Interview with Nobel-winning physicist Toshihide Maskawa: What responsibility do scientists have for nuclear issues?
Mar. 20, 2015
by Uzaemonnaotsuka Tokai, Editorial Writer
“I feel a sense of crisis,” said Toshihide Maskawa. Dr. Maskawa, a Japanese physicist, called this is frank feeling on the four-year anniversary of the Great East Japan Earthquake, which struck Japan on March 11, 2011 and triggered a massive tsunami and major nuclear accident. In the six years since he won the Nobel Prize for Physics, Dr. Maskawa, 75, while continuing his research activities at such institutions as Kyoto Sangyo University, has voiced concerns over the future of technology. Fueled by his conscience as a scientist, Dr. Maskawa is proactive in expressing his desire for an end to war and the abolition of nuclear weapons, though this aim remains distant even 70 years since the atomic bombings. The Chugoku Shimbun asked Dr. Maskawa to share his views on the lessons of Fukushima, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki.
The accident at the Fukushima Daiichi (No. 1) nuclear power plant has revealed that human beings are unable to control nuclear energy. From the viewpoint of scientists, the technology for nuclear power plants is inadequate to be used on a commercial basis. That is why such an accident occurred. But with the passing of four years, society as a whole has returned to the days before the accident. Discussions aimed at reviewing the nation’s energy policy have dwindled, and the Japanese government and the electric power companies are accelerating their preparations to resume operations at the nuclear power plants. This is completely unacceptable.
You take a dim view of restarting the nuclear plants, don’t you?
The electric power companies tell us, “If we don’t use the nuclear power plants, your electricity costs will rise significantly? Can you bear this?” Therefore, the public has come to reluctantly accept that the nuclear plants will be restarted. On the other hand, people are not familiar with the fact that technology which can completely control nuclear energy has not yet been devised. I may not be an expert in nuclear energy, but, as a scientist, I can recognize this. Even among the people who are promoting the restart of these plants, I expect there are only a few who are convinced that the nuclear power stations are 100 percent safe. Nothing in their mindset has changed since the accident. It is the same as before, following the dangerous notion that we’ll consider the repercussions when they occur.
Some people say that the gap in energy sources should be met with renewable energy, but isn’t it true that the quantity of renewable energy sources is limited?
I believe that sources of natural energy are not reliable. This may sound inconsistent, but I’m not advocating that nuclear energy technology be completely scrapped. It is said that fossil fuels can only last for another 300 years and human beings will naturally live much longer than that. Therefore, it isn’t acceptable, ethically, to simply use up all the oil now without a second thought to the future. Eventually, human beings might be able to rely on the use of nuclear energy so I suggest that scientists continue their research into how this technology can be used safely. But safe technology must first be established. We should not be hurrying to resume operations at the power stations with their inadequate technology. I believe this is the lesson of Fukushima.
The “safety myth” held by Japan prior to the accident has been harshly criticized. Scientists must have played a part in establishing that myth. Before the accident in Fukushima, there was a criticality accident at Tokaimura. Despite this, the Japanese government and the electric power companies continued to insist that the use of nuclear energy was safe. Among scientists, there were many who placed a higher priority on the commercial applications of the technology, rather than pursuing all possible measures for safety. Even now, there are scientists in this field who don’t see their responsibility for the accident. But I feel that scientists need to view their role in a different light. This is why I agreed to be interviewed, though doing so might dishonor me.
What sort of “different light” do you mean?
I mean a sense of ethics. Ten years after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Russell-Einstein Manifesto was issued and bore the signatures of 11 eminent scientists. When science isn’t tied to ethics, the consequences can be tragic. Their manifesto strongly reflects this fact. In the past, I read each word of the document carefully. The words are heavy with the sense of urgency over the fact that nuclear power could annihilate the human race. There is an aspect to science, I feel, where insufficient technology could not be restrained and spiraled out of control, resulting in such incidents as the nuclear accident in Fukushima and the atomic bombings. Of course, I’m not suggesting that the scientific community alone is responsible.
The relationship between nuclear power and humanity is being reexamined. The Pugwash Conferences, which you are helping to organize, will be held in November. What sort of discussions will take place?
I would like the participants to call the world’s attention to a variety of problems involving nuclear power. In terms of nuclear weapons, over time nuclear technology has proliferated to other developing nations, not simply the superpowers. The risks of regional conflicts and nuclear terrorism have risen as well. I feel that efforts to respond to the demands of these times are needed.
How your thoughts will be handed down to younger scientists is important to you, isn’t it?
Indeed. In the past, young researchers would often have some involvement in peace movements. I myself did research on U.S. nuclear-powered submarines entering the port of Sasebo and I often attended lectures and other gatherings. Since that time, I have felt a social responsibility, as a scientist, for how my research might be used. It seems that, today, researchers lack this same imagination. I would like to convey to younger generations of scientists the significance of the Pugwash Conferences, why the scientific community has continued to hold these gatherings with a sense of guilt over having produced nuclear weapons.
There are some who call for research results produced at the nation’s universities to be used for military purposes. What are your thoughts on this?
I see that such a trend is occurring at the University of Tokyo and at other institutions. I believe that the scientific community is being taken advantage of. Originally, researchers in Japan felt strongly that their studies must not be exploited by the military. Thus, if this new trend at universities had happened in the past, it would have been snuffed out right away. But with the differences between military and civilian use becoming difficult to distinguish, young researchers may no longer feel the same strong resistance. Moreover, I have to assume that issues involving research funds lie behind this trend, too. Researchers are asked to show results in a very short span of time or they are unable to land new posts. I’m very concerned that Japan could degenerate into the dangerous situation where the Japanese government has complete control over the scientific community.
I heard that the start of your proactive stance on peace issues began with your experience of World War II.
At the end of the war, an incendiary bomb dropped by the U.S. struck my home in Nagoya. Luckily, it didn’t explode so we survived. The houses around us, though, were almost all set ablaze in the attack. I remember how my parents grabbed some things from the house and put these belongings and me on a hand cart, and made a frantic dash to escape the flames. I was only a small child at the time, so I didn’t really understand what was going on. But when I grew older, and entered junior high school, I felt horrified. I hate war. I detest it, I don’t simply oppose it. Our generation is the last one able to talk about those times. Talking about serious matters demands energy. But I believe this is the duty of those who managed to survive.
Keywords
Pugwash Conferences
The Pugwash Conferences is a global organization comprised of scientists seeking the abolition of nuclear arms. Spurred by a U.S. hydrogen bomb test at the Bikini Atoll in 1954, the first conference was held in the village of Pugwash, Canada in 1957. Proposals made by the conferences have helped advance such treaties as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In 1995 the organization received the Novel Peace Prize. This year the gathering of the Pugwash Conferences will take place in November in Nagasaki, and will discuss such themes as nuclear non-proliferation, a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Northeast Asia, and the nuclear accident in Fukushima Prefecture.
Profile
Toshihide Maskawa
Born in Nagoya, he earned a Doctorate of Science from Nagoya University. In 1973, Dr. Maskawa predicted the existence of unseen quarks and announced the “Kobayashi-Maskawa Theory” which solved the phenomenon of the “CP-violation.” After the theory was verified, Dr. Maskawa was jointly honored with a Nobel Prize in Physics in 2008. He serves as the director of the Maskawa Institute for Science and Culture at Kyoto Sangyo University and is a professor emeritus of Kyoto University.
(Originally published on March 11, 2015)
“I feel a sense of crisis,” said Toshihide Maskawa. Dr. Maskawa, a Japanese physicist, called this is frank feeling on the four-year anniversary of the Great East Japan Earthquake, which struck Japan on March 11, 2011 and triggered a massive tsunami and major nuclear accident. In the six years since he won the Nobel Prize for Physics, Dr. Maskawa, 75, while continuing his research activities at such institutions as Kyoto Sangyo University, has voiced concerns over the future of technology. Fueled by his conscience as a scientist, Dr. Maskawa is proactive in expressing his desire for an end to war and the abolition of nuclear weapons, though this aim remains distant even 70 years since the atomic bombings. The Chugoku Shimbun asked Dr. Maskawa to share his views on the lessons of Fukushima, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki.
The accident at the Fukushima Daiichi (No. 1) nuclear power plant has revealed that human beings are unable to control nuclear energy. From the viewpoint of scientists, the technology for nuclear power plants is inadequate to be used on a commercial basis. That is why such an accident occurred. But with the passing of four years, society as a whole has returned to the days before the accident. Discussions aimed at reviewing the nation’s energy policy have dwindled, and the Japanese government and the electric power companies are accelerating their preparations to resume operations at the nuclear power plants. This is completely unacceptable.
You take a dim view of restarting the nuclear plants, don’t you?
The electric power companies tell us, “If we don’t use the nuclear power plants, your electricity costs will rise significantly? Can you bear this?” Therefore, the public has come to reluctantly accept that the nuclear plants will be restarted. On the other hand, people are not familiar with the fact that technology which can completely control nuclear energy has not yet been devised. I may not be an expert in nuclear energy, but, as a scientist, I can recognize this. Even among the people who are promoting the restart of these plants, I expect there are only a few who are convinced that the nuclear power stations are 100 percent safe. Nothing in their mindset has changed since the accident. It is the same as before, following the dangerous notion that we’ll consider the repercussions when they occur.
Some people say that the gap in energy sources should be met with renewable energy, but isn’t it true that the quantity of renewable energy sources is limited?
I believe that sources of natural energy are not reliable. This may sound inconsistent, but I’m not advocating that nuclear energy technology be completely scrapped. It is said that fossil fuels can only last for another 300 years and human beings will naturally live much longer than that. Therefore, it isn’t acceptable, ethically, to simply use up all the oil now without a second thought to the future. Eventually, human beings might be able to rely on the use of nuclear energy so I suggest that scientists continue their research into how this technology can be used safely. But safe technology must first be established. We should not be hurrying to resume operations at the power stations with their inadequate technology. I believe this is the lesson of Fukushima.
The “safety myth” held by Japan prior to the accident has been harshly criticized. Scientists must have played a part in establishing that myth. Before the accident in Fukushima, there was a criticality accident at Tokaimura. Despite this, the Japanese government and the electric power companies continued to insist that the use of nuclear energy was safe. Among scientists, there were many who placed a higher priority on the commercial applications of the technology, rather than pursuing all possible measures for safety. Even now, there are scientists in this field who don’t see their responsibility for the accident. But I feel that scientists need to view their role in a different light. This is why I agreed to be interviewed, though doing so might dishonor me.
What sort of “different light” do you mean?
I mean a sense of ethics. Ten years after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the Russell-Einstein Manifesto was issued and bore the signatures of 11 eminent scientists. When science isn’t tied to ethics, the consequences can be tragic. Their manifesto strongly reflects this fact. In the past, I read each word of the document carefully. The words are heavy with the sense of urgency over the fact that nuclear power could annihilate the human race. There is an aspect to science, I feel, where insufficient technology could not be restrained and spiraled out of control, resulting in such incidents as the nuclear accident in Fukushima and the atomic bombings. Of course, I’m not suggesting that the scientific community alone is responsible.
The relationship between nuclear power and humanity is being reexamined. The Pugwash Conferences, which you are helping to organize, will be held in November. What sort of discussions will take place?
I would like the participants to call the world’s attention to a variety of problems involving nuclear power. In terms of nuclear weapons, over time nuclear technology has proliferated to other developing nations, not simply the superpowers. The risks of regional conflicts and nuclear terrorism have risen as well. I feel that efforts to respond to the demands of these times are needed.
How your thoughts will be handed down to younger scientists is important to you, isn’t it?
Indeed. In the past, young researchers would often have some involvement in peace movements. I myself did research on U.S. nuclear-powered submarines entering the port of Sasebo and I often attended lectures and other gatherings. Since that time, I have felt a social responsibility, as a scientist, for how my research might be used. It seems that, today, researchers lack this same imagination. I would like to convey to younger generations of scientists the significance of the Pugwash Conferences, why the scientific community has continued to hold these gatherings with a sense of guilt over having produced nuclear weapons.
There are some who call for research results produced at the nation’s universities to be used for military purposes. What are your thoughts on this?
I see that such a trend is occurring at the University of Tokyo and at other institutions. I believe that the scientific community is being taken advantage of. Originally, researchers in Japan felt strongly that their studies must not be exploited by the military. Thus, if this new trend at universities had happened in the past, it would have been snuffed out right away. But with the differences between military and civilian use becoming difficult to distinguish, young researchers may no longer feel the same strong resistance. Moreover, I have to assume that issues involving research funds lie behind this trend, too. Researchers are asked to show results in a very short span of time or they are unable to land new posts. I’m very concerned that Japan could degenerate into the dangerous situation where the Japanese government has complete control over the scientific community.
I heard that the start of your proactive stance on peace issues began with your experience of World War II.
At the end of the war, an incendiary bomb dropped by the U.S. struck my home in Nagoya. Luckily, it didn’t explode so we survived. The houses around us, though, were almost all set ablaze in the attack. I remember how my parents grabbed some things from the house and put these belongings and me on a hand cart, and made a frantic dash to escape the flames. I was only a small child at the time, so I didn’t really understand what was going on. But when I grew older, and entered junior high school, I felt horrified. I hate war. I detest it, I don’t simply oppose it. Our generation is the last one able to talk about those times. Talking about serious matters demands energy. But I believe this is the duty of those who managed to survive.
Keywords
Pugwash Conferences
The Pugwash Conferences is a global organization comprised of scientists seeking the abolition of nuclear arms. Spurred by a U.S. hydrogen bomb test at the Bikini Atoll in 1954, the first conference was held in the village of Pugwash, Canada in 1957. Proposals made by the conferences have helped advance such treaties as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In 1995 the organization received the Novel Peace Prize. This year the gathering of the Pugwash Conferences will take place in November in Nagasaki, and will discuss such themes as nuclear non-proliferation, a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Northeast Asia, and the nuclear accident in Fukushima Prefecture.
Profile
Toshihide Maskawa
Born in Nagoya, he earned a Doctorate of Science from Nagoya University. In 1973, Dr. Maskawa predicted the existence of unseen quarks and announced the “Kobayashi-Maskawa Theory” which solved the phenomenon of the “CP-violation.” After the theory was verified, Dr. Maskawa was jointly honored with a Nobel Prize in Physics in 2008. He serves as the director of the Maskawa Institute for Science and Culture at Kyoto Sangyo University and is a professor emeritus of Kyoto University.
(Originally published on March 11, 2015)
