Learning from a Disaster: Nuclear Safety and Security Five Years after Fukushima
- This event is jointly sponsored by the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) and the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC) -
Five years to the day after a massive earthquake and ensuing tsunami caused an accident at three of the reactors of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Fukushima, Japan, a panel of Stanford experts will convene in Encina Hall to reflect on the lessons learned from the disaster that unfolded starting on March 11, 2011. Panelists will include:
- Steven Chu, 12th U.S. Secretary of Energy (2009-2013), Laureate of the 1997 Nobel Prize in Physics, William R. Kenan, Jr., Professor of Physics and Professor of Molecular & Cellular Physiology in the Medical School at Stanford University - Focus: Perspective from the Department of Energy on the role of the department in helping mitigate the consequences and the lessons learned
- Phillip Lipscy, Thomas Rohlen Center Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Assistant Professor of Political Science at Stanford University - Focus: Fukushima in comparative perspective and how the Japanese nuclear power industry has reacted since the accident.
- Scott Sagan, Caroline S.G. Munro Professor of Political Science, Mimi and Peter Haas University Fellow in Undergraduate Education, and Senior Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation and the Freeman Spogli Institute at Stanford University. Focus: the effects of the accident on efforts to improve nuclear safety and security, based on the upcoming book Learning from a Disaster.
- Takeo Hoshi, Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) and director of APARC's Japan Program, will chair the session and act as moderator.
This event will also serve as a book launch for the book Learning from A Disaster: Improving Nuclear Safety and Security After Fukushima, co-edited by Edward Blandford, a former Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow at CISAC and Scott Sagan. the book is being published by Stanford University Press and will be available for purchase at the event. Pre-orders can be taken here.
Stanford Researchers Uncover New Bacterial Diversity Inside U.S. Navy Dolphins
Stanford researchers working with the U.S. Navy’s Marine Mammal Program in San Diego have discovered a startling variety of newly-recognized bacteria living inside the highly trained dolphins that the Navy uses to protect its ships and submarines, find submerged sea mines and detect underwater intruders. They found similar types of bacteria in wild dolphins as well.
“About three quarters of the bacterial species we found in the dolphins’ mouths are completely new to us,” said David Relman, Stanford professor of microbiology and medicine, and co-author of a paper published in the journal Nature Communications on Wednesday.
A U.S. Navy dolphin opens its mouth for a swab to collect bacterial samples.
“Bacteria are among the most well-studied microbes, so it was surprising to discover the degree to which the kinds of bacteria we found were types that have never been described,” he said. “What novelty means is not just new names of species, families, classes or phyla…there’s reason to believe that along with this taxonomic novelty, there’s functional novelty.”
The U.S. Navy has been training dolphins and sea lions to carry out defensive military missions from their bases in San Diego and elsewhere since the early 1960s.
Over the years, it has also funded scientific research and become the single largest contributor to the scientific literature on marine mammals, producing more than 800 publications, according to the Navy.
Relman started working with the Navy more than 15 years ago to identify bacteria suspected of causing stomach ulcers in their dolphins.
His latest project to catalog the bacterial communities (or microbiota) living inside the dolphins began when the Navy asked him to help develop a probiotic bacterial strain that could keep their dolphins healthy, or help sick dolphins get better.
Navy trainers took regular swabs from the dolphins’ mouths and rectal areas, using what looked like a Q-tip, and shipped the samples to Stanford on dry ice for analysis.
Stanford researchers analyzed oral, rectal and gastric samples from the U.S. Navy's dolphins and sea lions, as well as samples from the dolphins' blowholes and the surrounding water.
The study found a similar amount of diversity and novelty in bacterial samples taken from wild dolphins living in Sarasota Bay off the west coast of Florida, although there were slight differences in the bacteria from the dolphins’ mouths.
Relman said he hoped to develop a profile of the normal microbial communities in healthy dolphins and other marine mammals, so that scientists could detect any early change that might signify an imminent disease, or health problems caused by climate change and ocean warming.
“There’s a lot of concern about the changing conditions of the oceans and what the impact could be on the health of wild marine mammals,” Relman said. “We would love to be able to develop a diagnostic test that would tell us when marine mammals are beginning to suffer from the ill effects of a change in their environment.”
The research could help solve other mysteries, such as how dolphins digest their food, even though they swallow fish whole without chewing them.
The key could be a unique bacterial group that’s also been identified in an endangered species of freshwater dolphins living in China’s Yangtze River, said Elisabeth Bik, a research associate at the Stanford Department of Medicine and lead author on the paper.
“It’s a very intriguing bacterial group that nobody has seen before in any other terrestrial animal group,” said Bik. “I would really love to know more about those bacteria and sequence their genomes to understand more about their functional capacity.”
Zak, a 375-pound California sea lion, shows his teeth during a training swim. Zak has been trained to locate swimmers near piers, ships, and other objects in the water considered suspicious and a possible threat to military forces in the area.
“The sea lions and dolphins are kept at the same facility, they’re fed exactly the same fish, and they’re swimming in the same water…but they’re very, very different in terms of microbiota,” Bik said.
Unlike dolphins, sea lions share many common types of bacteria with their terrestrial cousins.
“Sea lions weren’t that different from other carnivores like dogs and cats,” Bik said. “They’re evolutionarily related to them, and their microbiota looks very similar to those animals. But dolphins don’t really have a terrestrial mammal that’s closely related, and their microbiota looks very different from anything else that people have seen.”
Relman said his team was planning on expanding their study to include other marine mammals such as sea otters, killer whales, baleen whales, grey whales, harbor seals, elephant seals and manatees. Their purpose, in part, is to understand how life in the sea, over the millions of years since the return of mammals, may have shaped the structure of their microbial communities and the roles they play in marine mammal health.
They’re already working to analyze more than 80 samples of killer whale stool that the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has gathered with the help of specially trained sniffer dogs, which stand on the bow of their boats and point to fresh killer whale feces before it sinks.
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife is contributing samples from the sea otters and seals it studies as part of its conservation, ecological, and monitoring programs.
And the Marine Mammal Center in Sausalito, which is the West Coast’s largest rescue and rehabilitation facility for marine mammals, is sending samples from the seals in its care.
Relman said the research could help scientists begin to answer fundamental questions about life in the ocean.
“Marine mammals remain one of the more poorly understood habitats for studying microbial life, and there would be lots of reasons for thinking that these are important environments to study, in part because of the relevance for the health of these marine mammals, but also because they represent a view into what it means to live in the sea and the nature of our relationship with this vast aspect of our environment,” Relman said.
Collaborators and co-authors on this study included Stephanie Venn-Watson and Kevin Carlin from the National Marine Mammal Foundation, and Eric Jensen from the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific, in San Diego.
Stanford Experts Reveal Latest “Doomsday Clock” Estimate
The world remains perilously close to a nuclear disaster or catastrophic climate change that could devastate humanity, according to Stanford experts and California Governor Jerry Brown, who were on hand to unveil the latest update to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists’ “doomsday clock” on Tuesday.
The symbolic clock was created in 1947 when Albert Einstein and Robert Oppenheimer (the father of the U.S. nuclear program) founded the publication.
The closer the minute hand gets to midnight, the closer their Board of Science and Security predicts humankind is to destroying itself.
“I must say with utter dismay that it stays at three minutes to midnight,” said Rachel Bronson, the publication’s executive director and publisher, in a bi-coastal teleconference carried live from The National Press Club in Washington D.C. and the Stanford campus.
Despite some positive development over the past year, such as the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate accords, the doomsday clock is now the closest it’s been to midnight since the peak of Cold War hostilities in the mid 1980s.
Stanford experts, including former U.S. Secretary of Defense William J. Perry and former Secretary of State George P. Shultz, said they agreed with the dire assessment.
“The danger of a nuclear catastrophe today, in my judgment, is greater than it was during the Cold War…and yet our policies simply do not reflect those dangers,” said Perry, who is a faculty member at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation.
Perry said he was especially concerned that the U.S. and Russia were engaged in new arms race, with both countries working to rapidly modernize their nuclear arsenals.
“Whatever we need to do for deterrence, it does not require rebuilding what we did during the Cold War era,” he said.
Perry urged President Barack Obama not to give up on the goal of nuclear disarmament during his last year in office, and to push for a breakthrough deal to control fissile material at the upcoming Nuclear Summit in Washington D.C.
“These summit meetings have been quite significant, and if he can use this last summit meeting to establish international standards for fissile control, which fifty heads of state sign up to, that would be a real achievement,” Perry said.
Shultz said the U.S. needed to offer a new version of the bold plans and decisive actions that legendary American statesmen George Marshall and Dean Acheson pursued after World War II.
“We have to be engaged, because when we don’t give leadership, nobody does,” said Shultz, a distinguished fellow at the Hoover Institution.
The doomsday clock was initially designed to communicate the threat from nuclear weapons, but has since been expanded to include cyber and biosecurity and the dangers of unsustainable climate change.
California Governor Jerry Brown described climate change as a “daunting threat,” with many similarities to nuclear dangers.
“Climate change and nuclear accident or nuclear war or nuclear sabotage or nuclear terrorism, they’re tied together,” Brown said.
“Climate change is moving slowly, but tipping points are around the corner and you don’t know when you’ve reached one, and beyond a tipping point, we may not be able to come back.”
Brown said he was dismayed at the lack of political action to address climate change and nuclear threats.
“I’ve been around politics all my life, and I can see an obviously broken process, a democratic system that has turned more into spectacle than getting the job done,” Brown said.
“In order to have the political leaders deal with this, they have to first acknowledge it.”
When a high school student in the audience asked what he could personally do to tackle the threat of nuclear weapons, Perry said the most important step was to educate himself about the issues, so he could educate others.
“If you can get ten people interested in talking about this problem, and each of those ten can get ten people interested in talking about this problem, it builds up in a geometric progression,” Perry said.
“I think once the public understands the dangers, they will galvanize our Congress and our leaders into action.”
Herbert Abrams, pioneering radiologist and anti-nuclear activist at Stanford, dies at 95
[[{"fid":"221894","view_mode":"crop_870xauto","fields":{"format":"crop_870xauto","field_file_image_description[und][0][value]":"Herbert Abrams","field_file_image_alt_text[und][0][value]":"Herbert Abrams","field_file_image_title_text[und][0][value]":"Herbert Abrams","field_credit[und][0][value]":"","field_caption[und][0][value]":"Herbert Abrams","field_related_image_aspect[und][0][value]":"","thumbnails":"crop_870xauto"},"type":"media","attributes":{"alt":"Herbert Abrams","title":"Herbert Abrams","width":"870","style":"width: 400px; height: 500px; float: right; margin-left: 15px","class":"media-element file-crop-870xauto"}}]]Renowned radiologist Herbert Leroy Abrams, who co-founded the Nobel Prize-winning organization International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, died Jan. 20 at his Palo Alto home. He was 95.
Abrams was a professor emeritus of radiology at Stanford University, a senior fellow at Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, and an affiliated faculty member at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC).
Abrams' illustrious, multi-faceted career embraced what he called the "four dimensions of bio-medicine" – patient care, research, teaching and advocacy.
"For as long as I have known him, I could only describe Herb Abrams as a class act," said Sanjiv "Sam" Gambhir, professor and chair of radiology at Stanford. "It is upon the shoulders of giants such as Herb that we ourselves stand today at the cutting edge of radiology."
Former U.S. Secretary of Defense and CISAC colleague William J. Perry praised Abrams for his "wisdom and carefully chosen words" in his advocacy for better control of nuclear weapons.
"The forces maintaining nuclear weapons and creating the danger that we might use them are very powerful and very hard to stop, and Herb and the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War were an early voice of sanity in this field, " Perry said.
Visionary pioneer in radiology
Born in 1920 in New York to immigrant parents, Abrams declined to go into the family hardware business. He graduated from Cornell University in 1941 and earned his medical degree from Long Island College of Medicine in 1946.
According to his family, Abrams had planned to become a psychiatrist until he was captivated by radiological imaging, which provided the road map for virtually all surgical and many medical therapies.
Abrams, his wife, Marilyn, and daughter, Nancy, moved to the West Coast in 1948. Their son, John, was born a year later. Abrams completed his residency in radiology at Stanford in 1952 and joined the faculty as an assistant professor in the department in 1954.
While Abrams rose to become director of diagnostic radiology at Stanford, he and Marilyn raised their children in the Bay Area during what his children say he often called "The Golden Years" – rich with deep friendships, youthful exuberance, guitar-playing, family adventures, and professional success.
Abrams was an internationally known authority on cardiovascular radiology and wrote more than 190 articles and seven books on cardiovascular disease and health policy.
For many years he served as editor-in-chief of Postgraduate Radiology, and he was founding editor-in-chief of the journal Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology.
In 1961 he published Angiography, the first comprehensive volume on the subject, which now is in its fourth edition (edited by Stanley Baum) under the title Abrams' Angiography: Vascular and Interventional Radiology.
"Under his guidance, Stanford pioneered in the fields of coronary artery imaging and the diagnosis of adult and congenital heart diseases, as well as vascular diseases, such as renal artery narrowing as a cause of hypertension," said Lewis Wexler, professor emeritus of radiology at Stanford, who was a resident under Abrams.
"For many years, I referred to him as 'Dr. Abrams,' even though he requested a less formal address," Wexler added. "I think I waited until I was a full professor before I called him 'Herb.' His wife and a number of his old friends from San Francisco called him 'Hoppy,' an endearment that aptly describes his energy, excitement and ability to jump effortlessly from discussing radiology [to discussing] health policy, politics, religion, art and music."
The Boston years
In 1967, with their children pursuing their own paths, Abrams and his wife moved to Boston, where he became the Philip H. Cook Professor of Radiology at Harvard Medical School and radiologist-in-chief at Brigham and Women's Hospital and at the Dana Farber Cancer Center. The intellectual environment of Boston invigorated him and he devoted himself to building a great radiology department, a new research institute, and an outstanding teaching center. During their time in Boston he and Marilyn also began a long love affair with Martha's Vineyard, where they built a house in 1975.
Steven Seltzer, chair of the Department of Radiology at Brigham and Women's Hospital, who holds the Philip Cook professorship at Harvard Medical School, which Abrams previously held, remembers his longtime mentor as a visionary who helped broaden the scope of radiology as a discipline.
When Seltzer arrived at Brigham and Women's in 1976 to do his radiology residency in what was then a very small department, he recalled being "incredibly impressed with the professional growth opportunities and the values and quality of the program that Abrams was building." He added that radiology was "still growing up" at that time and that Abrams had a vision that began during his years at Stanford and developed during his years in Boston.
"He was a very determined man. I fully bought into that vision. I thought this is a good person to have as a mentor and a role model, because I also aspired to live in a world that had similar characteristics that Herb had dreamed of," Seltzer said.
As a mentor and teacher, Seltzer remembered, Abrams pursued and demanded excellence and sometimes exhibited impatience. During the time that Seltzer held the post of chief resident in radiology at Brigham and Women's, the hospital scored one of the first CT scanners in the city. The device operated 18 hours a day, seven days a week, and was staffed by residents after hours and on weekends. This was in addition to the residents' regular on-call duties. When the residents balked, Seltzer approached his boss and questioned the fairness of the arrangement and suggested that the residents be compensated with a stipend. "He just looked at me and said, 'Steve, you're doing this. This is your responsibility, and you need to get the residents comfortable with it.'"
During their 40-year relationship, Seltzer got to know another side of Abrams, whose approach to being a grandfather and great-grandfather was far different from the "tough love" he doled out to his students.
Anti-nuclear advocacy
Toward the end of the Boston years, in the early eighties, Abrams developed a keen interest in the effects of ionizing radiation and nuclear weapons and the problems of accidental or inadvertent nuclear war, which led to the next phase of his career as an anti-nuclear activist.
"He leveraged his training in radiology to become one of the leading experts on the health effects of low-dose radiation," said David Relman, professor of medicine at Stanford and current co-director of CISAC.
"It's a problem that doesn't get as much attention as the catastrophic effects of a nuclear blast, but the long-term consequences of low-dose radiation was something that Herb … helped promote as a serious issue, worthy of attention and study," Relman added.
Abrams discussed the threats posed by radiation in a story published in the Spring 1986 issue of Stanford Medicine magazine. He said that, for physicians, nuclear weapons and nuclear war were "the central health issue of the 20th century."
"We need to educate not only our colleagues and our students, but our constituents – the patients – and ultimately policymakers about the consequences of nuclear war," Abrams said in the article. "Medical students are seldom taught about the effects of radiation. It's important because there have been radiation disasters unrelated to nuclear weapons, and there will be more in the future."
He was founding vice president of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985, just five years after the organization was established. He also served for many years on the national board of directors and as national co-chair of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), a U.S. affiliate of IPPNW.
"His contributions were huge," said Scott Sagan, Caroline S.G. Munro professor of political science at Stanford. Sagan added that under Abrams' leadership the IPPNW "did yeoman's work to try to educate the public and world leaders about the consequences of nuclear war at a time when many, including some in the Reagan administration, were minimizing the consequences of nuclear weapons use."
Abrams returned to Stanford in 1985 as a professor of radiology, but spent most of his time in research at CISAC, working to link various disciplines and philosophies in the political, international and academic arenas to create a better understanding of international security during the nuclear age.
Presidential disability
In the 1990s Abrams began to focus on presidential disability and its potential impact on decision-making.
In 1992 he published The President Has Been Shot: Disability, Confusion and the 25th Amendment, which brought together important issues at the intersection of medicine, politics and humanism.
"[H]is contributions to our intellectual life and to our knowledge of the presidency and so much more were significant and lasting," said CISAC co-founder John Lewis, who invited Abrams to join CISAC after he returned to Stanford.
Near the end of his long life, Abrams wrote about the effects of aging, not only on leaders but also on himself.
Sagan said Abrams "continued to make both scholarly and policy contributions" even toward the end of his long career.
"Herb lectured every year at Stanford on how the physical and psychological health of leaders influenced their decision-making about war and peace," Sagan said.
CISAC co-director Amy Zegart said Abrams "was vibrant to the end," attending seminars and "asking hard-hitting questions."
"He had an incredible mind and an incredible heart, and I think everybody saw both of those things in him, which is why he was such a bedrock of our community for such a long time," Zegart said.
A vibrant family life
Always at the core of Abrams' life was bringing together his family to travel, to ski, to play tennis, and to celebrate birthdays and holidays.
On his 95th birthday Abrams played four-generation tennis with his son, grandson, and great-grandson on Martha's Vineyard, where his family spent summers for 45 years. Until the last month of his life, he played doubles three times a week.
In addition to Marilyn, to whom he was married for 73 years, daughter Nancy (Richard Eilbert), of Lincoln, Mass. and son John (Christine) of West Tisbury, Mass. ,Abrams is survived by three grandchildren (Pinto and Sophie Abrams, and Natasha Eilbert) and three great-grandchildren (Kalib, Silas, and Axel Abrams).
Memorial donations in memory of Abrams may be made to Physicians for Social Responsibility 1111 14th St. NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC, 20005, or by visiting that organization's website at www.PSR.org.
A service to celebrate his life will be held on the Stanford campus on March 19; details will be announced.
My Journey at the Nuclear Brink
My Journey at the Nuclear Brink is a continuation of William J. Perry's efforts to keep the world safe from a nuclear catastrophe. It tells the story of his coming of age in the nuclear era, his role in trying to shape and contain it, and how his thinking has changed about the threat these weapons pose.
In a remarkable career, Perry has dealt firsthand with the changing nuclear threat. Decades of experience and special access to top-secret knowledge of strategic nuclear options have given Perry a unique, and chilling, vantage point from which to conclude that nuclear weapons endanger our security rather than securing it.
For Iran, A Nuclear Option More Trouble Than It Was Worth
Why did Iran agree to send the bulk of its low-enriched uranium out of the country and remove the core of its Arak reactor? Those actions significantly lengthen the time it would take to build up a nuclear weapon program.
Siegfried Hecker, CISAC senior fellow and former Los Alamost National Laboratory director, shares his personal view in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists: http://thebulletin.org/iran-nuclear-option-more-trouble-it-was-worth9064
Talk to Tehran, but Talk Tough
Can the U.S. find the right balance between cooperation and containment, so it can realize the long-term benefits of the nuclear deal with Iran? CISAC visiting fellow Nicholas Burns, who helped to negotiate sanctions against Iran for the Bush administration a decade ago, offers his opinion in this piece for The New York Times.
Policy: Reassess New Mexico's nuclear-waste repository
For the past 15 years, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) has stored transuranic waste from the US nuclear-defense programme. The facility, located 650 meters below ground in the bedded salt deposits of southeastern New Mexico, is run by the US Department of Energy (DOE) and will be permanently sealed in 2033. Yet an arms-control agreement made with Russia in 2000 requires the United States to dispose of 34 tonnes of weapons plutonium, which a recent DOE panel recommended should be stored at WIPP. Tripling the amount of plutonium held at WIPP could increase the risk of release of radioactive material to the biosphere. Safety assessments have so far not adequately considered chemical interactions of this material with that already stored in the repository. In 2014, for example, plutonium-contaminated nitrate salts reacted with a wheat-based kitty litter used to absorb liquid wastes, resulting in a small radioactivity leak to the surface. Reassessment of the risk of potential human ‘intrusion’ in the future is also necessary. Inadvertent drilling through the repository, in the search for oil and gas, could release brine into the tunnels, spreading radioactivity to groundwater. The addition of this weapons plutonium will require expansion of the repository, increasing the probability of intrusion, and will increase the amount and chemical complexity of the radioactive material that might interact with the brine. The DOE should reassess its confidence in WIPP’s performance over the millennia during which this material will remain a threat to environmental safety before adding an additional 34 tonnes of plutonium to its inventory.
Reset of U.S. Nuclear Waste Management Strategy and Policy Meeting 3: Consent-Based Siting
Reset of U.S. Nuclear Waste Management Strategy and Policy
Meeting 3: Consent-Based Siting
The Reset Project’s third meeting, March 9-10, 2016, will focus on another key issue: consent-based siting. In 2012, the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future recommended a new, consent-based approach to siting future nuclear waste-management facilities. As a near-term action, the Commission recommended that future siting efforts be informed by past experience, drawing on experience gained in siting nuclear waste facilities in the U.S. and abroad. In 2013, the Secretary of Energy released the Administration’s Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-level Radioactive Waste, which endorsed the principles underlying the BRC recommendations (adaptive, phased implementation). Recently, the Department of Energy has invited public comment on the design of a consent-based siting process.
Critical to the success of any consent-based approach in the U.S. is that the implementer sustain public trust and confidence over decades and that there be a resolution of how power is distributed between the federal government on the one-hand and state/local governments on the other.
The Reset Project’s third meeting seeks to advance the understanding of how a consent-based siting process might be designed in the U.S.:
- What insights are provided from the U.S. experience for building local, Tribe and State confidence, and for initiating and sustaining consent-based siting?
- How can consent-based siting be informed by the experience by other nuclear projects in the U.S or internationally?
- How is “consent” sought, demonstrated and sustained?
- What are priority areas for preparing the policy and regulatory foundations for consent-based siting?
These topics will be addressed over a two-day meeting, through presentations and panel discussions. Invited speakers will share their experience, drawing on their first-hand experience with consent-based siting – from those with direct experience at the levels of local government, Tribe and State governments, to implementers and regulatory authorities involved. Scholars and other experts will be invited to address some important ethical and legal dimensions of consent-based siting. Considerable time will be set aside for discussion and audience participation.
Reset Conference Documents for meeting no. 3 can be accessed through this link.
For information related to the first meeting in this series, and relevant materials, please click here.
For information related to the second meeting in this series, and relevant materials, please click here.