Severe accidents in the energy sector: comparative perspective (original) (raw)
Related papers
Accident Risks in the Energy Sector: Comparative Evaluations
2005
Severe accidents are considered one of the most controversial issues in current comparative studies of the environmental and health impact of energy systems. The present work focuses on severe accident scenarios relating to fossil energy chains (coal, oil and gas), nuclear power and hydro-power. The scope of the study is not limited to the power production (conversion) step of these energy chains, but, wherever applicable, also includes full energy chains. With the exception of the nuclear chain, the focus of the present work is on the evaluation of the historical experience of accidents. The basis for this evaluation is the comprehensive database ENSAD (Energy-Related Severe Accident Database), which has been established at PSI. For hypothetical nuclear accidents, a probabilistic technique has also been employed. The broader picture, derived from examination of full energy chains, leads, on a world-wide basis, to the conclusion that immediate fatality rates are much higher for the ...
Comparative risk assessment of severe accidents in the energy sector based on the ENSAD database
Beyond the Horizon, 2013
Accident risks are compared across a broad range of energy technologies. Analysis of historical experience was based on the comprehensive database ENSAD. OECD and EU 27 performed significantly better than non-OECD countries. External costs of accidents are very small, but impacts can still be enormous. No technology performs best for all risk indicators; thus tradeoffs are inevitable.
Accident Risks in the Energy Sector: Comparison of Damage Indicators and External Costs
Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, 2004
In 1998 ENSAD, a highly comprehensive database on severe accidents with emphasis on the energy sector, was established by the Paul Scherrer Institute (PSI). The historical experience represented in this database was supplemented by probabilistic analyses for the nuclear energy, to carry out a detailed comparison of severe accident risks in the energy sector [1]. The database allows to perform comprehensive analyses of accident risks, which are not limited to power plants but cover full energy chains, including exploration, extraction, processing, storage, transports and waste management.
Severe accident risks in fossil energy chains: A comparative analysis
Energy, 2008
Accidents in the energy sector have been identified as one of the main contributors to man-made disasters. The present work focuses on the assessment of severe accident risks relating to fossil energy chains. Evaluations were based on the highly comprehensive Energyrelated Severe Accident Database (ENSAD), which was established at the Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI). The historical experience represented in this database allows a detailed comparison of severe accident risks in the broader energy sector. The analyses are not limited to power plants, but cover full energy chains, showing that immediate fatality rates are much higher for full fossil chains than expected if only power plants are considered. The different energy chains were analyzed separately, addressing selected technical aspects of severe accidents, followed by comparative evaluations. Generally, immediate fatality rates are significantly lower for countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and European Union 25 countries (EU25) than for non-OECD countries. In addition to aggregated values, frequency-consequence curves are also provided, since they not only reflect implicitly a ranking based on aggregated values, but also include information such as the maximum credible extent of damages.
Cost per severe accident as an index for severe accident consequence assessment and its applications
2014
The Fukushima Accident emphasizes the need to integrate the assessments of health effects, economic impacts, social impacts and environmental impacts, in order to perform a comprehensive consequence assessment of severe accidents in nuclear power plants. "Cost per severe accident" is introduced as an index for that purpose. The calculation methodology, including the consequence analysis using level 3 probabilistic risk assessment code OSCAAR and the calculation method of the cost per severe accident, is proposed. This methodology was applied to a virtual 1,100 MWe boiling water reactor. The breakdown of the cost per severe accident was provided. The radiation effect cost, the relocation cost and the decontamination cost were the three largest components. Sensitivity analyses were carried out, and parameters sensitive to cost per severe accident were specified. The cost per severe accident was compared with the amount of source terms, to demonstrate the performance of the cost per severe accident as an index to evaluate severe accident consequences. The ways to use the cost per severe accident for optimization of radiation protection countermeasures and for estimation of the effects of accident management strategies are discussed as its applications.
Benchmarking on the evaluation of major accident-related risk assessment
Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2009
This paper summarises the main results of a European project BEQUAR (Benchmarking Exercise in Quantitative Area Risk Assessment in Central and Eastern European Countries). This project is among the first attempts to explore how independent evaluations of the same risk study associated with a certain chemical establishment could differ from each other and the consequent effects on the resulting area risk estimate. The exercise specifically aimed at exploring the manner and degree to which independent experts may disagree on the interpretation of quantitative risk assessments for the same entity. The project first compared the results of a number of independent expert evaluations of a quantitative risk assessment study for the same reference chemical establishment. This effort was then followed by a study of the impact of the different interpretations on the estimate of the overall risk on the area concerned. In order to improve the inter-comparability of the results, this exercise was conducted using a single tool for area risk assessment based on the ARIPAR methodology. The results of this study are expected to contribute to an improved understanding of the inspection criteria and practices used by the different national authorities responsible for the implementation of the Seveso II Directive in their countries. The activity was funded under the Enlargement and Integration Action of the Joint Research Centre (JRC), that aims at providing scientific and technological support for promoting integration of the New Member States and assisting the Candidate Countries on their way towards accession to the European Union.
2013
To assess the complex situations regarding the severe accidents such as what observed in Fukushima Accident, not only radiation protection aspects but also relevant aspects: health, environmental, economic and societal aspects; must be all included into the consequence assessment. In this study, the authors introduce the "cost per severe accident" as an index to analyze the consequences of severe accidents comprehensively. The cost per severe accident consists of various costs and consequences converted into monetary values. For the purpose of improvement of the accident protection and consequence mitigation strategies, the costs needed to introduce the protective actions, and health and psychological consequences are included in the present study. The evaluations of these costs and consequences were made based on the systematic consequence analysis using level 2 and 3 probabilistic safety assessment (PSA) codes. The accident sequences used in this analysis were taken from the results of level 2 seismic PSA of a virtual 1,100 MWe BWR-5. The doses to the public and the number of people affected were calculated using the level 3 PSA code OSCAAR of Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA). The calculations have been made for 248 meteorological sequences, and the outputs are given as expectation values for various meteorological conditions. Using these outputs, the cost per severe accident is calculated based on the open documents on the Fukushima Accident regarding the cost of protective actions and compensations for psychological harms. Finally, optimized accident protection and consequence mitigation strategies are recommended taking into account the various aspects comprehensively using the cost per severe accident. The authors must emphasize that the aim is not to estimate the accident cost itself but to extend the scope of "risk-informed decision making" for continuous safety improvements of nuclear energy.
Dealing with cascading multi-hazard risks in national risk assessment: The case of Natech accidents
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2019
Natural hazard impacts on industrial activities handling hazardous substances can result in severe cascading events such as fires, explosions, and toxic or radioactive releases. These so-called Natech accidents are often overlooked in regional and national disaster risk management plans. National Risk Assessment (NRA) is a wellknown instrument to identify, analyse and compare a wide range of risks with potential impacts at a national extent. Increasingly complex and comprehensive NRAs are used globally for informed decision making. Although recognised as an important emerging issue, Natech risks are currently not considered systematically in NRAs. One cause for this deficiency is the lack of dedicated methodologies and guidance for Natech risk assessment within the NRA context. This study fills this gap by giving insight on how and in which setting Natech risks should be assessed in the NRAs. Following a contextual description of the Natech risk within the overall NRA process, different approaches for Natech risk assessment at the national level are discussed and differences with facility-level risk assessment are indicated. Natech-specific aspects to be considered in risk identification, risk analysis, and risk evaluation are explained in detail with examples from past accidents. Finally, research and policy challenges hampering the reliable Natech risk assessment in the NRAs are discussed. The provided information can improve the coherence and consistency of Natech-related aspects in the NRAs. As Natech risk is regarded as a typical example of multi-hazard risk, guidance on how to consider Natech risk can also support a better assessment of other cascading risks.