I understand you are majoring in the currently-controversial field of nuclear power?

Actually, the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami of March, 2011 occurred immediately after I decided to study nuclear power. I was just about to be assigned to the laboratory of Professor Yoshiaki Oka, and the earthquake and nuclear accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant occurred immediately before my assignment. It was a great shock to me at the time, and still gives me great cause for thought.
Many people think that nuclear power should be abandoned as a means of generating electricity. And honestly, I don't presently have any answer to the question of why it is that people who live in regions where nuclear power is generated should have to bear such great risk.

You certainly raise a valid question there.

It is, however, unfortunate that the advocates of nuclear power and the victims of the disaster do not engage in meaningful discussions. Of course, the advocates say that they will enhance existing safety measures. However, advocates ordinarily push the argument of national advantage from the stable energy supply to be gained by restarting the nuclear plants, rather than considering the great risk being shouldered by disaster victims and the residents of areas surrounding nuclear plants.
It seems to me that the goal of resolving the energy problem should be considered from a cool-headed perspective based on consideration of ways to share the risks.

Looking at this problem from a cool-headed perspective, where do you think Japan should be heading?

That is a very difficult question. At present, there is no stable supply of energy. With fossil fuels, there is the risk of depletion, and renewable energy is unstable, while nuclear energy is regarded as dangerous. However, in considering these limited options, it is also necessary to think about the problem of global warming. Also, we should keep in mind a fact that historically, competition for energy has resulted in wars. Taking all of these factors into consideration, it doesn't seem advisable to eliminate nuclear energy as an option. Of course, there is a need for greater safety.

I understand that you yourself are studying nuclear power plant safety?

Yes, I am. The theme I chose for my undergraduate thesis was the safety of the supercritical water-cooled reactors that Professor Oka is studying as next-generation nuclear reactors. Now I am analyzing the manner in which molten fuel spreads within the containment vessel of a nuclear reactor in the event of accidental core meltdown. In the end, I would like to analyze and hyphothesize about the current state of reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant.

Do you mean to say that the current state of the Fukushima Daiichi reactors is not properly understood?

From public reports, it is clear that the containment and pressure vessels have sufferered damage. However, the current severe accident analysis code (which deals with accidents that greatly exceed design parameters) cannot tell us the manner and locations to which melted core material has spread. I think this is probably because the analysis code is overly-reliant on experientially-based parameters. Since experiential measures cannot go beyond what has actually happened, it is important to avoid being overly influenced by parameters that are data-based.

In that case, what sort of analysis do you suggest?

I have been analyzing this problem using the MPS (Moving Particle Semi-implicit) method, which is a particle-based computational method. The particle method is a way of calculating the behavior of solids and liquids based of particle motion.
The bonds between particles are influenced by temperature. Also, whereas the bonds between the particles of liquids are loose, those between the particles of solids are stong. Since calculation models based on the MPS method takes such physical properties into account, it allows analyses that in not based on experiential parameters. However, calculations using the MPS method are time consuming. This is a problem to be addressed in the future.

I hear that you enrolled through the international admissions program?

Yes, that's right. At present, I am enrolled as a Japanese student, but I am originally from China, and was educated in China through high school. I came to Japan after graduating from high school, and obtained Japanese nationality after living in Japan for one year. By Waseda University's rules, students who have completed 12 years of education through ordinary schools in a foreign country, and who are qualified to take entrance exams for universities in that country, are eligible for admission through the international admissions system, so I entered the university through that system.

Did you study the Japanese language before coming to Japan?

No, not at all. I couldn't speak anything but Chinese. So after coming to Japan, I attended a Japanese language school for two years before taking the entrance exam. I am still not completely accustomed to speaking Japanese. Writing reports is particularly difficult. I just hope people don't think "what on earth?" when they see my writing!

Please give us a message for foreign students who are considering taking the Waseda University entrance exam.

I often say that "words are only the medium." It is what is being conveyed that is important. If one has nothing to say, he will not be able to put his heart into language study, so I hope people will concentrate on developing their inner selves.

Would you like to address a message to all students who hope to enter Waseda?

I would like to tell them, "act with confidence." Unfounded confidence is a special privilege of students. Realize that if you make a mistake, you can always fix it, and be avaricious about learning.