Worst case scenarios

London – The UK government has asked Dr Mike Weightman, the UK’s chief nuclear inspector to report on the implications of the still unfolding nuclear disaster in Japan on existing and new plants in this country.

Soundings, however, from Chris Huhne, secretary of state for Energy and Climate Change suggest that the exercise will be more about reassuring the public than a root-and-branch examination of all aspects of nuclear safety.

“Safety is and will continue to be the number one priority for existing nuclear sites and for any new power stations,” said Huhne. “I want to ensure that any lessons learned from Mike Weightman’s report are applied to the UK’s new build programme.”

Any such review will likely rely heavily on metrics and standards developed by regulators, the industry and safety experts over many years.

According to Weightman, his report will be based on “the best technical advice, consulting nationally and internationally with colleagues and organisations who, like us, have the safety and security of people and society uppermost in our minds.”

However, in leading this review, Weightman might also reflect on the seeming inability of experts and authorities to allow for the type of worse-case scenarios now happening at the Fukushima facility.

With hindsight, alarms bells should have been ringing worldwide for many years about the dangers posed by ageing nuclear plants in locations prone to extreme earthquakes and tsunamis.

Similarly, it took the BP Macondo disaster to make the oil & gas industry and regulatory agencies in the US and worldwide aware of the potential dire consequences of drilling for oil in extreme deepwater locations.

The tragic events of the past week demand a radical new approach to ensuring the safety of nuclear and, indeed, all hazardous industrial operations – not whitewash.