Dr. Ciara McMahon:

I will take that question. We have looked at a range of accidents. Sheltering was not required in the case of most of the accidents we have looked at, including some very severe accidents.

The important things would be food controls and agriculture protection actions in order to prevent long-term health risks like cancers. We wanted to look at cases such as Fukushima, where there was a release to the environment combined with unfavourable weather, with winds coming quickly from the east with a lot of rain as the plume arrived. It is best practice to measure the maximal impact when developing nuclear plans. We worked with Met Éireann to identify weather patterns over a 21-year period and we found about six days in that 21-year period when such unfavourable weather conditions existed. At those times, it might be appropriate to advise people to stay indoors. Even if they did not stay indoors, however, they would not get a radiation dose that would be of immediate concern. It would be above safe levels during the passage of the plume and we would advise people to stay indoors for maybe 24 or 48 hours. Even if people were camping outdoors, however, the predicted radiation dose would be roughly 14 mSv, which is higher than the annual recommended does but, as a once-off, is not an immediate health concern. Radiation workers can receive up to 20 mSv per year for every year of their working lives so we are not talking about a dangerous level of radiation.

The timelines all depend on what is initiated but with Fukushima there was a tsunami power was very quickly lost. For 48 hours there were significant releases to the environment. The journey of any radioactivity across the Irish Sea would take a few days. Once the release started, it would be a number of hours before any action would be expected in respect of the public. The action would be to recommend people who wanted to minimise the radiation dose to stay indoors. If nothing was done and we continued with our lives completely as normal, 90% of the effects would be on food from people's gardens or food which was 100% locally produced. That does not have to happen. We have worked with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Food Safety Authority to make sure that there are plans in place to ensure all food on sale after a nuclear accident would be safe to eat. That would reduce the radiation people get to much lower levels and we would not expect an increase in cancers provided the necessary actions were taken. We have worked with stakeholder groups, including representatives from the Irish Farmers Association, with retailer groups and with food and feed bodies to make them aware of what we are doing and they have given us feedback. We know what is technically feasible but they want to know what would work in the Irish situation.

The Irish national emergency plan for nuclear accidents was subject to an international peer review at the end of 2015. It was found to be a good plan and well integrated into overall planning in the State. We learned from events such as Storm Emma, Storm Ophelia and the dioxins crisis. Thankfully, nuclear accidents are rare but we have a feedback mechanism so that we learn from such events and our practice was identified as something other countries should emulate.