IYNC 2002 Y-Note Session Result
"Y-Notes" sessions were held each evening following the formal sessions to
give participants a unique opportunity for international discussions about the
challenges facing the nuclear industry. A representative sample of participants
drawn from multiple view points met in "Y-Notes" sessions to develop a statement
summarizing the common theme of the discussion followingeach technical session.
The session summary statements, along with proposed actions to address the
challenges, were presented at a final plenary session to all participants for
discussion, modification, and adoption by the Congress. All statements adopted
by the Congress were combined into a final report and distributed to the media
and interested individuals to demonstrate the young generation's commitment
to the future of nuclear technology.
Advances in Safety, Reliability and Human management I
Advances in Safety, Reliability and Human management II
Economic Challenges to the Development of Nuclear Power
Challenge to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle II
Generating Knowledge in the Young
Non Power Application of Nuclear Technology
Opportunities for Environmental Protection
Research and Innovation in Reactor Technology
Understanding Regulatory Needs and Relationships with the Regulator
Developing Trust and Transparency with the Public I
Developing Trust and Transparency with the Public II
KNOWLEDGE PRESERVATION WORKSHOP
Session Chairs : Andrew Bull and Yeon-Ki Chung
The audience was small and the “Advances in Safety Reliability and Human Management
Session” was combined with the session on “Economic Challenges to the Development
of Nuclear Power”. As with the other Y-Notes sessions the questions were based
on the prepared questionnaires developed by the organizing committee.
The summaries of those discussions are as
follows:
(a) Do the audience believe that with such techniques
and research available the safety of new and existing reactors is both improved
and made simpler to institute?
Yes, the change from analogue to digital technology
has improved the safety, as has the move from active to passive safety systems
as demonstrated by the paper on passive core reflooding.
(b) Do you feel that globally a reputation
of ‘Safe Nuclear’ is growing?
Overall the view was that the growth of the term “Safe Nuclear”
is being hampered by industry hiding behind technology and saying “Don’t worry
we’re experts”. The public has had little confidence in nuclear at the moment
but public opinion is slowly being turned back in Germany and Finland. The
mass media coverage on accidents in Russia had affected public support but
this was gradually becoming more positive although this return of support
was very regional. The key element in this increasing support was the developing
awareness of the growing energy needs of Eastern Russia pointing towards the
necessity of nuclear power.
(c) Do we feel that recent events in, for example,
the Middle East would alter any of the opinions drawn from the papers in this
session?
It was pointed out that the papers in the session were
all very positive regarding economic viability of nuclear energy, especially
in the current system of low interest rates. The costs for decommissioning
are well known which heightens confidence and the suitability for nuclear
plants to supply base load energy puts them at a significant advantage over
the variability of wind power. It was further pointed out that Hydro energy
is not only dependent on rainfall but is limited in application as there is
internationally little room left to build dams
Keynote speaker: Jae Joo Ha (KAERI, Korea)
Chair and co-chair: Marian Kristof (Nuclear Regulatory Authority, Slovakia)
and Roman Tertychnyy (IPPE, Russia)
Speakers: Marko Cepin, Mikhail Solopenko, Vladimir Toshinsky, Denys
Zenyuk, Dai Zhonghua
The highest priority in the entire nuclear business
for several decades has been given to operational safety. This is the key element
for keeping public acceptance in nuclear today and in the future. The goal is
to reduce operational events and avoid any, however small, release of radioactive
materials into the environment. Therefore, it is important to work towards improving
operational safety by looking for state-of-the-art practices around the world.
Working towards these improvements requires both a clear and understandable
vision, and prioritization of what is important and what is not. One of the
recent ways in evaluating the important factors that contribute to safety is
referred to as Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA). PSA activities, presented
mainly by the keynote speaker but also mentioned by other speakers and later
discussed among the attendees of the session, show that the cause of every event
or problem regarding nuclear installation – we probably can extend it to any
industrial sphere – is the human factor. This means that a top priority should
be given to the education and training of the responsible personnel, and to
make clear to everybody involved in the nuclear environment that safety is the
greatest concern, having in mind mainly economical aspects. Another possibility
is to look for reduction of human commitment in the technological processes
leading to the introduction of the latest computer based automatization systems
with high level of reliability. Next important issue talked over the session
was the exchange of regulatory experience to instill awareness on new safety
standards for old and modern reactor designs. The international collaborative
efforts have to be focused at harmonizing regulatory standards and acceptance
criteria.
Chair and co chair: Adam Mclean Kiza Francis (University of Toronto,
Canada)
Nuclear plants are expensive to build. They require
huge investment capital, often difficult to obtain by anything but centralized
government power utilities in all but the most industrialized countries.
On the other hand, they are relatively inexpensive
to operate. In strong contradiction to gas and oil based power production, minimal
operations costs for nuclear power plants have been exemplified by the price
of Uranium which has been at or near an all time low for the past dozen years.
Although expensive and large components of the reactor
are very often purchased abroad, nuclear power programs inevitably contribute
significantly and positively to the domestic professional workforce, as well
as the inherent level of science and technology. NPP designers and constructors
have also made steady strides to including an increasing domestic fraction of
balance of plant construction. In some cases, domestic nuclear programs have
evolved to a point where dependence on foreign expertise has reduced to not
one of dependence at all, but one of equal partnership in technological advancement,
bringing enormous benefits of national pride and worldwide prestige in the industry.
As well, in a world increasingly conscious and sensitive
to inevitable environmental and human health ramifications of burning fossil
fuels, the nuclear industry can point toward a long history of awareness of
full cycle cost analysis in consideration for NPP construction; something that
competitors for power production simply have not considered in the past.
Each of these topics were discussed in the IYNC2002
Y Notes session on economic challenges to furthering the nuclear option throughout
the world. Papers from five countries gave realistic impressions of nuclear
programs in each stage of development around the world; that of a pre nuclear
Macedonia, considering Gen III nuclear build to satisfy projected energy demand
within the next 20 years, that of Romania, Finland and China, each with considerable
nuclear experience historically based on foreign construction know how but increasing
domestic participation and intentions to continue projects already underway
and plans for new build, and finally, that of Korea with both a strong domestic
nuclear design and construction program and robust ties to international partners.
All agree, though, that the future of nuclear operations
and new nuclear build are decisions that will inevitably lay in the hands of
economists and financiers, ultimately even more so than public perception regarding
the addition of nuclear plants to the horizon. Delivered papers demonstrated
that given intense economic consideration, new nuclear, especially that of recent
Gen III designs (Westinghouse AP series reactors, Eskom's PBMR, AECL's CANDU
NG, etc.), can compete with production alternatives throughout their effective
production life cycle.
Recommendations for the future of nuclear from an
economics point of view were given including the following:
Effective communication on the whole cost of each
kilowatt hour of electricity.
The public, and even those in the nuclear industry,
have, in general, limited knowledge of economic impacts of nuclear construction
and just how financing of large projects is managed nationally and internationally.
A focus on revealing these aspects of new build will be highly significant to
how people perceive the nuclear industry into the 21st century.
Gen III reactor costs are expected to be reduced,
but how?
Each of the AP600/1000, PBMB, and CANDU NG expect
construction costs of less than $1200 US/kW installed, but how will this be
achieved given the current level of at least $2000 US/kW?
Experience in decommissioning is building, but
broad knowledge of the costs associated with the process is highly limited,
as is how utilities are planning to save and pay for decommissioning of facilities
when it becomes necessary.
In the current and evolving economic market, the
young generation believes that although economic challenges to nuclear development
exist, the future will prove that the nuclear industry is one that can compete
successfully and internationally on a level playing field with any other power
production scheme. More so, the many benefits of nuclear technologies, and the
public's increased awareness of them, will form compelling rationale for both
extension of nuclear plant lifetimes, and the promise of new nuclear build.
Key-note speaker: Dong-Seong Sohn (Director of Advanced Nuclear Fuel
Development Division KAERI, Korea)
Chair and co-chair: Hans Wilhelm Bolloni, Framatome ANP, Germany
Speakers: Elena A. Repnikova, Martin Rivarola and JM Kang.
Even when there are lots of critical issues related with the Nuclear Fuel Cycle,
the medium and long term storage of spent nuclear fuels seems to be a generalized
concern all over the world.
As the decision on the final disposition of spent fuel is being delayed and
the short term storage pools are being filled, the necessity of an interim dry
storage arises.
Using dry off-site storage in combination with wet on-site storage of the spent
fuels will allow the countries to delay safely the final disposition of spent
fuels for decades, in order to wait for better economical, political and technical
situation, before taking the final decision.
In the other side of the fuel cycle, the enrichment market is passing trough
a crisis, product of the finalization of the useful life of the bigger plants,
and a general confusion about which will be the next dominant technology. The
ultracentrifuge technology seems to be the less bad technology, but it has several
shortcomings related with its very high investment cost and its huge proliferation
potential.
The structure of the cost of the ultracentrifugues machines does not allow
to expand the market using private funding, but always require government support.
It is important to separate politic from the technical aspects when decisions
are took, if we want a healthy nuclear industry. And if the decisions are took
based more in politics rather than technical and economical considerations,
we are jeopardizing its future.
How do we train and knowledge-share with the Young Generation?
Session Chair: Adele Hollick, Technical Chair IYNC 2002, BNFL, United Kingdom
Keynote Speakers: Mr Yanev (IAEA) "Preservation of Knowledge and Nuclear
University", Mr Ratislav Petrech (Head of Foreign Affairs and PR,
Mohovce)
One of the core themes behind forming Young Generation groups is the development
of networks and the transfer of knowledge. With representation from different
YGN's present in the Y notes session, it was natural that some discussion would
centre around the Young Generation networks.àDifferences were identified between
the YGN's in terms of their structure and funding routes as some were more formalised
than others.àDelegates were interested in sharing information on the experiences
of other YGNÒs, learning from that experience and enabling communication through
contacts obtained through the IYNC. The IYNC project currently organised by
Ignacio Sebastian Luppi Berlanga was thought to possibly be a good way to facilitate
this transfer of experience and knowledge but communication between individual
YGN's was also to be encouraged.
The training of young people in the industry was an important point raised
in the Y notes.àIt was felt essential to ensure that there was more of a balance
between theoretical and practical experience.àIn gaining experience, it was
felt that any practical secondments should be long enough to be of benefit.à
When people join the industry there is a wide range of basic knowledge to be
transferred, following on from this graduates develop their knowledge both in
breadth and depth.àHowever concern was voiced as to whether knowledge should
be more broadly accumulated or more specific as it is in specific areas where
there has been found to be a lack of people within the industry.à
Much debate centred around the issue of how most people felt that their roles
were fairly broad and that there was less popularity associated with specialisation.à
It was felt that the process of knowledge transfer and knowledge sharing was
necessarily slower because of the amount and depth of knowledge required to
operate within a broad role.àWithin the industry and within companies the suggestion
was voiced that we need to interconnect more to learn off others rather than
specialise our knowledge.
One delegate felt that the culture of companies
also affected the desire of people to remain and the attitude displayed by some
companies did not encourage the retention of people and therefore the knowledge
that they possessed.
The process of knowledge transfer should be constant with the human factor
needing to be taken into account.àIt was customary in many places to acquire
knowledge first through the use of tests, papers etc.àPersonal contact and working
with more experienced people was felt to be of more value later in your career
when an adequate grounding had been achieved.
The influence of politics on knowledge retention and transfer was also debated.à
An example of the closure of the Phenix programme in France was raised by one
delegate.àWhilst this decision was political, the question of what was to happen
to all of the experience and knowledge gained from this research programme was
raised and was felt to be unresolved by the closure of the programme.àThis was
felt to connect to the theme of the knowledge preservation workshop also held
as part of the conference programme.
The themes of knowledge transfer and preservation were felt to be firmly interlinked
to the recruitment and retention of people in the industry.àPolitical decisions
made regarding the nuclear industry were felt to be of key importance in having
consequences on the industry that the industry was then left to resolve.àThe
issue of how best to settle the broad versus specific debate was not resolved
but was felt to be a point for further consideration.
Nuclear energy can contribute to the sustainable development of mankind not
only through electricity generation but also through the numerous applications
in the various fields.
Dr. Machi, the keynote speaker of the session I, delivered his presentation
titled ÓNuclear techniques for mankind in sustainable development. In his presentation,
he reviewed various techniques such as Cleaning flue gases; Waste water treatment;
Medical applications; Agricultural (Food) application; Industrial products like
latex and so on.
Some studies related to
above areas were introduced in the technical presentations such as:
- producing 18F-FDG used
in cardiological application;
- the future application
of biotechnology and its relation to nuclear applications;
- nuclear desalination
system;
- radiation dose estimation
technique crucial to the astronauts; and,
- intense ultra-short laser
applications relating to laser fusions.
After the presentation, participants discussed the current situation and prospects
of non-power applications of nuclear energy and what the main challenges would
be.
Many participants were interested in how to combine nuclear technology with
other technologies such as biotechnology, nano-technology and so on.
There was a question regarding what was the main obstacle to commercialize a
nuclear desalination system. It was answered that economic compatibility was
the main obstacle to implement a nuclear desalination system and that was the
reason future technology development was needed.
Participants of the session learned various possibilities of nuclear energy
and agreed on the opinion that the future of the non-power application of nuclear
energy was bright and more attention should be paid to it.
NPA have high
potential as promoter of the nuclear science and technology's benefit for the
mankind since nobody can deny the benefits of radiography, radiotherapy, etc.
to the society.
But the discussions
showed that NPA are not being contemplated as an efficient instrument to change
the negative public's opinion about nuclear. So it is highly recommended to
implement several public communication programmes in order to inform properly
the benefits that NPA provides for the human being.
This is a personal comment
from the Chair and Co-chair of the session.
We can recognize the variety of the applications of nuclear engineering other
than power applications through the discussions. But the categories covered
in the session were so wide that it was sometimes difficult to organize the
session and discussion.
How do we monitor and protect the environment from radioactivity?
Session Chair: Anthony E. Hechanova, University of Nevada, Las Vegas,
USA
Session Co-Chair: Kanthi K. Dasika, University of Nevada, Las Vegas,
USA
Keynote Speaker: Kazuo Shimomura, Nuclear Energy Agency, Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development,
Do you feel that sufficient breadth has been
covered on this area within the session?
The session covered two basic areas, that of radioactive
waste management and that of aspects of environmental protection, which included
regulatory standards and monitoring.àThe former having the stronger showing
in terms of papers.
Had there been more balance in the paper submissions
the session could have been divided into two areas:àradioactive waste management
and environmental monitoring and protection as the applications of the two are
sufficiently different to present separately.à
Are
there any areas you would have liked covered that are missing?
Environmental remediation is one growth area that would
have been ideally suited to presentation within this section and should be strongly
promoted at the next IYNC. Perhaps this could be combined with presenters who
had knowledge of working sites that had used such techniques.
Are
there any issues that the audience felt strongly about and if so why?
The broad nature of the topic meant that no central theme
could be assigned to it. The technical content of the session was quite good,
and the nature of the audiencesÒ interest was shown in the varied and diverse
questions.
Are
there any learning points we could take away for future presentations of this
subject or for the conference sessions in general?
The main recommendation is to divide the session
into two areas (radioactive waste management and environmental monitoring and
protection) and encourage nuclear scientists and engineers who may not have
an expertise in these areas to remain informed on these important areas as this
knowledge is often needed when interacting with the public.àThe importance of
knowing what is going on in different countries and learning the broad breadth
of nuclear technology was discussed.
What
degree of control is placed on environmental protection in the global community?
The Y-Note session group felt that global control
was acted out only by global discussion.àEach country was freely able to determine
their level of protection from nuclear power plants, weapons complex past and
present activities, and nuclear medicine and it was expected that they would
be responsible enough to harmonise the protection of the global environment
Where
does the audience feel more work is required in the area of waste minimization
and environmental protection?
The group at the Y-Notes session felt that more
work is required on improving the laws governing environmental protection and
waste management that include new information on health physics. Further work
onàwaste form optimization and inventory and volume reduction through separations
and concentration will assist in reducing waste repository volumes and include
cleanup of special cases which could also lead to establishment of a position
of uniformity and concensus on this subject.
Chair: Marco Cepin, Jozef Stefan Institute, Slovenia
At present, the facts show that nuclear energy represents the highest growing
source of primary energy worldwide (compared to other main sources such as oil,
gas, coal, hydro), in spite of the fact that some other energy sources may receive
more public attention at the moment.
The increased needs for production of more electric energy and expressed wishes
for establishment of a cleaner environment has confirmed that nuclear energy
is one of the most important sources of energy in the future. This has been
proven:
- - in Europe by plans of the Finnish government to build a new nuclear power
plant,
- - in the United States by a recent nuclear research program “Generation
IV”, which resulted in more than 100 new concepts of new reactor designs and
by extended lifetimes of the existing nuclear power plants,
- - in Asia (e.g. Japan, Korea, India) with intensive work for new reactors
that are under construction and in firm plans,
- - in South Africa, where the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor is firmly planned,
although its new design (based on knowledge from decades ago) can still cause
some difficulties for getting its regulatory acceptance,
- - on an international level, where INPRO research program in the organization
of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) integrates several national research
programmes including the European Union,
- - at IYNC2002 Congress in Korea, where the participants of the Congress
and the speakers and the audience of the session on “Research and Innovation
in Reactor Technology I” expressed their believe in the further worldwide
increase of growth of nuclear energy in the near future.
Keynote speaker: Jong-In Lee (KINS, Korea)
Chair: Marianne Uematsu (Nuclear Department of French Embassy in Japan,
Japan)
Speakers: Kristof Horvath, Marian Kristof, Ros Intan Purbasari, Anastassia
F. Raskatch
Posters: T. Apostolov
Strong, competitive and independent position of
the regulator are basic fundamentals of the nuclear safety. Open and truthful
attitude of the regulator significantly assure the public about the nuclear
installations’ safety. Close cooperation with nuclear facilities, reporting
of all problems and accidents, presentation of the safety documents and open
discussion and communication results in a high level of safety culture.
Of course regulatory activities are met with various
problems and difficulties. Relatively weak economic environments in countries
of Eastern Europe and Asia reduce the scope of the research activities and technical
support for decision-making and negatively influence professional training and
permanent education of the staff. The solution to this unacceptable situation
lies within broad global cooperation through international organizations like
IAEA (an example was given in the Indonesian presentation) or multilateral cooperation
of several countries (as presented in the Slovakian lecture). The main goal
of all these activities is to share knowledge and resources in the area of nuclear
safety – thus getting more useful results for less money.
On the other hand, western countries having only
minor economic problems are dealing with the question of the continuously decreasing
number of young people choosing to study nuclear science and technology leading
to a reduced number of future staff. This phenomenon certainly does not affect
only regulators but influences the whole nuclear business and establishes the
serious issue to be dealt with in the very near future, especially in connection
with an expected expansion of nuclear energy production. Unfortunately due to
the lack of representatives from western countries no meaningful discussion
could be initiated on this issue.
Key-note speaker: Chang Sun Kang (Seoul National University, Korea)
Chair: Emmy Roos, Washington Group International, USA
Do you feel that sufficient
breadth has been covered on this area within the session? Are there any areas
you would have liked covered that are missing?
Some of the areas that were missing in this session will be (were) discussed
in other sessions. These areas are:
- The special role that the young generation can play in public information
- will be/was discussed in the second public information session, Developing
Trust and Transparency with the Public II.
- How to provide objective information to the mass media Ö will be/was
discussed in the media forum.
Other areas of interest that have not been covered in this conference are:
- How to communicate with opinion leaders (politicians, NGOs, intermediary
organizations).àThis includes comparative studies between public opinion and
political opinion: often the politicians take a certain position because they
assume that is the publicÒs opinion, even though that is not always the case.à
How do we prevent that from happening?
- How to link nuclear to the economic advantages of nuclear
Are there any issues that the audience felt strongly about and if so why?
Are there any learning points
we could take away for future presentations of this subject or for the conference
sessions in general?
This session went quite well. Everyone stayed more or less within their allotted
time and the presentation quality was good.àThere was sufficient time for questions
and the session ended exactly on time.
Do you feel that within your
countries the publicÒs acceptance of nuclear power as a stable energy source
is growing?
The session was rather well attended and generated a lot of interactions with the audience, in the line with the first part of the same session which had taken place the day before.
The participants in the Y note session did underline the following 10 points to be remembered after the discussions, and to be conveyed outside the congress.
- Radiations are always in fashion, but eloquent examples
are needed
How to communicate about radiations, risks, health impacts will always be
in the heart of nuclear communication issues.
But on those complicated and rather scientific subjects, one can try to put
forward understandable and lively examples so that the messages get through.
- Sociology in the heart of public perception
There are proven links between the social profile and the way the general
public understands and perceives the nuclear technology and associated risks
or benefits.
- Opinion polls are a rich but dangerous tool
Several presentations were made based on survey experiences in various countries.
Doubts were brought up that those tools should be used very carefully, since
you can have the results of an opinion survey be what you chose it to be when
you order it.
Any attempt to conduct this kind of action in the sensitive nuclear field
should be organised together with an independent body when feasible so that
the data gain credibility.
- Why are Eastern European participants much more involved in
presenting papers on that subject than their Western fellows?
… which lead the group to the recommendation that participation to these communication
sessions should be encouraged from the Western participants for the next congress.
- A IYNC book on the nuclear history
A proposal was made to write altogether a book on the international history
of nuclear technology. The idea was unanimously said to be interesting, even
though the project should be preceded with a market study precising the target,
languages and aim of this important work.
- Impact of NPP visits
Several reports re-stated the positive influence that the visits of nuclear
facilities can have on the public perception.
- What do IYNC members themselves think about nuclear activities?
Before getting to know what the public thoughts and questions are about nuclear
activities, it was quoted that identifying IYNC members own thoughts and questions
can be a relevant first step…
- Direct contacts with the general public?
In the light of an experience with a youth festival, the audience recognized
that there is no other equivalent way to present he technology than direct
talks with the people. Also this type of communication is very efficient,
it is noted tat it is demanding a lot of investment in time, and that one
should not think of convincing the people but rather only to increase the
global knowledge and open the dialog.
- How to address the military connections of our activity in
communicating with the public?
There was underlined during discussions a strong disagreement between participants
on how the nuclear industry should deal in communicating its links to the
military business. Part of the audience considered we should each time present
both sides of the activity, the other part supporting the idea that those
activities should be clearly disconnected, even as far as communication is
concerned.
- Role of YG in communication with the public
Finally, it was stated once again that Young Generation probably has a relevant
role to play in communicating towards the public, and especially towards the
youth, as tits communication ways are new and favour a more open dialog, on
the way to a consensus rather than to persuasion.
Questions
How can knowledge be transferred across two generations when the intervening
generation may not work in that field, nor use the information?
- Which organization is the best librarian or custodian for information?
- Who should be the custodian of information?
- How do you retain a technical memory?
- How do you keep young people aware of this resource?
- How do you ensure that the next generation can use the information?
Principle Themes
Questions 1 and 2
There was no consensus on who should be the custodian of data and knowledge.
Rather it seemed to depend upon national requirements and national policies.
Several custodians were mentioned, such as libraries, universities, state
archives, and the IAEA, but the more important subject appeared to be how
the knowledge should be transferred (see below for the response to Questions
4 and 5.)
Nothing contravened or conflicted with the existing IAEA recommended process
(Consultancy meeting April 2-4, 2002 at Argonne National Laboratory.) That
process recommended that the actual gathering and preserving information,
knowledge, and wisdom, be the responsibility of individual nations, thus
preserving knowledge rights. It was also recommended that individual nations
appoint guardians of the information.
The IAEA INIS activity, with some changes, could play an important role
in information preservation.
Question 3
There was consensus that the information of aging experts should be retrieved
as an urgent matter – principally through ‘smart’ video interviewing.
This might include:
Stimulated interviewing through questioning by peers or by young professionals
Indexable video recordings
There was a consensus that the storage medium for information should be
the latest available at the time and that there should be an effort to transfer
information to new media as time demanded.
Hard copy was noted to be the most enduring of storage though it suffered
from problems of volume and problems of searching it. However, the selection
of storage media was a technical issue.
Questions 4 and 5
For keeping the new generation(s) aware of the value of the information
and for maintaining the ability to use it, there was a consensus that the
preservation of knowledge took more that simply a gathering of quality data
on the latest storage medium – it took a continuum of people or ambassadors
to transfer knowledge, to create an awareness of both the knowledge and
its value.
This “continuum of people” took several recommended forms:
- An international organization such as the IAEA, which might also be
charged with providing package courses in the technology for distribution
principally to universities but also be presented at the IAEA
- Private firms, or ‘middle men,’ charged with the responsibility of providing
a Corporate Memory and of continued ‘selling’ of its value, perhaps rewarded
by a long-term share in use-fees. This is a lesson learned from the Human
Genome Project in which long-term health information was required.
- Universities with the responsibility of including information on the
discipline in their courses – in this case the lecturers would be the
custodians of commonly available information, though not necessarily of
detailed information and data.
- An international university performing the same function with international
contributed information
- Frequent meetings on the subject such as special societal sessions
at major conferences or IYNC conferences.
- Government funded design projects for students to keep the discipline
alive and involve the older experts in these projects as part of an on-the-job
transfer of knowledge. This process might even enhance the knowledge base.
Such transfer of knowledge could be maintained on a national basis using
the nation’s own information resources or be conducted on an international
basis from internationally shared information. The concept of an international
index, or knowledge database of access information (addresses to guardians
of information) was considered necessary but not sufficient.
There was a consensus that information had to be used otherwise it would
cease to be useful. Use required that it might be the subject of research
projects or be taught actively to succeeding generations.
|
