JEREMY GORDON | OPINION
While nuclear’s ‘communication problem’ becomes ever clearer, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the global industry is still not very serious about solving it
And that one was specific to one country’s experience with one kind of project. So, while nuclear’s ‘communication problem’ becomes ever clearer, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the global industry is still not very serious about solving it. If the industry was serious, what would we see? Perhaps
a peer-to-peer network would share best practice so communicators can import proven methods and strategise with experts who have done the same things before. Possibly the latest research results from social sciences would be applied to make sure the nuclear power industry behaves in ways that build the trusting relationships it needs. It might be that an industry association might work with one of the world’s biggest and best PR firms to create a set of tools and training courses for its members. Conceivably there would be regular international and regional conferences where all this is discussed. And maybe there would be annual comparative research on the exact nature of the issue in different countries. Such is the cost of doing business with this technology when it goes right that these efforts would be seen as a trivial investment and when compared to the astronomical costs of getting it wrong, these kinds of costs are miniscule. Loss of public support can paralyse any business, force it into early closure or even write off a whole country’s industry. The IAEA does a lot of foundational work with its
counterparts in member states, and especially with newcomer countries, thanks partly to the 2020 introduction of the first General Safety Guide on arrangements a country should make for public communication in emergency situations. This important post-Fukushima development brought in the first guidelines on how nuclear organisations should communicate and marks the first concrete acknowledgement that good communication is actually of vital importance. International support in the area can be crucial. An IAEA event on using social media to communicate with the public in 2019 proved to be its largest Technical Meeting ever, attracting about 130 communication managers from nuclear organisations around the world. Clearly there is demand for support on this topic. The depth of the need was underlined by a poll that revealed the majority of the audience had no training or expertise in communication. They had typically been given the responsibility on top of
their technical role. I doubt there are many other areas within the nuclear energy sector where an organisation would give responsibility to someone who doesn’t have appropriate training or experience. This is not to say they were bad people, but it’s fair to say they probably weren’t the best people available for the work in their home country. In one session an audience member excitedly asked, “What can we learn from psychology? Why don’t we hire psychologists?” A speaker replied that, yes, she actually was a psychologist and, for sure, hiring more people like her is precisely what the industry should be doing. Even though the question shows the audience member was discovering their job in real time it was nevertheless a very good question: why doesn’t the industry hire psychologists? Unfortunately, the communications discipline just isn’t
respected enough in the nuclear community. A seemingly unwritten rule remains that the only ‘real’ nuclear people are the qualified engineers and anyone else’s opinion can be discarded. Over decades, this has established an engineering monoculture that has been very slow to take on other ideas and is only just getting past its inhibition to innovation. It is good news for the industry that the incoming small
and advanced nuclear sector presents an opportunity for change. Their new applications and new customers necessitate that things are done differently, as does their future workforce and the emerging global policy environment. They represent an opportunity to grasp the ‘communication problem’ anew and make a fresh, more focused, start on that also. A beacon of the changing times can be seen in the
micro-reactor company Oklo, which decided from the start that its product should be something ‘that people want’. Recognition of the importance of social considerations of nuclear are seeping through via environmental justice seminars here and there. Deep Isolation has made consent-based siting integral to its waste disposal offer. Meanwhile, the Good Energy Collective has for two years been sponsoring the social science needed to inform future nuclear developers. The ideas, the research and the practices for a new social contract to go with new nuclear technology are becoming available for developers – that is, if they choose to use them. ■
The ideas, the research and the practices for a new social contract to go with new nuclear technology are becoming available for developers – that is, if they choose to use them
www.neimagazine.com | November 2022 | 15
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45
