Abstract
The historical record of nuclear reactor performance can be interpreted as showing that they are very safe or that they are very dangerous. The former conclusion follows if one limits consideration to plants outside the former Soviet Union (FSU). The latter conclusion follows if one focuses on the Chernobyl accident and takes it as a broadly applicable indicator.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
International Atomic Energy Agency, Nuclear Power Reactors in the World, Reference Data Series No. 2, April 2003 edition (Vienna: IAEA, 2003).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Accidents and Unscheduled Events Associated with Non-nuclear Energy Resources and Technology, Report EPA-600/7-77-016 (Washington, DC: EPA, 1977).
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency, Achieving Nuclear Safety: Improvements in Reactor Safety Design and Operation (Paris: OECD, 1993).
Uranium Institute, The Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: An Assessment by an International Group of Senior Nuclear Safety Experts (London: The Uranium Institute, 1988).
C. W. Forsberg and A. M. Weinberg, “Advanced Reactors, Passive Safety, and Acceptance of Nuclear Energy,” Annual Review of Energy 15, 1990: 133–152.
International Atomic Energy Agency, The Safety of Nuclear Power: Strategy for the Future (Vienna: IAEA, 1992).
Ronald Allen Knief, Nuclear Engineering: Theory and Technology of Commercial Nuclear Power, 2nd edition (Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing Company, 1992).
American Nuclear Society, Report of the Special Committee on Source Terms (La Grange Park, IL: ANS, 1984.)
“Report to the APS of the Study Group on Radionuclide Release from Severe Accidents at Nuclear Power Plants,” Richard Wilson, Chairman, Reviews of Modern Physics 57, no. 3, part II, 1985.
“Report to the APS by the Study Group on Light-water Reactor Safety,” H. W. Lewis, Chairman, Reviews ofMo dern Physics 47,Supplement 1, 1975.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Severe Accident Risks: An Assessment for Five U.S. Nuclear Power Plants, Final Summary Report, Report NUREG-1150, vols. 1 and 2 (Washington, DC: NRC, 1990).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Reactor Safety Study: An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants, Report WASH-1400 (NUREG 75/014) (Washington, DC: NRC, 1975).
H. Kouts, “The Safety of Nuclear Power,” in The Safety of Nuclear Power: Strategy for the Future (Vienna: IAEA, 1992), pp. 47–54.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Risk Assessment Review Group Report to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, H.W. Lewis, Chairman, NUREG/CR-0400 (Washington, DC: NRC, 1978).
David Bodansky, “Risk Assessment and Nuclear Power,” Journal of Contemporary Studies 5, no. 1, 1982: 5–27.
“World List of Nuclear Power Plants,” Nuclear News 37, no. 3, March 1994: 43–62.
American Nuclear Society, Report of the Special Committee on NUREG-1150, The NRC’s Study of Severe Accident Risks (La Grange Park, IL: ANS, 1990).
Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee, R. J. Budnitz, Chairman, Recommendations for Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis: Guidance on Uncertainty and Use of Experts, Report NUREG/CR-6372, UCRL-ID-122160 (Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1997).
Electric Power Research Institute, Use of Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Results: General Decision Making, the Charleston Earthquake Issue, and Severe Accident Evaluations, EPRI Report TR-103126, prepared by Risk Engineering, Inc. (Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, 1993).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Revised Livermore Seismic Hazard Estimates for 69 Nuclear Power Plant Sites East of the Rocky Mountains, Draft Report NUREG-1488 (Washington, DC: NRC, 1993).
Energy, U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10 (1993).
T.E. Murley, “Developments in Nuclear Safety,” Nuclear Safety 31 no. 1, 1990: 1–9.
T.E. Murley, “Safety Culture Indicators,” MIT Safety Course (July, 1999), unpublished.
William D. Travers, Status ofA ccident Sequence Precursor and SPAR Model Development Programs, SECY-02-0041 (Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2002).
R. J. Belles, et al., Precursors to Potential Severe Core Damage Accidents: 1997, Report NUREG/CR-4674, ORNL/NOAC-232, Vol. 26 (Oak Ridge, TN: ORNL, 1998).
“Changes in Probability of Core Damage Accidents Inferred on the Basis of Actual Events,” NRC staff report (forwarded to the Chairman of the NRC by James M. Taylor, April 24, 1992).
William D. Travers, Status of the Accident Sequence Precursor (ASP) and the Development of Standardized Plant Analysis Risk (SPAR) Models, SECY-03-0049 (Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2003).
“Performance Indicators: Another Successful Year in Performance, Safety,” Nuclear News 45, no. 6, May 2002: pp. 28–30.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC Update: Davis-Besse Reactor Head Damage (November 2002).
“The Nuclear News Interview. The NRC’s Brian Sheron: On Reactor Vessel Degradation,” Nuclear News 46, no. 7, June 2003: 29–33.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methods in Nuclear Regulatory Activities; Final Policy Statement, Federal Register 60, no. 158, August 1995: 42622–42629.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “10CFR Part 50, Safety Goals for the Operation of Nuclear Power Plants; Policy Statement; Correction and Republication, Federal Register 51, no. 162, August 1986: 30028–30033.
William D. Travers, Modified Reactor Safety Goal Policy Statement, SECY-01-0009 (Washington, DC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2001).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Committee Voting Record, Modified Reactor Safety Policy Goal Statement (Washington, DC: NRC, April 16, 2001).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to Certification of the AP600 Standard Design,” NUREG-1512 (Washington, DC: NRC, 1998).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Safety Goals for Nuclear Power Plant Operation, NUREG-0880 REV 1 (Washington, DC: NRC, 1983).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor, Report NUREG-1503 (Washington, DC: NRC, 1994).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, An Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-Specific Changes to the Licensing Basis, Regulatory Guide 1.174 (Washington, DC: NRC, 1998).
International Atomic Energy Agency, Basic Safety Principles for Nuclear Power Plants, 75-INSAG-3, Rev. 1, International Nuclear Safety Group Report INSAG-12 (Vienna: IAEA, 1999).
National Research Council, Nuclear Power, Technical and Institutional Options for the Future, Report of the Committee on Future Nuclear Power Development, John F. Ahearne, Chairman (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1992).
The World Almanac and Book of Facts 1980 (New York: Newspaper Enterprise Association, 1979).
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer-Verlag New York, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
(2004). Nuclear Reactor Safety. In: Nuclear Energy. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-26931-2_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-26931-2_14
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-20778-0
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-26931-3
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)