The president of the Seismological Society of Japan says his profession was partly to blame for the disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant because of misleading forecasts of quake risks.
The president of the Seismological Society of Japan says his profession was partly to blame for the disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant because of misleading forecasts of quake risks.
Kazuro Hirahara, professor of seismology at Kyoto University, told The Asahi Shimbun that the March 11 temblor had driven home how little seismologists know about quakes.
Before the disaster, a panel at the Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion at the science ministry predicted there was a 99 percent chance of a quake around magnitude 7.5 off Miyagi Prefecture within 30 years. But scientists were stunned by the magnitude-9.0 quake that devastated the region. Predictions of quakes off Miyagi Prefecture had previously been considered to be ahead of research in other areas.
With aftershocks from the quake expected to continue for five years and an earthquake of up to magnitude 8.0 a distinct possibility, Hirahara said Japan should draw up a plan to eventually phase out its nuclear power plants in the light of its inability to predict the real risks facing the industry.
Excerpts from the interview follow:
* * *
Question: How many more years do you think aftershocks of the Great East Japan Earthquake will continue to occur?
Answer: We expect aftershocks for more than five years in areas surrounding the hypocentral region. There is the possibility that an earthquake measuring close to magnitude 8.0 could strike. Seismologists have predicted that Tonankai and Nankai earthquakes in waters in central and western Japan could occur around the middle of this century. Before that, we could see more earthquakes shake inland Japan. We would not be surprised if a powerful temblor were to hit the Tokyo metropolitan area any time.
Q: How should we prepare for earthquakes?
A: People should stop thinking that they will be safe. We are living in an era in which we have to be keenly aware that Japan is a quake-prone country. I recommend that each of us should visualize how to protect ourselves from the collapse of something if a quake strikes. If people can survive the crucial first seconds, they will likely be able to manage the rest.
Q: What is your view of the March 11 quake and ensuing nuclear accident at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant?
A: Seismologists are to blame for having given a wrong forecast of the possible size of the anticipated temblor. But the response to the nuclear accident also appears to have been tardy. Tokyo Electric Power Co. was unable to admit that it was failing to get on top of the situation at the plant after the accident. It kept saying that things were under control. With the current state of seismologic research, it is difficult to anticipate how each temblor will strike. The Great East Japan Earthquake drove home the lesson that we do not know what will happen. We should draw up a plan to phase out nuclear power plants and eventually depart from nuclear power generation, even if we cannot do it immediately.
Q: Was the earthquake beyond the expectations of seismologists?
A: There are many excuses we can make, but it amounted to a defeat for us. The only thing we can say is that it was beyond our expectations. I was gripped by a sense of loss. I must have gone through the data from the quake for about a month after it struck. I don't recall clearly what I was doing then. Until the Great East Japan Earthquake actually hit, we had missed the fact that a huge amount of energy had been stored under the sea near the Japan Trench. We have set up a panel at the Seismological Society of Japan to identify problems and look into what went wrong with our forecast.
Q: The Central Disaster Management Council at the Cabinet Office is also reviewing its response, so it can better prepare for the largest possible earthquake.
A: We have released to the public only the information that was deemed certain from all the analysis available. But, from now on, we will urge government officials to be ready to deal with a temblor more powerful than previous predictions. (We now realize) such a quake is possible, depending on the way we read data. The way information is conveyed is also important. Scientists did not bother to get training to help them get across information because they thought their job was only to disclose what they had discovered and established. Scientists should learn how to convey information by working with sociologists, administrators and the public to find out how it will be received.
Q: Scientists are finding some of the questions the public is most interested in tough to answer. For example, experts on radiation are having difficulties communicating their opinions about the effects of radiation.
A: It must be really tough to predict the effect of radiation on health and the environment 10-20 years from now. The data is not available. But I would like the experts to give us some advice to help steer our society.
Q: As a seismologist, what can you do?
A: I am wondering if we can come up with a revolutionary apparatus that will allow a whole city to float up and avoid damage if a quake hits--just as it happens in manga. I believe that continuing our effort to try to understand earthquakes is our way of taking social responsibility.