Large-scale accidents cause great social disruption and public alarm and the risks of such accidents must be considered together with those arising during normal operation (Ball and Roberts, 1995). The record of severe accidents in the technologies that contribute to electricity generation is summarised; the UK figures compare favourably with the average in the world. Since such events are rare, future risks have to be assessed by applying the methods of risk analysis to individual installations. Risks of severe accidents should reduce further as modern methods of risk analysis and safety management are developed and applied.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenF.R.GarlickA.R.HaynsM.R.TaigA.R. (1992). The management of risk to society from potential accidents. Elsevier Applied Science. ISBN 1 85166 892 6.
2.
BallD.J.RobertsL.E.J. (1995). Risks of seven UK electricity generation options Part 1: Routine operations. Energy and Environment, 6, 4, pp. 283–335.
3.
BarnesM. (1990). The Hinkley Point Public Inquiries. HMSO, London.
4.
ChadwickM.J.. (1991). Key Issues Paper No. 3. Senior Expert Symposium on Electricity and the Environment. IAEA, Vienna.
5.
CIMAH Regulations (1984), Statutory Instrument No. 1902. Health and Safety Executive.
6.
ClementC.F. (1989). The characteristics of risks of major disasters. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond.A424, pp 439–454.
7.
CliftonJ.J. (1992). The historical record of major accidents in the energy industries. Applied Energy, 42, pp. 17–32.
8.
CullenW.D. (1990). The Public Inquiry into the Piper Alpha Disaster. HMSO, London.
9.
Department of Trade and Industry (1995). Energy Paper 65. D.T.I., London.
10.
Fernandes-RussellD. (1988). Societal risk estimates from historical data for UK and world-wide events. Research Report No. 3. Centre for Environmental & Risk Management (CERM), University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK.
GittusJ.H. (1982). On degraded core analysis. Vol. 2. Evidence to Sizewell B Power Station Public Inquiry (CEGB P16).
13.
GittusJ.H.. (1988). The Chernobyl accident and its consequences. Report WOR4200, 2nd edition. HMSO, London.
14.
Health and Safety Executive (1978 & 1981). Canvey: An investigation of potential hazards from operations in the Convey Island/Thurrock area. HMSO, London.
15.
Health and Safety Executive (1988 & 1992). The tolerability of risk from nuclear power stations. HMSO, London.
16.
Health and Safety Executive (1989a). Quantified risk assessment: Its input to decision making. HMSO, London.
17.
Health and Safety Executive (1989b). Risk criteria for land-use planning in the vicinity of major industrial hazards. HMSO, London.
18.
Health and Safety Executive (1992). Safety assessment principles for nuclear plants. HMSO, London.
19.
LayfieldF. (1987). Sizewell B Public Inquiry, Department of Energy. HMSO, London.
20.
LockeD.H. (1994). The International RBMK Safety Review. Nucl. Engineer, 35, pp. 174–180.
21.
MarshallV.C. (1992). The management of hazard and risk. Applied Energy, 42, pp. 63–85.
NAPAG (1995). Energy and environment in the 21st century. National Academics Policy Advisory Group. Royal Society, London.
24.
NEA (1995). Chernobyl ten years on: Radiological and health impact. OECD, Paris.
25.
ParfittJ.P. (1992). Societal risk estimates from historical data for the United Kingdom and world-wide events. SRDA-R5. AEA Technology, Warrington, UK.
26.
RobertsL.E.J.HaynesM.R. (1989). Limitations on the usefulness of risk assessment. Risk Analysis, 9, pp. 483–494.
27.
RobertsL.E.J.LissP.S.SaundersP.A.H. (1990). Power generation and the environment. Oxford University Press.
28.
SellersJ.G.ClementsonR.BrittonP.J.MullinsJ.M.WesternD.J. (1992). Emergency planning. Applied Energy, 42, pp. 87–116.
29.
UNSCEAR (1992). United National Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. United Nations, New York, USA.
