Lecture 5-Societal Aspects of Nuclear Technology

NE 319
Societal Aspects of Nuclear
Technology
How Safe is Safe Enough?
Dr. Jose N. Reyes, Jr.
Department of Nuclear Engineering
Oregon State University
Spring Term 2001
Nuclear Engineering & Radiation Health Physics

Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Risks - Everywhere You Look!
A Survey of Risks
A Definition of Safety
A Definition of Risk
Estimating Risk
Attitudes Towards Risk
The Move Towards “Risk-Based” Regulation
PRA for Nuclear Power Plants
An Exercise in Funding Safety Research

Washington man survives attack by deadly
bacteria
A 41-year-old recovers from flesh-eating and toxic-shock streptococcal
infections.
Sunday, January 30, 2000
From The Associated Press
_____________________________________________________________
Risk of being infected with flesh-eating bacteria: 1 in170,000
Risk of dying once infected:

1 in 4


Lightning Risks
• Risk of being struck
by Lightning in any
given year: 1 in
750,000
• The chances of
surviving: 3 in 4


An Electrifying Personality
• According to the Guinness
Book of World Records,
Former Park Ranger Roy
"Dooms" Sullivan Sullivan
has the dubious distinction of
being the most lightningstruck person ever recorded.
• Between 1942 and his death
in 1983, Roy Sullivan was
struck by lightning seven
times.

1. The first lightning strike shot through
Sullivan's leg and knocked his big
toenail off.
2. In 1969, a second strike burned off his
eyebrows and knocked him
unconscious.
3. Another strike just a year later, left his
shoulder seared.
4. In 1972 his hair was set on fire and
Roy had to dump a bucket of water
over his head to cool off.

5. In 1973, another bolt ripped through
his hat and hit him on the head, set his
hair on fire again, threw him out of his
truck and knocked his left shoe off.
6. A sixth strike in 1976 left him with an
injured ankle.
7. The last lightning bolt to hit Roy
Sullivan sent him to the hospital with
chest and stomach burns in 1977.

Survey
• Rank the activities according to your
perception of the risk involved in
participating!
• For Example:
SPORTS ACTIVITIES
Archery

Very Risky

Somewhat Risky

Little or No
Risk




Occupation

Number of Fatalities - 1993

Executive/Managerial
Technicians

5

Sales

4

Administrative/Clerical

1

Farming

Occupational
Fatalities per
100,000 Employed

3

20

Forestry/Logging

142

Mechanics

6

Construction Supervisor

12

Construction Laborer

34

Truck Drivers

25

Taxi Drivers/Chauffeurs

50

Resident Military

10

Quarry Worker

28

Coal Miner

38

Metal Miner

22


SPORTS
ACTIVITIES

INJURIES
(Thousands)

INJURY PER
PARTICIPANT

Archery

5.8

4.94

1 in 1170

Baseball

34.6

437

1 in 80

Basketball

29.6

761

1 in 40

Bicycle Riding

63.0

604

1 in 105

Billiards, pool

29.4

5.19

1 in 5660

Bowling

Sports
Injuries

PARTICIPANTS
(Millions)

41.3

23.8

1 in 1730

Boxing

0.70

7.54

1 in 90

Fishing

51.2

76.0

1 in 670

Football

14.7

409

1 in 40

Golf

22.6

38.0

1 in 600

Ice Hockey

1.7

61.3

1 in 30

Ice Skating

6.9

36.4

1 in 190

Racquetball

5.4

15.4

1 in 350

Skateboarding

5.6

27.7

1 in 200

Soccer

10.3

146

1 in 70

Swimming

61.4

146

1 in 420

Waterskiing

8.1

15.3

1 in 530


Deaths Due to Injuries in 1992
Accident Type
Motor-vehicle
Falls from stairs, ladders, etc
Poisoning by drugs and medications
Fires
Drowning
Medical care mistakes
Inhalation and ingestion of food
Air and space transport
Water transport
Railway
Alcohol poisoning

Deaths per Million Population
161
50
23
16
14
10
4.7
4.3
3.3
2.5
1.3


How Do You Define Safety?
• “Safety” is the relative absence of the risk
of realizing a set of undesirable
consequences.


Definition of Risk
• Risk: The likelihood of experiencing a defined
set of undesired consequences.
– Involves both “likelihood” and “consequences” of
an event.

• Likelihood: Slightly different then probability.
Implies that some subjective judgement is used
as a basis for determining the probability of an
event. Typically assumes:
– Magnitude of consequences will remain relatively
constant (e.g. fatalities /yr) with time.
– All members of the population are equally exposed
or susceptible to risk.


Estimating Societal Risk
SOCIETAL RISK = FREQUENCY x MAGNITUDE
•
•
•
•

Risk (Consequences/time)
Frequency (Events/time)
Magnitude (Consequence/Event)
e.g.:

50,000 Deaths/yr = (15 x 106 Accidents/yr) x ( 1 Death/300
accidents)

Estimating Individual Risk
INDIVIDUAL RISK = SOCIETAL RISK/(POPULATION AT
RISK)
e.g.: If 200 million people in US:
(50,000 Deaths/yr)/(200 x 106 people) = 2.5 x 10-4 Deaths/(person-yr)
Societal Risk / Pop. At Risk
= Individual Risk
or 25 Deaths/100,000 people


Estimating Cost Risk
• Cost Risks for Injuries and Property Damage
are expressed in terms $Dollar values
associated with injuries and/or property
damage.
Cost Risk = (Total $ Value)/ (Population at Risk)


• Types of activities with a fatality risk greater
than 1 x 10-3 deaths/(person-yr) to the general
public are generally unacceptable.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–

cars
falls
fires
drowning
firearms
poisoning
lightning

~ 3 x 10-4 deaths/(person-yr)
~1 x 10-4 deaths/(person-yr)


• High Risk Activities are usually on the
order of the Disease Mortality Rate :
10-2 deaths/(person-yr)

• Low Risk Activities are usually on the
order of the Natural Hazards Mortality
Rate:
10-6 deaths/(person-yr)

• If some sports have a high likelihood of
injury, (e.g., greater than 1 x 10-3 deaths/
(person-yr), why do people participate
in them?
• If the risk of dying in an airplane crash
is less than dying in a car accident why
would some people rather drive than
fly?

• Acceptability Towards Risk depends on:
–
–
–
–

Benefits of Activity
Voluntary Nature of Activity
Perception
Consequence Distribution


• Consequence Distribution:
– Given two activities with equal risk, the
public will tend to accept Low
Consequence-High Frequency Events more
readily than High Consequence-Low
Frequency Events.

• Need a quantitative method to
distinguish between “Perceived Risk”
and “Actual Risk.” This method is
known as a Risk Analysis.

The Move Towards “RiskBased” Regulation
• A Risk Analysis can answer the following questions:
– How can government, industry, community use its “safety”
dollars most effectively to reduce overall risk to its workers
or the public it serves?
– How can an industry reduce plant down-time?
– How much should be spent on safety improvements?
– How can industry minimize the likelihood of occurrence of
a hazard?
– What would be the most effective emergency strategies
given the occurrence of a hazard?

• Government regulators are now using Risk Analyses
to determine: How safe is safe enough?

Risk Analysis
• Risk analysis is a technique of
identifying, characterizing, quantifying
and evaluating hazards.
• Two Phases:
– A qualitative step of identifying,
characterizing and ranking hazards.
– A quantitative step of risk evaluation,
which includes estimating likelihood and
consequences of hazard occurrence.

Probabilistic Risk Assessment
(PRA) for Nuclear Power Plants


Sequoyah PRA Results
Identifying Areas for Safety Improvements
NUREG-1150

ATWS
1%
Loss of Component
Cooling Water
31%

LOCA
59%

Other
1%
Station Blackout
5%
Loss of Bus
3%


Grand Gulf PRA Results
NUREG-1150
ATWS
1%

Station Blackout
99%


Surry PRA Results
NUREG-1150
Loss of Offsite
Power
4%
Loss of Bus
20%

Station Blackout
38%

ATWS
6%

LOCA
28%

SGTR
4%


NRC Safety Goal
(Latent Cancer Fatalities NUREG-1150)


An Exercise in Funding Public
Safety Research
• Organizations
–
–
–
–
–
–

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

• Each Team will be asked to share with the
class:
– What they think are the top 2-3 safety issues their
agency needs to address.
– Why they should get funding over other agencies.

NRC Safety Goal
(Early Fatalities NUREG-1150)


Comparison of
U.S. Nuclear
Power Plant Risks
to Natural Events
WASH-1400 Study


Comparison of U.S.
Nuclear Power Plant
Risks to Man-Made
Events
WASH-1400 Study


Lecture 5-Societal Aspects of Nuclear Technology

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Lecture 5-Societal Aspects of Nuclear Technology

Ähnlich wie Lecture 5-Societal Aspects of Nuclear Technology (20)

Mehr von Albania Energy Association

Mehr von Albania Energy Association (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Lecture 5-Societal Aspects of Nuclear Technology