|
══════════════════【立報】═══════════════════ |
| 教 育 專 題 深 入 報 導《2007-07-27》 |
| 本期內容 | |
| ◎國際專題：日本地震給核工業帶來的震動 | |
| ◎地震影響日本核計畫 | |
| 國際專題：日本地震給核工業帶來的震動 | |
| 策劃、編譯■陳銳嬪 | |
|
編按：1945年7月，當美國在新墨西哥州阿拉莫戈多附近試爆第一顆原子彈，核時代就此掀開序幕。這60多年間，核能源一直是個爭議性的議題。 2000年11月，在海牙舉行的聯合國地球暖化演說中，核能源被認為是骯髒、危險以及不必要的科技。而在2001年4月，聯合國持續發展會議拒絕把核能源標籤為持續能源，使到核能源又面對另外一次打擊。 最近，日本新潟大地震所帶出的核子安全問題，提醒了我們，該是正視核子安全的時候了。如果回頭看看台灣，我們應該問的或許是，我們從新潟事件學到什麼？核四的興建，會對台灣帶來怎樣的影響？ 越來越多人相信，發生在日本並導致世界上最大核電廠關閉的地震，凸顯了我們所面對的能源危機。 自從1986年前蘇聯車諾比核能電廠發生核子災變後，人們就鮮少公開反對核能。那時候，人們擔心的是能源供應安全和地球暖化。所以，製造核能量所排放出來的碳沒有招來導致地球暖化的批評。對關心環境議題的人士來說，這是個阻礙；對抱持懷疑論者來說，這更加深了他們的不安。 牛津大學研究小組顧問法蘭克‧巴納比認為，核動力的風險太高，並不值得投入。「這一定會有影響，車諾比核能電廠核子災變也帶給我們深遠的影響，這兩件事應該同等看待。問題是關於如何維持平衡？人們的不安與核電廠的擴張如何取得平衡？」 日本7月16日發生的強震導致輻射外洩，迫使東京電力公司（TEPCO）關閉位於日本西北方的柏崎刈羽核電廠。 經濟合作與發展組織（OECD）的諮詢顧問核能署（NEA）指出，最大的衝擊是更高的安全標準。此刻身在巴黎的核能署長路易士‧埃查瓦里透過長途電話表示：「真正的影響將會如此，邏輯上，日後人們在設計新的核電廠時將會特別關注地震方面的尺度。」 他說，不同的國家會面對不同的問題。在歐洲，民意是採用核動力的主要原因，雖然反核也爭取了一些民意。「因為氣候變化以及供應安全，核能源比前幾年更普及。但是在一些國家，會面對政治上的困難。」 英國與美國尋找新一代核能源 在英國，政府提出新一代核電廠計劃，以便在2020年之前把二氧化碳排放量減少到1990年的20％以下。雖然公眾的反對聲浪相對而言是靜默的，但是受到環保團體綠色和平組織的挑戰，政府還是被迫檢討它的核能源政策。 與此同時，英國的能源龍頭老大地位也開始面臨挑戰。英國能源公司（British Energy）原本打算在新的核電廠計劃中扮演重要的角色，但是最後卻發現它必須關閉杭特斯頓和辛克利點的核電廠以應付冗長的維修，在短期內它將無法供應完整的能源。 而世界上最大的能源使用者－美國，相信也在積極尋找新的核子能源設備，而新的核能源執照申請表預計將會在今年開始呈交。雖然眼見東京電力公司面對困難，但是美國的分析家表示，尋找核能源的基本原因依然存在。雖然在短期內東京電力公司事件會影響公眾的信心，但是建立核能源計劃所需的時間才是更大的阻礙。來自惠譽國際信用評等公司（Fitch Ratings）的丹尼斯‧富怡指出：「核電廠的設立與計劃之間耗時良久，誰知道從現在到以後，會有什麼因素影響政策決定者？」 曾受其害 瑞典德國反核能源 瑞典和德國是逐步淘汰核能源的國家之一。這兩個國家都曾經經歷瑞典電力公司Vattenfall所帶來的核子設備問題。 在瑞典，福斯馬克的核反應堆在去年7月曾經緊急停工，根據國際原子能總署的國際核子事故分類標準，這事件被評定為第2級。世界上最嚴重的核災是車諾比核能電廠核子災變事件，該事件被評定為第7級。 Vattenfall在德國的公司──歐洲能源公司也因為兩起緊急停工事件而受到嚴密監視，德國政府警告將會取消相關公司的營運執照。這起事件在人們普遍反核的國家特別敏感，導致前一任的德國政府答應在2020年代中之前，關閉所有的核反應堆。 那些贊同核能源的國家如芬蘭和法國則會開始建立新的核電廠。在法國，核能源供應全國80％的電力供應，法國民眾普遍上對核能源的接受度蠻高，因為核能源代表更便宜的能源。 但是法國還是存在著反對核能者。自從日本新潟發生地震後，法國反核組織「遠離核能」表示，如果此事發生在法國，在法國的58個核反應堆中，其中42個將無法應對類似事件。但是大多數的分析家表示，這是不可能發生的事。 （路透社） A Japanese earthquake that forced the closure of the world's biggest nuclear plant has highlighted the energy source's dangers, just when support had been growing. Worries about security of energy supply and the urgency of fighting climate change had helped to overcome years of opposition to nuclear power after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. Generating nuclear power does not produce any of the carbon emissions blamed for warming the planet. But even for those swayed by environmental considerations, there are obstacles and, for the doubters, Japan's troubles have added to their unease. "It's bound to have an effect. Chernobyl had a huge effect. These things are all factors into the equation. The question is about the balance? Will the public disquiet counteract the huge push by the industry?" asked Frank Barnaby, a consultant at the Oxford Research Group, who argues nuclear power is not worth the risk. A powerful earthquake on July 16 caused radiation leaks, forcing Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501.T: Quote, Profile, Research) (TEPCO) to shut its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in the northwest of the country. The Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), advisory board to the OECD, said the biggest impact would be higher safety standards. "The real impact will be that, logically, people designing new nuclear power plants will pay even more attention to the criteria for seismic events," said Luis Echavarri, the NEA's director, speaking by telephone from Paris. Other difficulties varied from country to country. In Europe, public opinion was the dominant factor, although to an extent it had been won over, Echavarri said. "Nuclear energy is much more popular than a few years ago because of climate change and security of supply, but still in some countries, it's politically difficult." BRITAIN, U.S. LOOK TO NEW GENERATION In Britain, the government has called for a new generation of nuclear power plants as part of efforts to cut carbon dioxide emissions to 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. Although public opposition has been relatively muted, the government has been forced to review its nuclear energy policy by a court challenge from environmental group Greenpeace. At the same time, it is becoming harder to maintain Britain's ageing fleet. British Energy (BGY.L: Quote, Profile, Research), which hopes to play a big part in building any new nuclear plants, had to shut down its Hunterston and Hinkley Point nuclear stations for lengthy repairs and has said they are unlikely to return to full power. Like Britain, the United States, the world's biggest energy user, is also thought to be well on the way to seeking new nuclear plants and applications for licenses are expected to be submitted later this year. Regardless of TEPCO's difficulties, U.S. analysts said the fundamental reasons for looking to nuclear remained in place. There could be an impact on public confidence, they said, but the time needed to process plans could be a bigger hurdle. "These plants are so far away from being built. Who knows what factors could affect policy-makers between now and then?" Denise Furey of Fitch Ratings, said. AGAINST Sweden and Germany are among the nations that have decided to phase out nuclear power. Both have experienced problems with Swedish firm Vattenfall's (VATN.UL: Quote, Profile, Research) nuclear facilities. In Sweden a reactor at the Forsmark plant suffered an emergency shutdown in July last year. It was rated two on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), compared with seven for the Chernobyl disaster, the world's worst nuclear accident. Vattenfall's German unit Vattenfall Europe (VTTG.DE: Quote, Profile, Research) is also under scrutiny following two emergency shutdowns and the German government has threatened to withdraw operating licenses for the plants involved. The incidents have been especially sensitive in a country where nuclear plants have met massive popular resistance, leading the previous government to agree to the closure of all of Germany's reactors by the mid-2020s. Those most favorable to nuclear power include Finland and France and both are building new plants. In France nuclear power provides around 80 percent of the nation's electricity needs and generally has public acceptance because it means cheaper power. But even France has its nuclear detractors. After last week's earthquake in Japan, the nation's anti-nuclear association Sortir du Nucleaire said 42 of France's 58 nuclear power reactors might not be able to cope should a similar incident occur in France. Most analysts say, however, that is extremely unlikely.REUTERS |
|
| （回目錄） | |
| 地震影響日本核計畫 | |
|
日本的核能源工業是世界上最野心勃勃的。核計畫者看準人們對地球暖化的憂心，把核能源包裝成急速擴張、有生產力以及屬於尖端科技的願景。 上週日本發生的致命地震，全球最大的核電廠發生數起放射性物質外洩事件，使該核電廠在公共關係上陷入難以脫離的困境。 綠色和平組織核能源計畫組長占‧勃藍納克表示：「你如果沒有獲得公眾的信任，就得不到核電力。你不能相信沒有告訴你真相的人──把核電廠建在地震區的人。」 柏崎市刈羽核電廠有7個核反應堆，是世界上產量最大的核電廠，深受7月16日發生的芮氏規模6.8的地震影響。大火把電子變壓器燒焦了、木板傾倒到小水坑中，小水坑滿是用過的核燃料，而4百桶原子廢料也翻倒滿地。 放射性物質外洩的消息過了幾天之後才傳出去，東京電力公司延遲知會公眾令情況惡化。根據第一手消息指出，在地震發生的12小時後，315加侖含有發射性物質的水從容器洩出，流到海裡。 接下來的幾天，日本最大的東京電力公司列出50個故障、毀壞以及錯誤的名單，宣布放射性物質已經從出水口排出，而水中放射性物質的含量比之前在報告中所提的多出50％。最新的名單發現63個錯誤。令東京電力公司感到尷尬的是，在上週四，出水口又發現外洩的放射性物質。這顯示，在地震發生3天後，放射性物質還是持續外洩。 雖然東京電力公司、執行者以及環境學家皆認為，外洩的放射性物質數量微小，不足以構成威脅。但是這其中最具破壞性的後果是，全球最大的核電廠被發現並沒有在結構上裝備好來面對此強大地震，雖然日本長期以來都是處於地震活躍帶。 直到去年，日本政府才要求核電廠必須足以應付芮氏規模6.5的地震。去年9月，政府開始施行更嚴謹的指南，但是並沒有更新芮氏規模的標準。執行者承認他們必須重新檢視這些條規。核安全委員會主席鈴木篤之指出：「核電場所的地震安全是公眾最應該關心的議題，維護安全是迫切且需要的。」 但是對一些科學家來說，沒有一個指南足以保護核電場所。日本神戶大學城市安全與防備研究中心的地震專家石橋克彥表示，其中一個問題是，科學家無法精準地找出正確的錯誤。「情況顯示，用來檢查核電廠地震活躍帶的舊指南是不合適的。」他認為，當地震發生時，沒有一個核電廠可以逃過一劫。 日本核電廠的蓬勃發展源自人們對地球暖化議題的關注。原子能源成為政府要在2050年減少一半溫室氣體排放量的替代品。日本共有55座核反應堆，供應全國30％的電力。此外，日本政府計畫在2017年之前再興建11座核反應堆，希望可以供應全國40％的電力。 另一方面，日本政府希望可以在2030年左右的時候推動新世代的輕水反應堆。這個快速增殖（反應）堆，可以生產鈽，並可以當燃料重新使用，滿足日本在能源方面自給自足的夢想。雖然如此，日本已經越來越難找到願意讓他們安置核反應爐的社區，這主要是過去發生過太多的意外以及試圖掩飾錯誤，這其中包括東京電力公司。 在柏崎所發生的事件使核電廠的擴張更加困難。雖然很多日本人意識到，他們需要能源來推動全球第二大的經濟，但是他們卻不敢相信經營者。東京一名40歲的市場顧問指出：「保證100％安全是不可能的，但是我們擔心的是，他們試圖掩飾所有事情，然後告訴我們一切安全。」 （衛報） Japan's nuclear power industry is among the world's most ambitious. Spurred by fears of global warming, planners envision a rapid expansion of plants, capacity and cutting-edge technologies. But a series of radioactive leaks at the world's largest atomic plant following a killer earthquake in northwestern Japan this week has given the industry a public relations headache that will be difficult to cure. ``You cannot have nuclear power without public trust,'' said Jan Beranek, nuclear energy project leader for the Greenpeace environmentalist group. ``And you cannot trust people who don't tell you the truth or who build nuclear plants in earthquake zones.'' The sprawling, seven-reactor Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant - the world's largest in capacity - suffered in Monday's 6.8-magnitude quake. A fire charred an electrical transformer, planks toppled into a pool of spent nuclear fuel and some 400 barrels of atomic waste tipped over. Disclosures of radioactive leaks seeped out over several days, exacerbated by operator Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s delays in notifying the public. First came word, 12 hours after the quake, that some 315 gallons of radioactive water had sloshed out of a tank and was flushed out to sea. In following days, TEPCO - Japan's largest power company - released a list of 50 malfunctions, damages and mistakes, announced that radioactive materials had spewed from an exhaust vent, and had to acknowledge the water leak contained 50 percent more radioactivity than initially reported. The list was later updated to 63 cases. The company was further embarrassed on Thursday when yet another leak was discovered from an exhaust vent, indicating leaks continued as late as Wednesday night, nearly three days after the quake. TEPCO, regulators and even environmentalists agreed the amounts of radioactivity involved were minuscule and posed no threat. But the most damaging result from the troubles was the realization that the world's largest nuclear power plant was not structurally equipped to withstand such a powerful earthquake - this despite Japan's long history as one of the most seismically active places on Earth. Until last year, Japan had required plants to be built to withstand a 6.5-magnitude quake. In September, the government began implementing tougher guidelines, though they have not set a fresh magnitude level. Regulators acknowledge they need to take a fresh look at the rules. ``Earthquake safety at nuclear facilities is an issue of utmost concern to the public, and it's imperative that we ensure safety as soon as possible,'' said Atsuyuki Suzuki, chairman of the Nuclear Safety Commission. For some scientists, however, no guidelines would be enough to protect a plant. Katsuhiko Ishibashi, earthquake specialist at Kobe University's Research Center for Urban Safety and Security, said one problem is that scientists are unable to pinpoint fault lines with any accuracy. ``This situation clearly showed the insufficiency of the old guidelines for examining the seismic design of nuclear power plants,'' he said, arguing no plant could survive a direct hit from an earthquake. The troubles facing Japan's nuclear industry come just as it is getting a boost because of concern over climate change. Atomic power figured high in the government's proposal to cut world greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2050. Japan has 55 reactors producing about 30 percent of its electricity, with plans to build another 11 reactors by 2017, eventually boosting nuclear power's share of electricity production to 40 percent. Down the road, the government is pushing for development of next generation light water reactors around 2030, and so-called ``fast-breeder'' reactors that produce plutonium that can be reused as fuel, fulfilling a Japanese dream of energy self-sufficiency. Japan, however, already faces difficulties in finding communities willing to host reactors, mostly because of a long list of past accidents and cover-ups of malfunctions - including some at TEPCO. The problems at Kashiwazaki could make that expansion even more difficult. While many Japanese understand the need for energy to power the world's second-largest economy, they are hesitant to trust operators. ``It is impossible to guarantee 100 percent safety,'' conceded Yumi Shimoda, a 40-year-old marketing consultant in Tokyo. ``But what scares me is the fact that they tried to cover up the truth in order to claim safety.'' （Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6793949,00.html） |
|
| （回目錄） | |
長期徵稿啟事 |
|
面對教育議題，有話不吐不快？立報讓妳大聲說出來！除了各版的固定專欄外，歡迎基層教師、學生及家長發表意見。大作請附地址，一經採用，即贈當期立報5份，不另奉酬。來稿即視同本報擁有刪改權及網際網路使用權，人力有限，未採用者不另行通知。投稿帳號：article@lihpao.com。 |
|
| （回目錄） | |
|
參觀立報： |
http://www.lihpao.com |
|
立報地址： |
台北縣新店市復興路43號1樓 |
| 欲詳完整內容請訂閱立報 電話：02-86676655 傳真：02-82191213 訂報：02-86676655轉214 地址：台北縣新店市復興路43號1樓 每週一至週六出報，每份10元 |