Re: Commissioner Dicus speaks on the public's perception about Radiat ion Pro...

["J. J. Rozental" <joseroze@NETVISION.NET.IL>]

- ----- Original Message -----

From: Sandy Perle <sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET>

To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 7:17 PM

Subject: Re: Commissioner Dicus speaks on the public's perception about

Radiat ion Pro...





> This Dicus speech is the same old junk about "perception" that we've been

> hearing since assessment of risk perception became a thriving cottage

> industry!



- ----------------------------------

<

So, we keep asking ourselves why we have a problem, why the nuclear

option for all practical reasons is non-existent, and why nobody

believes us?



The answer is clear.

<



Dear Sandy,



Yes it is very clear,



a) Public do not believe in Regulatory Authority, as honest, human,

sensitive, attentive, sincere;



b) Society is not against the uses of radioactive substances in medicine,

industry and research, the society is afraid of possibility of an

radiological or nuclear accident and the waste solution;



d) In his mentality many nuclear professional also with large nuclear

experience, think that is so clear what they are talking about, however,

the fact they can't recognize the public emotion and society's difficulty to

understand;



d) Communication is a job for trained communications experts who work in

direct consultation with technical nuclear professionals. Without this

interaction can be released some kind of information, however never

communication - Communication is an art from brain to brain, even in form of

a written document.



e) How many among this list have had training in Nuclear Communication

Issue? -- How many have had participation in Scenario Accidents? - How many

had even studied the reasons of misperception and lessons learned in the

many radiological accident in the past?



I'll give example in the recent accident in Tokaimura to radsafers analysis

some reasons why public doesn't believe: (The Japanese Mea Culpa)



1 - The Japanese government admitted that it had moved too slowly to respond

to the incident. It did not hold its first emergency meeting until 10 hours

after the incident occurred;



2 - "We lacked a more serious understanding of the situation of the

 accident", said Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiromu Nonaka;



3 - Numata blamed the government's slowness to respond, in part on poor

communication between the plant operators and the government -- "There may

have been a series of unfortunate events taking place", he said. "This

particular accident took place in a plant owned by a private enterprise, and

the communication channel between this private plant and the government

facility may not have worked as it should have. But once we learned the

seriousness of this accident, we engaged in a very intensive effort to

prevent the worst from happening" (Sadaaki Numata is a spokesman for the

Japanese Foreign Ministry);



4 - "The situation is one our country has never experienced", a government

spokesperson said;



5 - We lacked a more serious understanding of the situation of the accident"

, said Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiromu Nonaka;



6 - Chief cabinet secretary Hiromu Nonaka called the failures that led to

the accident "unthinkable", and declared that "we must examine how nuclear

facilities are being managed"



Jose Julio Rozental

joseroze@netvision.net.il

Israel



PS. To those that ask the complete paper presented in Goiania, I'll send it

next Tuesday to add some jpg pictures













************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.



------------------------------