Transcript
Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster
Examine the factors that affected the choice of adjustments before, and responses to actual
hazard events or disaster
Joy Yuen, Alex Gotianun, Linh Nguyen
Context
April 26 April 26 19861986Operating crew Operating crew
planned to test planned to test Unit 4’s turbinesUnit 4’s turbines
Melted fuel rods, ignited the Melted fuel rods, ignited the graphite coveringgraphite covering
Human-induced Human-induced HazardHazard
Adjustments prior to event
1.One (out of four) cooling pump always
on stand by
2. ECCS (Emergency Core Cooling System):
Automatic shutdown mechanism that
pumps more water to cool nuclear rods
3. 24- hour emergency firefighting crew on
stand by
Factors that affected these adjustmentsHazard type, Social, Political and
Economics
Hazard type 1.Human induced
2.Unpredictability
3.Rapid speed of on-set
Political1.Communist
society1. Secrecy!
2.Cold War arms race1. Plutonium
Production imposed sense of urgency
Economic1.Budgetary
problems due to investment in military• Funds produced
highest quality weapons-grade plutonium-239
1. ∴ Less money implemented for safety measures
Social1.Inexperienced crew
specialists in turbines, conventional power plants, small nuclear reactors
NO experience with LARGE NUCLEAR REACTORS
Responses after the eventShort-term, Mid-term, Long-term
Responses to Explosion- Short Term
1.Fire fighters
Responses to Explosion- Mid Term1.Boron and sand
poured over reactor2.May 14 1986, 116 000
people that lived within 30 km radius evacuated
3.Russian nuclear team of experts immediately decided on their course of action
Responses to Explosion- Mid Term
1.Liquidators People who
helped clean disaster
2.International Atomic
Energy Association
• Press conference in Moscow
for a post accident analysis
Responses to Explosion- Long Term1.Entombed in a temporary
concrete "sarcophagus" limit further release of radioactive material
• New 2013 Sarcophagus by the EU
2.Pushing for universal salt iodization reduce thyroid cancer in children
3.Meters showing radiation installed
Responses to Explosion- Long Term (continuation)
4. Exclusion Zone to protect people from the harmful radiation
Factors that affected responsesHazard type, social, economic, political
Hazard type factor
International involvements to mitigate consequences opening up of USSR
UnpredictabilUnpredictabilityity Rarenes
sSudden Speed of Onset ∴ Slow responses and
little preparation
Political factor: Media and Government Control
• Government reluctant to inform citizens
• USSR failed to provide prompt warning to foreign neighbors and citizens
• Absence of emergency communications plans
• Deliberate withholding of radiation releases
Social factor: Perception of Risk
Lack of knowledge and experience
Lack of immediate responses
∴ Limited help in the beginning
Economic factor: Level of Development
More developed countries= better preparations
Chernobyl, Ukraine under USSR
Conclusion
1.Major factors that affected the adjustments and responses was the governmental control
2.Contribution to the collapse of the Soviet Union
3.Forced USSR to open up and participate in international affairs
4.Because it was a major disaster, it served as a basis for future reactions and responses
Bibliographyhttp://home.comcast.net/~glenncheney/Chernobyl.htmhttp://www.penelopeironstone.com/Rubin.pdfhttp://www.eoearth.org/article/
International_response_to_the_Chernobyl_accidenthttp://www.oecd-nea.org/rp/chernobyl/c0e.htmlhttp://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Safety-and-Security/Safety-of-
Plants/Chernobyl-Accident/#.UZzd8rWLDIchttp://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/chernobyl1.htmlhttp://www.djs.si/proc/nene2011/pdf/108.pdf
top related