach by combining tele-medicine and human genome
database has been under discussion for practical solutions, and it could be a good
reference for any health issues.
Reliable scientific data and individual care policy can be the basis for reasonable
solutions. In this context, calculated data requires careful evaluation on their
Search WWH ::
Custom Search