DOCSLIB.ORG

Case Study: Chernobyl Disaster

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Case Study: Chernobyl Disaster International Journals of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering Research Article February ISSN: 2277-128X (Volume-8, Issue-2) a 2018 Case Study: Chernobyl Disaster Yasar Hussain*, Arvind Rehalia, Akash Dhyani Bharati Vdyapeeth, College of Engineering, New Delhi, India Email- [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract— the Chernobyl disaster was the world worst nuclear disaster, took place in the Chernobyl power plant due to explosion of reactor at Pripyat city in Ukraine. It led to 31 deaths including fire fighters and workers of the power plant on same day andabout 15 indirect deaths up to 2011. Also around 115000 people were evacuated from a 30 km zone around the plant. In this paper author gives a case study on Chernobyl disaster. And also, author finds the reasons and its effect on the human beings after the accident. And also, the confinement process of reactor number 4. Keywords— Steam Turbine Test, Technical Flaw, Uranium Reaction, Overheating, the Confinement I. INTRODUCTION The Chernobyl disaster occurred on April 26, 1986 at Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine. It was a catastrophic disaster which occurred due to technical flaws. Basically, the accident was the result of failure of steam turbine test. On April 26, 1986 technicians prepared to test the backup cooling system in reactor number 4. But the routine safety went wrong while the test was ongoing condition. In the reactor number 4, uranium fuel is used to produce a high amount of heat that convert water into steam which drive huge turbine to generate electricity for all the reactor. Control rods were inserted inside the uranium to control the reaction and it is crucial for cooling water to pump around the core to prevent overheating. But, as the test was started, all of the rods were removed from the uranium fuel. Due to this mistake, technicians lost the control of the flow of coolant, as a result the temperature of the reactor increased drastically and a high amount of heat was produced, that was sufficient to melt the core. At 1:23 am the reactor number 4 of Chernobyl plant was exploded. Around 8 tonnes of radioactive fuel was spread into the atmosphere of the Ukraine. The toxicity of this explosion was equivalent to 400 Hiroshima bomb explosions. After the explosion in 1986, the reactor number 4was covered by the sarcophagus and plant was again started with three remaining reactor which were in running condition. But due to lake of energy resources the Chernobyl nuclear plant was completely shut down later in year 2000.The Chernobyl accident led to a huge impact on the people of the Ukraine. Abnormalities of insects, deformation of eyes and other parts of the body and natural waste were some of the most common effects of the Chernobyl accident. II. THE CAUSE ( STEAM TURBINE TEST ) A. Before Steam Turbine Test An easy way to comply with the conference paper formatting requirements is to use this document as a template and simply type your text into it. The construction of Chernobyl nuclear plant was done on 15th august 1972 and the commission was held in 1977 with only one reactor. Two other reactors became operational earlier. The reactor number 4 was newest going online in 1983. The preparation was done in 1986 to test the backup cooling system on reactor number 4with the expectations of some improvement in processing rate. B. Steam Turbine Test The steam turbine test was held on 26th April 1986. In the reactor number, the uranium fuel is used to produce a high amount of heat which converted the water into steam and with the help of that steam the turbine could be rotated and could produce the energy for the reactors. To control the reaction and overheating of the system, some rods were inserted into the uranium fuel. C. Result of Steam Turbine Test The preparation for steam turbine test was done properly. But the test was gone horribly wrong, almost all the rods were removed from the uranium fuel. As a result, technicians lost the control over the temperature of the system. And finally a huge amount of heat was produced, which result in the explosion of reactor number 4 of Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine. And also a large amount of toxic radioactive fuel was spread out in the atmosphere. © www.ijarcsse.com, All Rights Reserved Page | 76 Hussain et al., International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering 8(2) ISSN(E): 2277-128X, ISSN(P): 2277-6451, pp. 76-78 III. EFFECT OF EXPLOSION There were various hazardous effects occurs due to the explosion of reactor number 4 at Chernobyl nuclear power plant. These effects included some earlier effects which include direct effects and also some indirect effects occurred afterwards. A. Earlier Effects The explosion led to 31 deaths in total, including fire fighters and workers of Chernobyl nuclear plant and also around 115000 people were evacuated due to the radiation of the explosion in a radius of 30 km around the plant and around 15 more indirect deaths by 2011. B. Lateral Effects There are many other effects has been seen after the accident at Chernobyl Power Plant related to human, insects and nature etc. The most common effects are 1) Radroach (after the explosion the insects around the Chernobyl were found to be abnormal. The abnormalities are such as deformation of legs, eyes or fur). 2) Eyes abnormalities in human being (it includes either the deformation or unnatural growing eyes). 3) Hydrocephalus (it includes the deformation of body parts usually head, face hands and legs). 4) Limb development (it includes the development of limbs in abnormal fashion). 6) Natural waste (after the accident the growing rate of plant around Chernobyl was decreased and also decomposition of old plants started). 7) Mental health (it includes negative effect of brain development). IV. CONFINEMENT METHODS FOR DAMAGED REACTOR After the explosion, there are two steps has been taken by the government of Ukraine till date, first was the emergency construction of sarcophagus and another is New Safe Confinement (NSC) or New Shelter. A. Sarcophagus After the Chernobyl explosion, there were lot of problems raised related to human health and safety. It is estimated that within the shelter there is 200 tons of radioactive corium, 30 tons of contaminated dust and 16 tons of uranium and plutonium were present. To overcome the effect of toxic radioactive fuel, a secure and successful treatment was needed. Thus, a sarcophagus structure was build over the reactor number 4 between May and October in 1986 to halt the release of radiation into the atmosphere. It was an emergency measure of safety purpose. It was made up of giant metal concrete and the durability of that sarcophagus was estimated around 30 year since its construction. But, the structural condition of the sarcophagus was continuously deteriorated. Later repair of this sarcophagus was seemed to be impossible. Thus a decision to replace the sarcophagus was taken. B. New Safe Confinement In 1992 Ukraine organized a competition to attract the ideas that would make the Chernobyl safe again. Time frame was quite tight since the sarcophagus that had been built around reactor number 4 was designed to last 30 years. In 1993 Novarka was selected for the construction of New Safe Confinement (NSC or new shelter) with tender partners Vinci Construction Grand projects and Bouygues travdux public. Its design includes the confining of damaged reactor as well as the sarcophagus. Its height(92.5meters), length(150meters) and external span(270meters) can easily describe its huge dimensions. It is a containment style of structure to contain the escape of radiation or toxic gases to maximum pressure of 275 to 550KPa and its architecture is Arch shaped steel structure which would take the confinement air tight for 100 years. Also it is the biggest mobile structure in history. It would weighs more than the Eiffel Tower and can house the Statue of Liberty. The total cost in its construction is around €1.6 billion this much amount was the only hindrance occurred in this project. But in 1997 the Chernobyl Shelter Fund was established and it received the donation from all over the world and was managed by the European Bank The construction of NSC was started in September 2010 and it was decided that the encloser would be constructed around 300 meters away from the damaged reactor. The arch was assembled in the ground and lifted in phases on the damaged reactor. The Novarka team started clearing and cleaning of erection in earlier 2010. In April 2010 they started excavating to lay the concrete beams that would be used to slide the structure into position over damaged reactor. By Feb 2012 the first segment was rolled off from the production line. The arch was erected in six phases between November 2012 to October 2014.Work on electric and ventilation system began in June 2015 to prevent corrosion in the confinement. The air between the inner and outer wall was dried and subjected to mild pressure. After some other works, on 14th November 2016, the arch was ready to be pushed in its final position. On 29th November, the © www.ijarcsse.com, All Rights Reserved Page | 77 Hussain et al., International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering 8(2) ISSN(E): 2277-128X, ISSN(P): 2277-6451, pp. 76-78 arch was shifted to the damaged reactor by travelling the distance of around 300 meters. Some of safety works are still in progress qnd the completion of the project will be done by 2018.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • General Assembly Distr.: General 27 September 2019
    United Nations A/74/461 General Assembly Distr.: General 27 September 2019 Original: English . Seventy-fourth session Agenda item 71 (d) Strengthening of the coordination of humanitarian and disaster relief assistance of the United Nations, including special economic assistance: strengthening of international cooperation and coordination of efforts to study, mitigate and minimize the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster Persistent legacy of the Chernobyl disaster Report of the Secretary-General Summary The present report is submitted in accordance with General Assembly resolution 71/125 on the persistent legacy of the Chernobyl disaster and provides an update on the progress made in the implementation of all aspects of the resolution. The report provides an overview of the recovery and development activities undertaken by the agencies, funds and programmes of the United Nations system and other international actors to address the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster. The United Nations system remains committed to promoting the principle of leaving no one behind and ensuring that the governmental efforts to support the affected regions are aimed at achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals. 19-16688 (E) 041019 151019 *1916688* A/74/461 I. General situation 1. Since the Chernobyl nuclear plant accident on 26 April 1986, the United Nations, along with the Governments of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, has been leading the recovery and development efforts to support the affected regions. While extensive humanitarian work was conducted immediately after the accident, additional recovery and rehabilitation activities were conducted in the following years to secure the area, limit the exposure of the population, provide medical follow-up to those affected and study the health consequences of the incident.
    [Show full text]
  • Present and Future Environmental Impact of the Chernobyl Accident
    IAEA-TECDOC-1240 Present and future environmental impact of the Chernobyl accident Study monitored by an International Advisory Committee under the project management of the Institut de protection et de sûreté nucléaire (IPSN), France August 2001 The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Waste Safety Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria PRESENT AND FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT IAEA, VIENNA, 2001 IAEA-TECDOC-1240 ISSN 1011–4289 © IAEA, 2001 Printed by the IAEA in Austria August 2001 FOREWORD The environmental impact of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident has been extensively investigated by scientists in the countries affected and by international organizations. Assessment of the environmental contamination and the resulting radiation exposure of the population was an important part of the International Chernobyl Project in 1990–1991. This project was designed to assess the measures that the then USSR Government had taken to enable people to live safely in contaminated areas, and to evaluate the measures taken to safeguard human health there. It was organized by the IAEA under the auspices of an International Advisory Committee with the participation of the Commission of the European Communities (CEC), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The IAEA has also been engaged in further studies in this area through projects such as the one on validation of environmental model predictions (VAMP) and through its technical co-operation programme.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Lessons from Chernobyl, Early Warnings from Fukushima
    Emerging issues | Late lessons from Chernobyl, early warnings from Fukushima 18 Late lessons from Chernobyl, early warnings from Fukushima Paul Dorfman, Aleksandra Fucic and Stephen Thomas The nuclear accident at Fukushima in Japan occurred almost exactly 25 years after the Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986. Analysis of each provides valuable late and early lessons that could prove helpful to decision-makers and the public as plans are made to meet the energy demands of the coming decades while responding to the growing environmental costs of climate change and the need to ensure energy security in a politically unstable world. This chapter explores some key aspects of the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents, the radiation releases, their effects and their implications for any construction of new nuclear plants in Europe. There are also lessons to be learned about nuclear construction costs, liabilities, future investments and risk assessment of foreseeable and unexpected events that affect people and the environment. Since health consequences may start to arise from the Fukushima accident and be documented over the next 5–40 years, a key lesson to be learned concerns the multifactorial nature of the event. In planning future radiation protection, preventive measures and bio-monitoring of exposed populations, it will be of great importance to integrate the available data on both cancer and non-cancer diseases following overexposure to ionising radiation; adopt a complex approach to interpreting data, considering the impacts of age, gender and geographical dispersion of affected individuals; and integrate the evaluation of latency periods between exposure and disease diagnosis development for each cancer type.
    [Show full text]
  • Chernobyl: Chronology of a Disaster
    MARCH 11, 2011 | No. 724 CHERNOBYL: CHRONOLOGY OF A DISASTER CHERNOBYL; CHRONOLOGY OF A DISASTER 1 INHOUD: 1- An accident waiting to happen 2 2- The accident and immediate consequences ( 1986 – 1989) 4 3- Trying to minimize the consequences (1990 – 2000) 8 4- Aftermath: no lessons learned (2001 - 2011) 5- Postscript 18 Chernobyl - 200,000 sq km contaminated; 600,000 liquidators; $200 billion in damage; 350,000 people evacuated; 50 mln Ci of radiation. Are you ready to pay this price for the development of nuclear power? (Poster by Ecodefence, 2011) 1 At 1.23 hr on April 26, 1986, the fourth reactor of the Cherno- power plants are designed to withstand natural disasters (hur- byl nuclear power plant exploded. ricanes, fl oods, earthquakes, etc.) and to withstand aircraft The disaster was a unique industrial accident due to the crash and blasts from outside. The safety is increased by scale of its social, economic and environmental impacts and the possibility in Russia to select a site far away from bigger longevity. It is estimated that, in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia towns." (page 647: "Zur Betriebssicherheit sind die Kraftwerke alone, around 9 million people were directly affected resulting (VVER and RBMK) mit drei parallel arbeitenden Sicherheit- from the fact that the long lived radioactivity released was systeme ausgeruested. Die Kraftwerke sing gegen Naturka- more than 200 times that of the atomic bombs dropped on tastrophen (Orkane, Ueberschwemmungen, Erdbeben, etc) Hiroshima and Nagasaki. und gegen Flugzeugabsturz und Druckwellen von aussen ausgelegt. Die Sicherheit wird noch durch die in Russland Across the former Soviet Union the contamination resulted in moegliche Standortauswahl, KKW in gewisser Entfernung van evacuation of some 400,000 people.
    [Show full text]
  • International Nuclear Law in the Post-Chernobyl Period
    Cov-INL PostChernobyl 6146 27/06/06 14:59 Page 1 International Nuclear Law in the Post-Chernobyl Period A Joint Report NUCLEAR•ENERGY•AGENCY A Joint Report by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency ISBN 92-64-02293-7 and the International Atomic Energy Agency International Nuclear Law in the Post-Chernobyl Period © OECD 2006 NEA No. 6146 NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 30 democracies work together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD. OECD Publishing disseminates widely the results of the Organisation’s statistics gathering and research on economic, social and environmental issues, as well as the conventions, guidelines and standards agreed by its members. * * * This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident : Its Decommissioning, The
    The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant accident : its decommissioning, the Interim Spent Fuel Storage ISF-2, the nuclear waste treatment plants and the Safe Confinement project. by Dr. Ing. Fulcieri Maltini Ph.D. SMIEEE, life, PES, Comsoc FM Consultants Associates, France Keywords Nuclear power, Disaster engineering, Decommissioning, Waste management & disposal, Buildings, structures & design. Abstract On April 26, 1986, the Unit 4 of the RBMK nuclear power plant of Chernobyl, in Ukraine, went out of control during a test at low-power, leading to an explosion and fire. The reactor building was totally demolished and very large amounts of radiation were released into the atmosphere for several hundred miles around the site including the nearby town of Pripyat. The explosion leaving tons of nuclear waste and spent fuel residues without any protection and control. Several square kilometres were totally contaminated. Several hundred thousand people were affected by the radiation fall out. The radioactive cloud spread across Europe affecting most of the northern, eastern, central and southern Europe. The initiative of the G7 countries to launch an important programme for the closure of some Soviet built nuclear plants was accepted by several countries. A team of engineers was established within the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development were a fund was provided by the donor countries for the entire design, management of all projects and the plants decommissioning. The Chernobyl programme includes the establishment of a safety strategy for the entire site remediation and the planning for the plant decommissioning. Several facilities that will process and store the spent fuel and the radioactive liquid and solid waste as well as to protect the plant damaged structures have been designed and are under construction.
    [Show full text]
  • The IAEA Conventions on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident and on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident Or Radiological Emergency
    International Nuclear Law in the Post-Chernobyl Period The IAEA Conventions on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident and on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency by Hon. Prof. em. Rechtsanwalt DDr. Berthold Moser∗ Abstract This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the provisions of both conventions. Special attention is paid to the rules of the Convention on Early Notification which identify the event subject to notification and the content and addressees of the information provided with regard to a nuclear accident, as well as to the provisions of the Convention on Assistance concerning the request and grant of international assistance with regard to a nuclear accident and the duties attributed in this field to the IAEA. The author also considers the liability questions raised by that convention. I. General In the wake of the Chernobyl reactor accident on 26 April 1986, discussions were initiated in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with the object of strengthening international co-operation in the development and use of nuclear energy. To that end, the intention, among other things, was that IAEA Member States (and the IAEA itself) should be under an obligation, in the event of an accident in their own country, to notify any other states for which there was a danger of harmful radiological effects as quickly as possible. It was also the intention that Member States and the IAEA should agree on an undertaking to provide assistance in the case of a nuclear accident or a radiological emergency. The Chernobyl accident in the Ukraine had radiological consequences on an unprecedented scale on the territory of other states not limited to those bordering the USSR.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the International Atomic Energy Agency: First Forty Years, by David Fischer
    IAEA_History.qxd 10.01.2003 11:01 Uhr Seite 1 HISTORY OF THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC Also available: ENERGY International Atomic Energy Agency: Personal Reflections (18 ✕ 24 cm; 311 pp.) AGENCY The reflections are written by a group of distinguished scientists and diplomats who were involved in the establishment or The First Forty Years subsequent work of the IAEA. It represents a collection of by ‘essays’ which offer a complementary and personal view on some of the topics considered in the full history. David Fischer A fortieth anniversary publication ISBN 92–0–102397–9 IAEA_History.qxd 10.01.2003 11:01 Uhr Seite 2 The ‘temporary’ In 1979, the Austrian headquarters of Government and the IAEA in the City of Vienna the Grand Hotel, on completed construction the Ringstrasse in of the Vienna central Vienna. International Centre The Agency remained (VIC), next to the there for some Donaupark, which twenty years, until 1979. became the permanent home of the IAEA and other UN organizations. Austria generously made the buildings and facilities at the VIC available at the ‘peppercorn’ rent of one Austrian Schilling a year. IAEA_History.qxd 10.01.2003 11:01 Uhr Seite 2 The ‘temporary’ In 1979, the Austrian headquarters of Government and the IAEA in the City of Vienna the Grand Hotel, on completed construction the Ringstrasse in of the Vienna central Vienna. International Centre The Agency remained (VIC), next to the there for some Donaupark, which twenty years, until 1979. became the permanent home of the IAEA and other UN organizations. Austria generously made the buildings and facilities at the VIC available at the ‘peppercorn’ rent of one Austrian Schilling a year.
    [Show full text]
  • Activity C: the Chernobyl Disaster
    Activity C: The Chernobyl Disaster Teacher’s Briefing Activity C: The Chernobyl Disaster Further notes Plenary activity Curriculum links Materials for Students Question sheet Map cards A3 map Download this resource www.cnduk.org/activity-c 23 Activity C: The Chernobyl Disaster: Activity overview Concepts to examine Overview Nuclear accidents, the effects of – In pairs or small groups, students match up the cards of information about the radiation on humans, the effects of effects of the nuclear fallout from Chernobyl and discuss its effects. radiation on the environment. Instructions Materials and space needed – Split the students into pairs or small groups and provide each group with a Tables for pair/small group work, A3 copy of the map of Europe. maps of Europe (if you do not have – Instruct the students to match the cards detailing the effects to the access to a colour photocopier, then corresponding countries on the map. further copies of the map are – In their pairs or small groups, ask the students to write down the countries in available. distance order from the disaster. For each country, students should also list one effect the radiation had on that area. Learning outcomes – Go around the class asking groups in turn to feed back a country (and one By the end of the lesson: effect) in distance order. All students should be able to identify what sort of power station Plenary exploded and name an effect. To discuss: – Imagine that you and your family had to leave your town at short notice due to Most students will be able to name a nuclear disaster.
    [Show full text]
  • Present and Future Environmental Impact of the Chernobyl Accident
    XA0102711 IAEA-TECDOC-1240 \ - Present and future environmental impact of the Chernobyl accident Study monitored by an International Advisory Committee under the project management of the Institut de protection et de surete nucleaire (IPSN), France ffl IAEA 32/ 40 August 2001 IAEA SAFETY RELATED PUBLICATIONS IAEA SAFETY STANDARDS Under the terms of Article III of its Statute, the IAEA is authorized to establish standards of safety for protection against ionizing radiation and to provide for the application of these standards to peaceful nuclear activities. The regulatory related publications by means of which the IAEA establishes safety standards and measures are issued in the IAEA Safety Standards Series. This series covers nuclear safety, radiation safety, transport safety and waste safety, and also general safety (that is, of relevance in two or more of the four areas), and the categories within it are Safety Fundamentals, Safety Requirements and Safety Guides. • Safety Fundamentals (silver lettering) present basic objectives, concepts and principles of safety and protection in the development and application of atomic energy for peaceful purposes. • Safety Requirements (red lettering) establish the requirements that must be met to ensure safety. These requirements, which are expressed as 'shall' statements, are governed by the objectives and principles presented in the Safety Fundamentals. • Safety Guides (green lettering) recommend actions, conditions or procedures for meeting safety requirements. Recommendations in Safety Guides are expressed as 'should' statements, with the implication that it is necessary to take the measures recommended or equivalent alternative measures to comply with the requirements. The IAEA's safety standards are not legally binding on Member States but may be adopted by them, at their own discretion, for use in national regulations in respect of their own activities.
    [Show full text]
  • SOVIET DECISIONMAKING for CHERNOBYL : an ANALYSIS of SYSTEM PERFORMANCE and POLICY CHANG E By
    NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SOVIET AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARC H TITLE : SOVIET DECISION_MAKING FOR CHERNOBYL : An Analysis of System Performance an d Policy Chang e AUTHOR : William C. Potte r CONTRACTOR : University of California, Los Angele s PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR : William C . Potte r COUNCIL CONTRACT NUMBER : 802-1 2 DATE : March, 199 0 The work leading to this report was supported by funds provided by the National Council for Soviet and East European Research . Th e analysis and interpretations contained in the report are those o f the author . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SOVIET DECISIONMAKING FOR CHERNOBYL : AN ANALYSIS OF SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AND POLICY CHANG E by William C . Potte r This report analyzes the systemic (as opposed to technical ) factors which contributed to the April 26, 1986 Chernobyl nuclea r accident, assesses the performance of the major organizationa l actors at Chernobyl, analyzes the impact of the accident on polic y change with respect to nuclear safety, and discerns lessons fro m the performance of Soviet organizations at Chernobyl that may b e applicable to other crisis situations . Its major conclusions may be summarized as follows : * Chernobyl was only the latest and most catastrophic in a lon g series of sometimes fatal accidents at Soviet nuclear powe r facilities ; * The Chernobyl accident should not have been totall y unanticipated, especially when viewed against the prior record o f accidents at Soviet nuclear facilities ; * Gorbachev may have been the patron of one of the few pre - Chernobyl nuclear safety critics
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power: a Sustainable Risk?
    Daniels Fund Ethics Initiative University of New Mexico http://danielsethics.mgt.unm.edu Debate Nuclear Power: A Sustainable Risk? ISSUE: Despite the fact that nuclear power is a more sustainable energy source than fossil fuels, is it worth the risks it poses to people and the environment? Nuclear accidents have made people nervous ever since nuclear power first started being seriously investigated as an energy source. The partial nuclear meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 and the Soviet Union Chernobyl accident in 1986 made these fears appear warranted, particularly as radiation from the Chernobyl disaster was believed to have contributed to many deaths and environmental damage. However, better control procedures and technology through the years has made nuclear power plants safer and more likely to be seen as an acceptable power source. However, in 2011 a natural disaster caused many people to reexamine the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power as an alternative energy source. An 8.9 magnitude earthquake and the following tsunami devastated Japan and the surrounding Pacific regions. The disaster caused serious damage to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. The nuclear plant underwent major explosions and fires, which caused a partial meltdown. This event caused long-term, if not permanent, changes to many people’s lives and the surrounding environment. Radioactivity in food, land, and water is an issue that the region has had to deal with since the incident. Nuclear power is produced by using the radioactive element uranium as the impetus for deriving energy by means of nuclear fission. Nuclear fission occurs when neutrons collide into the nucleus of an element, splitting the atom in half and generating heat.
    [Show full text]