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