Antinuclear

Australian Carl-Magnus Larsson will head UNSCEAR report on the Fukushima nuclear disaster

Next December Carl-Magnus Larsson, head of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, takes over as UNSCEAR chairman.

UNSCEAR has been the go-to body for such complex, high-profile investigations since it was established by the UN General Assembly in 1955 under the chairmanship of Australian radiation expert Cecil Eddy…. the Fukushima report .. will be
presented to the [United Nations] General Assembly late next year.

Radiation risks high in Japan http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/radiation-risks-high-in-japan/story-e6frg8y6-1226456949429 BY: LEIGH DAYTON   The Australian August 25, 2012 IT’S hard to believe, but earlier this month the power company that runs Japan’s devastated Fukushima nuclear power plant revealed that five people working on the clean-up had covered their radiation detectors with lead, rendering them useless.

The Tokyo Electric Power Company said the five were contracted by a subcontractor of a – yes – subcontractor and were not even authorised to work at the plant. Other workers were found not to have used dosimeters at all.

“That such egregious flouting of safety protocols would occur despite the media attention on the clean-up efforts is astonishing,” an
editorial last week in the journal Nature said. “And it seems all the
more so given the ongoing concern about the health risks of radiation
in Japan.”

TEPCO’s tendency to non-transparency is disturbing. It also indicates
the difficulty facing international experts assessing the radiation
exposure and health risks from what is the largest nuclear accident
since the catastrophic 1986 explosion and fire at the Chernobyl
nuclear power plant in Ukraine. Last December the UN General Assembly
handed that complex job to its Scientific Committee on the Effects of
Atomic Radiation. Next December Carl-Magnus Larsson, head of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, takes over as UNSCEAR chairman.

“It’s inappropriate to speculate what will come up and out of the
assessment,” Larsson says of the Fukushima report, which will be
presented to the General Assembly late next year.

“All these accidents are very rare and have their own peculiarities,
but in terms of releases and exposures we are not close to Chernobyl.”

Larsson says 72 scientists from 18 countries are assessing the
peculiarities of the accident in four areas: measurements of radiation
and radioactivity; release and dispersion of radioactive material;
exposure of the public and plants and animals; and exposure of
workers, including those contracted for the clean-up.

Under the chairmanship of Larsson’s predecessor, German radiation
expert Wolfgang Weiss, ARPANSA took the lead on the public exposure
investigation. “ARPANSA staff visited Japan three times following the
accident to work with Japanese and international colleagues on
dosimetry and other aspects related to exposure,” says Larsson, who
plans to travel to Japan in December.

UNSCEAR has been the go-to body for such complex, high-profile investigations since it was established by the UN General Assembly in 1955 under the chairmanship of Australian radiation expert Cecil Eddy.

Victoria-based nuclear radiologist Peter Karamoskos says Larsson’s
election to the position last May is a credit to Australia’s ongoing
expertise. “It also confirms that Carl-Magnus has an international
reputation in this field,” notes Karamoskos, the public representative
on ARPANSA’s radiation health committee.

Retired ARPANSA health physicist Peter Burns, who chaired UNSCEAR in
2006-08, tells Weekend Health: “UNSCEAR is unique in the UN system
because it reports directly to the General Assembly.
“Countries nominate a scientist to the group, not a bureaucrat,” says
Burns, a member of the International Commission on Radiological
Protection. “We scientists review and write reports which go straight
to the General Assembly. No bureaucrat or politician sees it or can
interfere with it.”

Still, there’s plenty of internal debate and discussion, and Larsson
says he would be concerned if there weren’t scientific tensions. “It
doesn’t do us any good if we’re all singing the same note.”

According to Burns, UNSCEAR fits into an international scientific,
medical and legal scheme for managing radiation release and exposure.

“UNSCEAR measures the effects of radiation and measures the sources,
but does not say what to do about it.”

That role falls to the ICRP, an advisory body providing
recommendations and guidance on radiation protection. And the
International Atomic Energy Agency provides legal, policy and
technical advice as part of its role of promoting the peaceful use of
nuclear energy.
As Fukushima illustrates, unfortunately UNSCEAR’s work is continuous.
It is also wide-ranging. Today, Karamoskos will outline UNSCEAR’s
current projects at the 20th world congress of International
Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, meeting in Hiroshima.

“UNSCEAR puts forward a work program to the General Assembly, who tick
it off; then it reports every three to four years,” he told Weekend
Health before leaving for Japan.

Along with the Fukushima study, the committee is working with UN
member states, international organisations, non-governmental groups
and specially engaged experts on eight reports. Topics range from the
ability to attribute risk and effects of radiation exposure to
uncertainties about estimating the risk of cancer from exposure to
ionising radiation – that is, radiation energetic enough to knock an
electron from an atom or molecule.
Larsson says many of the reports are highly technical. “Down the line
we have reports that relate to mechanism, modelling and children that
are relevant (to public policy) in different ways.”

As to the Fukushima study, Larsson says next year’s report will
include a detailed assessment of the first year’s exposures, along
with projections of future “dose exposures”. That report will be
followed up in the next 10 years.

He says there’s huge interest in the Fukushima study: “It will be a
highly quoted source, certainly in the scientific community. The
debate on nuclear safety will be informed by the outcomes.”

August 25, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics international