Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
actions to take in response to emergency situations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: actions to take in response to emergency situations
[Type the document title] Contents I. Introduction 1 II. Ethical theories and principles 2 III. Conclusions 2 IV. References 2 V. Appendices 2 I. Introduction On March 11, 2011 and earthquake of grade 9 on the Richter scale sacudio (the larger on the 1400 years or records history [1]) the Pacific coast of Tohoku in which the Fukushima nuclear power complex is located. The initial disaster did not represented any significant risk even the power cut that isolate the complex from the electric grid the generators in place kept the cooling system of the generators running and the 3 operating reactors active at that moment initiated an automatic shutdown to protect the cores, what nobody at this point was expecting was a tsunami with a wave higher than 15 meters that forty-one minutes later hit the seawall that originally was designed to withstand waves up to 6 meters. This caused significant flooding on all the installations and malfunction on the diesel generators, replacement batteries in place powered the cooling system, but couldn’t prevent those from overheating oxidising their protective cladding and melting their radioactive cores, producing significant amount of hydrogen in reactors 1,2 and 3 which eventually exploded damaging the containing vessels. Reactors 1, 3 and 4 had significant leaking given the structural damage, and contaminated water was released to the environment. Overall by the end of the first crisis, three of the six reactors suffered a partial meltdown with the consequent release of radioactivity that contaminated the atmosphere and water from the reactors that reached the ocean. The situation raised many ethical issues given the nature of the incident and the implications as well as the ... ... middle of paper ... ...ilosophy, 2012. [2] Robert Jan van den Berg, "Nuclear Waste and," Social and ethical aspects of the retrievable storage of nuclear waste, 2000. [3] Wikipedia - Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. [Online]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster [4] Steven Starr. Costs and Consequences of the Fukushima Daiichi Disaster. [Online]. http://www.psr.org/environment-and-health/environmental-health-policy-institute/responses/costs-and-consequences-of-fukushima.html [5] Zoe Schalanger. (2014, February ) Another Day, Another Spill of Radioactive Water From Fukushima. [Online]. http://www.newsweek.com/another-day-another-spill-radioactive-water-fukushima-229840 [6] Managing Director of Investigation - Sakon Uda, "The official report of The Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission," The National Diet of Japan, 2012.
Lewis, H. W. (1986). The Accident at the Chernobyl' Nuclear Power Plant and Its Consequences. Environment, 28(9), 25.
Early in the morning of April 27, 1986, the world experienced its largest nuclear disaster ever (Gould 40). While violating safety protocol during a test, Reactor 4 at the Chernobyl power plant was placed in a severely unstable state, and in a matter of seconds the reactor output shot up to 120 times the rated output (Flavin 8). The resulting steam explosion tossed aside the reactor’s 1,000 ton concrete covering and released radioactive particles up to one and a half miles into the sky (Gould 38). The explosion and resulting fires caused 31 immediate deaths and over a thousand injuries, including radiation poisoning (Flavin 5). After the accident more than 135,000 people were evacuated from their Ukrainian homes, but the major fallout occurred outside of the Soviet Union’s borders. Smaller radioactive particles were carried in the atmosphere until they returned to earth via precipitation (Gould 43). The Soviets quickly seeded clouds to prevent rainfall over their own land, so most of the radioactivity burdened Western Europe, Scandinavia, and the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans (Flavin 12). This truly international disaster had far reaching effects; some of these were on health, the environment, social standards, and politics.
The Chernobyl & Fukushima nuclear disasters are similar in many ways, but yet so very different. Lets explore these two disasters, the events that took place, the amounts of radiation released, the effects on the people and the land, and how each disaster was handled then and still being handled now.
...ernobyl power plant. The highest doses of radiation were received by the fireman and the personnel of the power station on the night of the accident. About 600 000 persons of recovery operation workers (civilian and military) have received special certificates confirming their status as liquidators. The evacuation of the nearby residents was carried out at different times after the accident on the basis of the radiation situation and of the distance of the populated areas from the damaged reactor. For inhabitants of contaminated areas of the former Soviet Union, they continued to live in the contaminated territories surrounding the Chernobyl reactor although efforts were made to limit their doses. The average doses from 134Cs and 137Cs that were received during the first 10 years after the accident by the residents of contaminated areas are estimated to be 10 mSv.
Following a severe earthquake and Tsunami, 3 reactors were damaged, similar to Chernobyl. However, the event was contained with minimal nuclear leaks and no deaths. The surrounding area has already been deemed safe. Despite this, many still fear events such as this. The problem is, they should not. “As a nuclear engineer, it is depressing to read the recent reports on the Fukushima nuclear incident — not because of the incident itself (at this point I strongly believe that we will remember Fukushima as evidence of how safe nuclear power is when done right) — but because the media coverage of the event has been rife with errors so glaring that I have to wonder if anyone in the world of journalism has ever taken a physics class.” (Yost, Keith. What happened at the Fukushima reactor? Mit.edu) What he is essentially saying is that the nuclear reactors were properly managed during the event, and a major incident was avoided. He believes it instead to be a testimony to the safety of nuclear
On April 26, 1986, a reactor in the nuclear power plant in Chernobyl, Ukraine exploded and released 126 different types of radiation into the atmosphere. On April 25, the reactor which later exploded was shut down for maintenance. At the same time, machine operators were planning a test on the nuclear turbines located in the power plant. During this test, the operators turned off several safety systems which led to this major disaster. While testing the reactor, the power was increased, water flow into steam drums decreased, and the power rapidly increased. Because the emergency and safety systems were turned off, the reactor exploded and caused a horrible problem to deal with.
In addition to the potential dangers of accidents in generating stations, nuclear waste is a continuing problem that is growing exponentially. Nuclear waste can remain radioactive for about 600 years and disposing these wastes or storing them is an immense problem. Everyone wants the energy generated by power plants, but no one wants to take responsibility for the waste. Thus far, it is stored deep in the earth, but these storage areas are potentially dangerous and will eventually run out. Some have suggested sending the waste into space, but no one is sure of the repercussions.
This paper is about the health hazards of nuclear material as depicted by the Fukishima nuclear power plant meltdown and the role of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in safeguarding the American public against nuclear disaster or exposure to nuclear material and the agency’s commitment to the nonproliferation of nuclear material through their association with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
This has been the worst nuclear disaster the whole world has ever witnessed. The explosion at Chernobyl and its harmful effects on public health and to nature could have been avoided, but instead were made possible because of a political system that cultivated secrets and that did not judge useful to prioritize the development of enforceable safety methods to adapt to the operation of nuclear reactors. The long-term effects to humans affected by the radiation of the disaster have not been able to determine with exactitude, not even after more than twenty years. There are many more negative consequences expected to those people affected and people living in those areas where radiation still is present.
Povinec, Pavel and Katsumi Hirose. Fukushima Accident: Radioactivity Impacts on the Environment. Boston: Newnes, 2013. Print.
America needs to pay better attention to what is happening in Japan. This is our opportunity to learn and prepare our own Nuclear Plants in the event of such a crisis. We currently have 100 commercial nuclear power reactor units licensed to operate in the U.S. These operate in 31 of the 48 contiguous states. The nuclear power reactor units provide the U.S. with approximately 20 percent of its electricity. By reviewing Americas history of some recent natural disasters, I intend to build a case that an incident such as Fukushima could happen her in the U.S. I find it essential that these lessons be taken seriously to strengthen nuclear safety and it eventually leading to a complete phasing out of nuclear energy.
Most people have bad feelings towards nuclear power because of three major incidents, Three-mile Island in 1979, Chernobyl in 1986, and more recently Fukushima in 2011. It is because of these events that many dislike the idea of nuclear power and have a misunderstanding of what actually happened in these events. According to the World Nuclear Association, “These three significant accidents occurred during more than 16,000 reactor-years of civil operation. Of all the accidents and incidents, only the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents resulted in radiation doses to the public greater than those resulting from the exposure to natural sources. The Fukushima accident resulted in some radiation exposure of workers at the plant, but not such as to threaten their health, unlike Chernobyl. Other incidents (and one 'accident ') have been completely confined to the plant.” (WNA). Each plant had its problems, but the only plant to actually cause damage and the loss of human life was the ukraine reactor in Chernobyl. According to WNA, what happened during the meltdown was that the staff running the reactor did not follow the correct procedure and when they were supposed to follow through with one action they neglected to stop something from happening, therefore resulting in the meltdown of only one reactor out of four. The total meltdown could have been easily prevented if the engineers running the plant had followed through with all plant procedures. The meltdown was an unfortunate accident and many nations turned from nuclear power soon afterwards until more recently when the technology to handle all possible situations with the most extreme care. The United states is best known for its procedures with rectors. The US has set in plans to handle any and all actions for the possible event of a nuclear situation. According to the Nuclear Safeguards Infrastructure Development and
Primarily, the Fukushima disaster has caused negative effects on the ecosystem. Eight hundred square kilometres near the nuclear plant have been declared too radioactive for human habitation; these areas are called exclusion zones. When radioactive caesium is introduced to an ecosystem it contaminates the water, soil, plants, animals and maintains ownership of the land for centuries (Starr). Further, radioactive caesium bioaccumulates as it moves up the food chain. Bioaccumulation refers to the build up of chemicals in an organism which can be dangerous for human consumption. Forty percent of bottom dwelling fish such as halibut and cod were found to have exceeding radioactive levels than regulatory limits. As a matter of fact, the Fukushima disaster is the largest discharge of radioactive material into the ocean in history (Starr). Unfortunately, efforts to clean up are futile because water run-off continues to re-contaminates the land and ocean. Also, many areas are still too radioactive to work in. Currently, reactor four is still in tact; however, if Japan is struck with another magnitude six plus earthquake, the reactor will be destroyed and will cause a world cr...
On April 26, 1986 a nuclear explosion at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in present day Ukraine caused catastrophic damage. A systems test at a reactor took a turn for the worst when there was a sudden surge of power. Unskilled worker attempted a shutdown but only caused an even greater spike in the power surge. A reactor vessel ruptured and a succession of explosions followed. A total of thirty operators and firemen were killed in a short amount of time. (“What is Chernobyl”) The amount of radioactivity released was two hundred times greater than that of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Following the accident into present- day there is a larger number of radiation related deaths as people are exposed to unhealthy amounts of radiation.
The energy industry is beginning to change. In today’s modern world, governments across the globe are shifting their focuses from traditional sources of power, like the burning coal and oil, to the more complex and scientific nuclear power supply. This relatively new system uses powerful fuel sources and produces little to no emissions while outputting enough energy to fulfill the world’s power needs (Community Science, n.d.). But while nuclear power seems to be a perfect energy source, no power production system is without faults, and nuclear reactors are no exception, with their flaws manifesting in the form of safety. Nuclear reactors employ complex systems involving pressure and heat. If any of these systems dysfunctions, the reactor can leak or even explode releasing tons of highly radioactive elements into the environment. Anyone who works at or near a nuclear reactor is constantly in danger of being exposed to a nuclear incident similar to the ones that occurred at the Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi plants. These major accidents along with the unresolved problems with the design and function of nuclear reactors, as well as the economic and health issues that nuclear reactors present serve to show that nuclear energy sources are not worth the service that they provide and are too dangerous to routinely use.