Advertisement

Chernobyl pp 85-116 | Cite as

The International Response: Prospects for a Nuclear Safety Regime

  • Joanne Linnerooth-Bayer
Chapter
  • 115 Downloads
Part of the Springer Series on Environmental Management book series (SSEM)

Abstract

In April 1986, the Chernobyl nuclear reactor breached containment and released more than 100 million curies of radioactivity into the environment. The release from this worst case accident, which has been compared to several dozen Hiroshima bombs (Hohenemser and Renn, 1988), conformed little, if at all, to accepted nuclear accident scenarios. To everybody’s relief, there were far fewer immediate fatalities in the Ukraine than would have been anticipated. Actual deaths, however, instead became anonymous statistical deaths. The radionuclide contamination reached most of the Northern Hemisphere, and expected future cancer fatalities may be in the thousands.[1]

Keywords

Nuclear Power Plant International Atomic Energy Agency Emergency Response Chernobyl Accident Nuclear Accident 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BEUC, 1986, Bulletin of the European Communities, 5(Sept).Google Scholar
  2. Björkbom, L., 1988, Resolution of Environmental Problems: The Use of Diplomacy, in J.E. Carroll, ed., International Environmental Diplomacy: The Management and Resolution of Transfrontier Environmental Problems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  3. Blix, H., 1986, The Influence of the Accident at Chernobyl, Lecture delivered at Round Table No. 7, The Future for Nuclear Power, 13th Congress of the World Energy Conference, 7 Oct. 1986, Cannes, France.Google Scholar
  4. Carroll, J.E., 1988, International Environmental Diplomacy: The Management and Resolution of Transfrontier Environmental Problems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  5. CEC, 1982, Radiological Protection Criteria for Controlling Doses to the Public in the Event of Accidental Releases of Radioactive Material, Employment, Social Affairs and Education, Health and Safety Directorate of CEC, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  6. CEC, 1986, Aims and Practices of Transfrontier Emergency Planning within the EC Countries in Case of an Accident in a Nuclear Installation, Employment, Social Affairs and Education, Health and Safety Directorate of CEC, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  7. Collins, H.E,. 1981, Emergency Response to a Nuclear Facility Accident: Preplanning and Preparedness by Off-Site Organizations, in J.W. Lathrop, ed., Planning for Rare Events: Nuclear Accident Preparedness and Management, Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  8. Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, 1984, Criteria for Radioactive Releases from Nuclear Power Plants Requiring Other Countries to be Informed, Radiation, USSR Protection Series No. 18, CMEA, Moscow [in Russian].Google Scholar
  9. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Reaktorsicherheit [German Reactor Study], 1979, Deutsche Risikostudie Kernkraftwerke: Eine Untersuchung zu dem durch Störfälle in Kernkraftwerken verursachten Risiko.Google Scholar
  10. EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute), 1990, Advanced Light-Water Reactor: Utility Requirements, Document, March, Palo Alto, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  11. European Study Service, 1987, Nuclear Safety in the EEC in the Wake of Chernobyl, Rixensart, Belgium.Google Scholar
  12. Ferrara, G., 1978, Atomic Energy and the Safety Controversy, Checkmark Books, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Fischer, D.A., 1986, The International Response, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 42(7):46–50.Google Scholar
  14. Flavin, C., 1987, Reassessing Nuclear Power: The Fallout from Chernobyl, World-watch Paper 75, Worldwatch Institute, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  15. Galtung, J., 1986, On the Anthropology of the United Nations System, in D. Pitt and T. Weiss, eds., The Nature of United Nations Bureaucracies. Croom Helm, London, UK.Google Scholar
  16. GCRA (Gas-Cooled Reactor Association), 1989, Utility/User Requirements for the Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor Plant, GCRA-86-002, (Revised, Apr. 1989).Google Scholar
  17. Gerlach L.P. and Rayner, S. 1988, Managing Global Climate Change: A View from the Social and Decision Sciences, Draft Report, ORNL6390, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA.Google Scholar
  18. Goldschmidt, B., 1982, The Atomic Complex: A Worldwide Political History of Nuclear Energy, American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, USA.Google Scholar
  19. Gruppe ökologie Hannover, 1986, International Nuclear Reactor Hazard Study, Report prepared for Greenpeace, Sept., Hannover, Germany, F.R.Google Scholar
  20. Hohenemser, C., 1988, The Accident at Chernobyl, Am. Rev. of Energy 13:383–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hohenemser, C. and Renn, O., 1988, Chernobyl’s Other Legacy: Shifting Public Perception of Nuclear Risk, Environment 30(3):4–17, 40-45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. IAEA, 1981, Planning for Off-Site Response to Radiation Accidents in Nuclear Facilities, Safety Series No.55, IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  23. IAEA, 1982a, Basic Safety Standards for Radiation Protection: 1982 Edition, Safety Series No. 9, IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  24. IAEA, 1982b, Preparedness of Public Authorities for Emergencies at Nuclear Power Plants, Safety Series No. 50-SG-G6, IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  25. IAEA, 1982c, Preparedness of the Operating Organizations (Licensee) for Emergencies at Nuclear Power Plants, Safety Series No. 50-SG-06, IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  26. IAEA, 1985a, Principles for Establishing Intervention Levels for Application in Controlling Radiation Doses to the Public in the Event of a Nuclear Accident or Radiation Emergency, IAEA Safety Series No. 72, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  27. IAEA, 1985b, Guidelines on Reportable Events, Integrated Planning and Information Exchange in a Transboundary Releaser of Radioactive Materials, Information Circular INFCIRC321, IAEA, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  28. IAEA, 1986a, Derived Intervention Levels for Application in Controlling Radiation Doses to the Public in the Event of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency, IAEA Safety Series No. 81, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  29. IAEA, 1986b, Final Document: Resolutions and Conventions, Adopted by the First Special Session of the General Conference, 24–26 Sept., 1986, GC(SPL.I)/ Resolutions, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  30. IAEA, 1988, IAEA News Feature 1 15 April, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  31. ICRP, 1984, Protection of the Public in the Event of Major Radiation Accidents: Principles of Planning, ICRP, Publication 40, Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  32. INSAG, 1986, Summary Report on the Post-Accident Review Meeting on the Chernobyl Accident, Aug. 30–Sept. 5, 1986, GLC (SPL.I)/3, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  33. INSAG, 1988, Basic Safety Principles for Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA Safety Series No. 75-INSAG-3 Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  34. Kasperson, R. and Gray, A., 1981, Risk Assessment Following Crisis: The Impacts of the Kemeny Commission Report on Nuclear Safety in the US, Working paper prepared for the Beijer Institute, Stockholm; the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria; Clark University, Worcester, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  35. Kohl, W.L., 1983, International Institutions for Energy Management, Gower, London, UK.Google Scholar
  36. Lathrop, J., 1981, An Open Discussion of Problems in Nuclear Accident Preparedness, in J. Lathrop, ed., Planning for Rare Events: Nuclear Accident Preparedness and Management, Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  37. Linnerooth, J., 1988, Negotiated River Basin Management: Implementing the Danube Declaration, WP-88-4, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.Google Scholar
  38. Majone, G., 1985, The International Dimension, in H. Otway and M. Peltu, ed., Regulating Industrial Risks, Butterworths, London, UK.Google Scholar
  39. Majone, G., 1986, International Institutions and the Environment, in W. Clark and R. Munn, ed., Sustainable Development of the Biosphere, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  40. Martin, 1981, in J. Lathrop, ed., Planning for Rare Events: Nuclear Accident Preparedness and Management, Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  41. Morrey, M., Brown, J., Williams, J.A., Crick, M.J., Simonds, J.R., and Hill, M.D., 1987, A Preliminary Assessment of the Radiological Impact of the Chernobyl Reactor Accident on the Population of the European Community, National Radiological Protection Board, CEC 86 398, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  42. NEA, 1987a, Chernobyl and the Safety of Nuclear Reactors in OECD Countries, Report by an NEA Group of Experts, OECD, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  43. NEA, 1987b, The Radiological Impact of the Chernobyl Accident in OECD Countries, OECD, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  44. Pitt, D., 1986, Power in the UN Superbureaucracy: A Modern Byzantium? in D. Pitt and T. Weiss, eds., The Nature of United Nations Bureaucracies, Croom Helm, London, UK.Google Scholar
  45. Ramberg, B., 1987, Learning from Chernobyl, Foreign Affairs 65(2):304–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Salo, A. and Daglish, J., in press., Response to an Accident in Theory and in Practice, Environment International Google Scholar
  47. Sands, P., 1988, Chernobyl: Law and Communication, Grotius Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  48. Scheinman, L., 1988, The IAEA and World Nuclear Power, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, USA.Google Scholar
  49. Shapar, H.K., 1987, Chernobyl One Year On, in The OECD Observer, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  50. Starr, Ch., 1987, Functional Perspective on Risk Analysis in Nuclear Power, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  51. Sternglass, E.J., 1986, The Implications of Chernobyl for Human Health, International Journal of Biosocial Research, July:7-36.Google Scholar
  52. US GAO (General Accounting Office), 1980, Do Nuclear Regulatory Commission Plans Adequately Address Regulatory Deficiencies Highlighted by The Three Mile Island Accident? Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  53. US NRC, 1975, Reactor Safety Study, An Assessment of Accident Risks in US Commercial Nuclear Power Plants (WASH-1400), Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  54. US NRC, 1987, A Report on the Chernobyl Accident, NUREG 1250, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  55. US President’s Report, 1979, Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island (Kemeny Report), The Need for Change: The Legacy of TMI, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  56. Weinberg, A.M., 1985, Is Nuclear Energy Acceptable? Continuing the Nuclear Dialogue: Selected Essays, American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, USA.Google Scholar
  57. Wilson, R., 1986, Assessing the Accident, Issues in Science and Technology, Fall:25.Google Scholar
  58. WHO, 1957, Effect of Radiation on Human Heredity, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  59. WHO, 1965, Protection of the Public in the Event of Radiation Accidents, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  60. WHO, 1977, Health Implications of Nuclear Power Production: Report on a Working Group, WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
  61. WHO, 1984, Nuclear Power: Accidental Releases — Principles of Public Health Action, WHO Regional Publication, European Series No. 16, Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
  62. WHO, 1986a, Chernobyl Reactor Accident, Report of a Consultation, 6 May 1986, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  63. WHO, 1986b, Chernobyl Reactor Accident, Information Received on Public Health Measures as of 29 May 1986, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  64. WHO, 1986c, Updated Background Information on the Nuclear Reactor Accident in Chernobyl, USSR, Information received on public health measures as of 12 June 1986, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  65. WHO, 1986d, Summary Report of Working Group on the Assessment of Radiation Dose Commitment in Europe Due to the Chernobyl Accident, Bilthoven, 25–27 June 1986, Regional Office of Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
  66. Wynne, B., 1983, Redefining the Issues of Risk and Public Acceptance, Futures 15: 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wynne, B., 1988, Safety Targets and Public Risk Perceptions in the Nuclear Field — Technical Treadmill or Institutional Responses? Proceedings of Conference on Safety Targets and Acceptable Risk in the Nuclear Industry, University of East Anglia, UK.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg/Austria 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joanne Linnerooth-Bayer
    • 1
  1. 1.IIASALaxenburgAustria

Personalised recommendations