This file is copyright of Jens Schriver (c) 
It originates from the Evil House of Cheat 
       More essays can always be found at: 
       --- http://www.CheatHouse.com --- 
                ... and contact can always be made to: 
                    Webmaster@cheathouse.com 
-------------------------------------------------------------- 
Essay Name       : 1575.txt 
Uploader         : 
Email Address    : 
Language         : English
Subject          : Environmental Awareness
Title            : What Have We Learned From Three-Mile Island After 17 Years?
Grade            : A-
School System    : Penn State
Country          : USA
Author Comments  : 
Teacher Comments : 
Date             : 4/1996
Site found at    : Friend referral
--------------------------------------------------------------
What Have We Learned From Three-Mile Island After 17 Years ?

(Implications for Future Chernobyl's )

Today in our energy hungry world, the reliance on nuclear power is getting larger and larger. Nuclear power is on top of the list
of forms of power available to generate electricities in the quantities, forms and reliability needed as we head towards the 21st
century.Current operating nuclear plants number approximately 430 through out 26 countries (1).

Nuclear energy production will grow an average of 3.3 to 4.2% PER YEAR worldwide from 1988-2005 (IAEA News briefs,
Sept.1989). Though we have experienced if not the worst technogenic environmental disaster of the 20th century ten years ago
- Chernobyl, together with the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island seventeen years ago, most people today give only passing
thoughts to the issue of nuclear safety worldwide.These two cases are only mere examples of the ominous potential for
accidents of great magnitude within such nuclear plants worldwide (2). It is vital that we understand both the logic and
outcomes of such disasters. Today 10 years later,effects of Chernobyl are still hazardous and have been detected all over the
world. Belarus, a country most affected by history's worst nuclear disaster does not even have a nuclear plant. The radiation
released from Chernobyl was 200 times more than that of the combined releases of the atom bombs that annihilated Hiroshima
and Nagasaki in 1945 (3). Due to prevailing winds, 25 percent of the land in Belarus is uninhabitable. All normal life has
stopped there, people are afraid to move, stay, marry and afraid to have families. The costs of the accidents after-effects are
monumental; resettlement of people affected, medical and clean-up costs are just a few on the priority list.

The problem lies in ignorance of interactions between human, engineering, organizational and managerial factors of such a
system. In most cases human error is customarily cited as a major cause of the calamity. Sometimes in my mind I cannot blame
the opearators involved. Reason being that the control rooms of such plants are a maze of complex displays and controls
spread over an array of immense rooms. In the case of an emergency, due to the mere size and complexity of such rooms,
errors are just begging to occur! Error is also a combination of many factors such as ineffective training, intricate operating
procedures, erratic rebuttal systems, non-pliable managerial systems, non-conforming organizational designs and natural
disasters. Usually the direction taken to ensure safety at such nuclear plants is one of tending to find an engineering solution. If
the above mentioned factors together with the use of safety and human factors in the enginnering education for such large-scale
techological systems are used, then we would be heading the right direction; a safer, productive life not only for us but for our
environment too. Nuclear regulation is the public's business (4).

Politics, resource and structural problems are another major cause. For example here is the US, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) was set up as the major regulatory agency. Under staffed and under skilled employees are just one of their
obstacles. Relying on the fact that the industry itself is responsible for safety tests on plants, the NRC has over looked many
issues while tending to focus on matters with greatest safety importance. We should all know that system failures can be traced
to all those small components that make up this human/machine interface. Whenever we have such components fitted together
and are in interaction it is crucial to give weight not only to the human and technological factors but also to how they operate
together. The NRC's relationship with the industry has been suspect since its creation in 1974 (5). Operations of such
regulatory agencies worldwide is greatly influenced by the member states (IAEA) who have such nuclear operating plants. The
power of money in hand and foreign relation policies of these states control the acts and decisions of such agencies. Structural
troubles include the fact that it is only optional for member states to comply with or use safety principles set by the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 1986 (6). Thus there is no clear cut accord by IAEA member states on the issue of
complying with safety standards.

Lack of Safety Culture is yet another obstacle. Many nuclear plants in Central and Eastern Europe (e.g. Ukraine) are just time
bombs waiting to blow. Many of these plants have not yet collapsed probably due the fact that combination of events needed
for failure has not yet occured or that they have just not been given enough time. Hence it is high time that the international
community and the G-7 get involved. The problem(s) in this industry needs to be tackled collectively, no one is in a position
today to solve this complex field of science and practice individually, irrespective of depth of education or dedication. Political,
economic and cultural barriers have to be crushed if we are to achieve this. A collaborative effort worldwide, especially from
the West is needed to form, support a reaserch team, to counter and unravel studies, develop universal policies and to staff
such nuclear plants if we are to avoid any more Chernobyl's in the future!

Future Chernobyl's can be avoided but it is upto us. Firstly we must make space for reality to take precedence over public
relations for any successful technology, as we cannot fool nature (7). Secondly much greater guarantees, co-operation and
communication is needed between the industry, the regulatory agencies and the member states. Safety will only be achieved if
ALL those involved play their part whole heartedly and honestly right down from the plant workers through the manufacturers
and regulatory agencies right upto the financial institutions that control this whole industry.

References :

1. Los Angeles Herald Examiner, March 28, 1989. N. Meshkati.

2. Los Angeles Herald Examiner, March 28, 1989. N. Meshkati.

3. New York Times, March 31, 1996. M. Specter 

4. Time Magazine, March 4, 1996. E. Pooley

5. Time Magazine, March 4, 1996. E. Pooley

6. Foreign Policy Journal; U.N. 50th Anniversary, "The Critical Role of The U.N.in Ensuring the Safety of Nuclear Power
Plants Around The World". N.Meshkati.

7. Los Angeles Herald Examiner, March 28, 1989. N. Meshkati. Quote from the late Nobel Physicist; R. Feynman 
--------------------------------------------------------------
