Talking about risk management is currently impossible. Not talking about risk management as well!
In a year where we have seen shortly after the financial crisis the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and in a years span the earthquake leading to tsunami leading to Fukushima - in such a year talking rationally about risk and risk management feels cynical. Not forgetting the not less important events in the middle east and northern Africa.
But not talking rationally about those events would be deeply wrong as well. So many today always had known that "nuclear energy" was not safe. Replace it by "drilling under seas" or "working with an Arabian dictator" as you wish. And - sure they are right - that was the "residual risk" that was accepted. At least by those who had to decide. But as well by those who accepted readily the benefits of those decisions - and that's most of us! (Drove a car on cheap gas? Had vacation in Tunisia? Wanted a reduced carbon dioxide footprint?)
But was it really accepted? Or simply ignored? Listening to the commonly expressed horror one could get the notion that nobody had known such a thing could really happen. Especially in the western world we find it hard to accept such events. (And I have to state that I'm deeply shaken too.)
That the residual risk occurred in a nuclear power plant was extremely unlikely. The effects of an actual emergency are unlikely extreme. This very simple logic applies to many extremely unlikely risk scenarios. It was there on Deepwater Horizon and it is obvious at Fukushima. It even was valid for the toxic papers that started the financial crisis.
So what is it that lets us ignore this residual risk and its potential disastrous effects for long times and still be deeply shaken when they happen? Is it greedy expectation of the related profit? Is it the sheer complexity of the topics that prevents understanding? Laziness to think it through? Simple unwillingness to take an unpleasant decision? Or simply the lack of courage to decide for a uncertain alternative?
I believe it is a little bit of all. So what does this tell us? When confronted with a situation where the benefits are high but the alternatives and outcomes uncertain it foremost takes courage. Courage to have a rational look at what may happen and think it through, courage to speak out and more courage to take the necessary decisions. And if needed the courage to stand up to our bad decisions.
So let's pay respect to those who suffer today at least by accepting the lesson and let's stop to discuss who is to blame. Let's show courage and face the decisions outstanding in private or in positions as risk managers even if they force us to impose limitations on ourselves.
Martin, this is a very strong article! I'm also very moved by the many things happening within the last months. Personally, I never understood why we employ nuclear energy technology, because the consequences in case of failure are so disrupting as we see now in case of Fukushima.
I think humankind is taking such risks, because there are profits to be gained. If we want to prevent taking such risks, we must limit these profits, e.g. by introducing some kind of risk tax. For example, operators of nuclear power plants could be requested to pay a noticable amount of their margins to a fund to be used in case of a nuclear crisis. However, introducing such a tax is never a popular option as it will also increase consumer prices. And as soon as a noble step is affecting our personal lifes, we tend to turn into selfish individuals.
