Chernobyl adjustments and responses

3,041 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,041
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
235
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
34
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Because of the high magnitude, there were international involvements to mitigate the consequences of this hazard event. The responses also led to the opening-up of the Soviet
  • In conclusion one of the major factors that affected the adjustments and responses to the disaster was the government control. The Chernobyl Explosion was one of the leading contributing factors that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. This event forced the USSR to open up to and participate in international affairs which exposed the turmoil within the society. In addition, because Chernobyl was the first major nuclear disaster, this served as a basis for how the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011 should react and respond.
  • Chernobyl adjustments and responses

    1. 1. Chernobyl NuclearDisasterExamine the factors that affected the choice of adjustmentsbefore, and responses to actual hazard events or disasterJoy Yuen, Alex Gotianun, Linh Nguyen
    2. 2. ContextApril 26 1986April 26 1986Operating crew plannedOperating crew plannedto test Unit 4’s turbinesto test Unit 4’s turbinesMelted fuel rods, ignited theMelted fuel rods, ignited thegraphite coveringgraphite coveringHuman-induced HazardHuman-induced Hazard
    3. 3. Adjustments priorto event
    4. 4. 1. One (out of four) cooling pump always onstand by2. ECCS (Emergency Core Cooling System):Automatic shutdown mechanism that pumpsmore water to cool nuclear rods3. 24- hour emergency firefighting crew onstand by
    5. 5. Factors that affectedthese adjustmentsHazard type, Social, Political andEconomics
    6. 6. Hazard type1.Human induced2.Unpredictability3.Rapid speed of on-set
    7. 7. Political1. Communist society1. Secrecy!2.Cold War arms race1. Plutonium Productionimposed sense ofurgency
    8. 8. Economic1. Budgetary problemsdue to investment inmilitary• Funds producedhighest qualityweapons-gradeplutonium-2391. ∴ Less moneyimplemented forsafety measures
    9. 9. Social1. Inexperienced crewspecialists inturbines, conventionalpower plants, smallnuclear reactors  NO experiencewith LARGENUCLEARREACTORS
    10. 10. Responses afterthe eventShort-term, Mid-term, Long-term
    11. 11. Responses to Explosion-Short Term1. Fire fighters
    12. 12. Responses to Explosion-Mid Term1. Boron and sand pouredover reactor2.May 14 1986, 116 000people that lived within30 km radius evacuated3.Russian nuclear team ofexperts immediatelydecided on their courseof action
    13. 13. Responses to Explosion-Mid Term1. Liquidators  People whohelped clean disaster2.International AtomicEnergy Association• Press conference in Moscowfor a post accident analysis
    14. 14. Responses to Explosion-Long Term1. Entombed in a temporaryconcrete "sarcophagus"  limitfurther release of radioactivematerial• New 2013 Sarcophagus bythe EU1. Pushing for universal saltiodization  reduce thyroidcancer in children2. Meters showing radiationinstalled
    15. 15. Responses to Explosion-Long Term (continuation)4. Exclusion Zone to protect people fromthe harmful radiation
    16. 16. Factors thataffected responsesHazard type, social, economic, political
    17. 17. Hazard type factorInternational involvements to mitigateconsequences  opening up of USSRUnpredictabilityUnpredictabilityRarenessSudden Speed of Onset∴ Slow responses and littlepreparation
    18. 18. Political factor: Mediaand Government Control• Government reluctant to informcitizens• USSR failed to provide promptwarning to foreign neighbors andcitizens• Absence of emergencycommunications plans• Deliberate withholding ofradiation releases
    19. 19. Social factor: Perceptionof RiskLack of knowledge and experienceLack of immediate responses∴ Limited help in the beginning
    20. 20. Economic factor: Levelof DevelopmentMore developed countries= better preparationsChernobyl, Ukraine under USSR
    21. 21. Conclusion1. Major factors that affected the adjustmentsand responses was the governmental control2.Contribution to the collapse of the SovietUnion3.Forced USSR to open up and participate ininternational affairs4.Because it was a major disaster, it served as abasis for future reactions and responses
    22. 22. 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

    ×