Suchergebnisse

This paper focuses on the nuclear licensing process which is the environmental impact assessment. In the Alberta context, the jurisdictional power over environmental impact assessments and provincial legislation are analyzed to enhance the understanding of potential conflicts that arise if plans to construct a nuclear power plant in Alberta become real. Although, this approach seems to be of a theoretical nature at present, during nuclear conferences questions centering on the division of power and its consequences were raised by the oil sands industry. Consequently, there is a demand for clarification which this paper attempts to address. ; Alberta Law Foundation; Cenovus Energy ; Yes

The paper presents the results of radiation risk assessment for the staff of a nuclear power plant design during design basis accident (spent nuclear fuel assembly falling on fuel in reactor core or storage pool during refueling operations) and a beyond design basis accident (large leakage of the primary coolant with failure of the active part of the emergency cooling system and complete blackout for 24 h). The assessment is based on state-of-the-art radiation risk models from the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). The calculation of risk indicators for occupational exposure of NPP staff in emergency situations was carried out on the basis of data obtained using a computational module created in the COMSOL 5.6 multiphysics software, doses from a radioactive cloud and internal exposure due to inhalation for such radionuclides as 134Cs, 137Cs, 131I, 133I, 90Sr. A feature of this approach is the detailed consideration of the NPP industrial site infrastructure, which allows obtaining a more accurate assessment of the radionuclide air distribution and fallout.

Ukraine's surprise incursion into Russia raises questions about the risk to yet another aging civilian nuclear power plant

Risk criterion is a term that may distinguish between what is considered as an acceptable level of safety and what is not. One of the ways of determining quantitative risk criteria for temporary changes in a nuclear power plant considering probabilistic safety assessment is presented. Risk criteria are based on timing and on time duration of the change. Several examples of temporary changes in a nuclear power plant were examined to evaluate the criteria. Results show that it is possible to determine a set of risk criteria for temporary changes. Risk criteria can represent a standpoint for risk‐informed decision making.

Florida Technological University College of Engineering Thesis; The United States' energy crisis, which has received so much publicity lately , has focused national attention on how we are to meet our energy demands. Proposed energy sources include conventional nuclear power plants, breeder reactor and fusion reactor plants, coal gasification, liquid hydrogen, solar energy, and geothermal energy. All of these except conventional fission plants are still on the drawing board or in the experimental laboratory, and are described briefly. Government and industry are betting heavily on conventional nuclear power plants. ($40 billion already spent by private utilities for 30 operating plants, 60 under construction, and 75 on order.) A. few unpublicized accidents and more and more complex instrumentation in nuclear power plant control rooms has pointed to a desperate need for more effective ways of training individuals to safely operate these plants. Recognizing this need, General Electric Company designed and built a very realistic computer-driven simulator of a plant control room. The physical enclosures and instrumentation duplicates the Dresden II control room in every way, and response to operator manipulation of controls duplicates that of a real plant. The bulk of this paper describes the simulator and its development. The last section raises questions concerning hazards of continued growth of nuclear power and presents some alternatives. ; 1973-05-01 ; M.S. ; Engineering ; Masters ; This record was generated from author submitted information. ; Electronically reproduced by the University of Central Florida from a book held in the John C. Hitt Library at the University of Central Florida, Orlando.

Front cover -- Half title -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Contents -- About the Author -- Preface -- Chapter 1 Reliability modeling -- 1.1 Reliability mathematics -- 1.1.1 Set theory -- 1.1.2 Fundamentals of Boolean algebra -- 1.2 Probability theory -- 1.2.1 Conditional probability -- 1.2.2 Bayes theorem -- 1.3 Probability distributions -- 1.3.1 Discrete probability distribution -- 1.3.2 Continuous probability distribution -- 1.4 System reliability -- Further readings -- Chapter 2 Introduction to probabilistic safety assessment -- 2.1 Safety approach in NPPs-defense-in-depth -- 2.2 Need for PSA -- 2.3 Regulatory decision making with PSA insights -- 2.3.1 Probabilistic safety goals/criteria -- 2.4 Approaches for regulatory decisions -- 2.4.1 Risk-informed approach -- 2.4.2 Risk-based approach -- 2.4.3 Risk-informed, performance-based approach -- 2.5 Quality assurance -- 2.5.1 Management of QA activities -- 2.5.2 Structure of QA program -- 2.6 Standardization of PSA -- 2.7 PSA methodology -- 2.7.1 Data -- 2.7.2 Failure mode selection -- 2.7.3 External events -- 2.7.4 Computer code -- 2.7.5 A graded approach to risk evaluation -- 2.7.6 Level-1 PSA -- 2.7.7 Level-2 PSA -- 2.7.8 Level-3 PSA -- 2.8 Initiating event frequency -- 2.9 Component data -- 2.9.1 Component reliability models -- 2.10 Human reliability -- 2.11 Dependence analysis -- 2.11.1 Complete dependency -- 2.11.2 High dependency -- 2.11.3 Moderate dependency -- 2.11.4 Low dependency -- 2.11.5 Zero dependency -- 2.12 Passive systems -- 2.12.1 Category A -- 2.12.2 Category B -- 2.12.3 Category C -- 2.12.4 Category D -- 2.13 Software reliability -- 2.13.1 Black-box reliability models -- 2.13.2 White-box reliability models -- 2.14 Uncertainty analysis -- 2.15 Sensitivity analysis -- 2.16 Importance measures -- 2.16.1 Risk achievement worth -- 2.16.2 Risk reduction worth.

This study investigated risk perception, well‐being, and organizational commitment among nuclear power plant personnel. The study group, 428 employees from a nuclear power plant, completed a questionnaire which included the same questions as those in previous surveys on risk perception of lay persons and industrial workers. Hazards at work were not seen as a sizable problem by nuclear power plant personnel. The study group estimated the safety of nuclear power plants better and the possibility of a serious nuclear accident as more unlikely than the general public. Compared to employees in other industrial companies, the overall perceived risks at work among plant personnel did not exceed the respective perceptions of the reference groups. Risk‐related attitudes did not explain well‐being among plant personnel, but the relationship between the perceived probability of a serious nuclear accident at work and organizational commitment yielded to a significant correlation: Those plant workers who estimated the likelihood of an accident higher were less committed to the organization.