scholarly journals Radiophobia - useful concept or ostracising term?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Lindberg ◽  
Denali Archer
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Heuristics And Biases ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Past ◽  
Extreme Risk ◽  
Communication Practices ◽  
Public Ignorance ◽  
Sociopsychological Factors

The term ‘radiophobia’ has been a cornerstone in much of the nuclear discourse over the past 70 years and has been used extensively by proponents of nuclear technologies to dismiss fears of radiation as being emotional overreactions to a risk that is actuarially very low, and that this stems from public ignorance. Despite its longevity in nuclear discourse, little attention has been afforded to the term, its history, and the factors that underpin the extreme divergence in risk perception that the term de facto refers to, threatening to severely hamper any efforts to redress said divergence. This article will explore these factors, mostly sociopsychological in nature, and conclude that the powerful affective imagery associated with radiation, compounded by various heuristics and biases, renders public discomfort with ionising radiation from nuclear power plants rational – despite the fact nuclear energy is actuarially the safest energy source available. The article will note that whilst its often ostracising usage towards the public should render the term obsolete, radiophobia can still be regarded as a useful concept to try and explain the extreme risk perception divergence that exists between nuclear experts and the public. This would, however, require a paradigm shift that acknowledges the complex historical and sociopsychological factors that have shaped radiation into becoming a uniquely feared process. Such an acknowledgement will likely be a prerequisite for any efforts towards normalising humanity’s relationship with radiation, and would require considerable changes in communication practices.

The Three Mile Island (TMI) Accident

1985 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. 398-401
Author(s):  
Gordon K. MacLeod
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Burn Injuries ◽  
Health It ◽  
Nuclear War ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Past ◽  
Medical Response ◽  
Nuclear Warfare

On March 28,1979, a near nuclear catastrophe occurred at Three Mile Island (TMI) near Harrisburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. I was at that time Pennsylvania's Secretary of Health. It was an accident that just “could not happen.” After all, nuclear power plants were built so safely that they could not possibly affect public health.As a physician, lam compelled to say that I am unalterably opposed to nuclear warfare. I am sure that most physicians would agree that there can be no adequate preparedness for the devastating medical consequences of nuclear war. Prevention of nuclear war is the only reasonable medical response to the hazards posed by nuclear weapons.By contrast, many of you may not share my position on nuclear power. Nuclear power can be made relatively safe if we do not ignore the public health lessons of the past. I belive that physicians need to increase and update their understandings of the medical consequences of radiation accidents and be trained to triage and to treat blast, radiation, and burn injuries.

A dose constraint proposal for members of the public taking into account multi-unit nuclear power plants in Korea

2014 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 739-747 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae Young Kong ◽  
Hee Geun Kim ◽  
Jong Hyun Ko ◽  
Gamal Akabani ◽  
Goung Jin Lee
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
The Public ◽  
Dose Constraint

Proposed Improvements of the ASME B&PV Code and Future Directions of CIWG

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinquan Yan ◽  
Yinbiao He ◽  
Gang Li ◽  
Hao Yu
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Third Generation ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
The Past ◽  
Development Direction ◽  
Asme Code ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Near Future ◽  
First Time

The ASME B&PV Code, Section III, is being used as the design acceptance criteria in the construction of China’s third generation AP1000 nuclear power plants. This is the first time that the ASME Code was fully accepted in Chinese nuclear power industry. In the past 6 years, a few improvements of the Code were found to be necessary to satisfy the various requirements originated from these new power plant (NPP) constructions. These improvements are originated from a) the stress-strain curves needed in elastic-plastic analysis, b) the environmental fatigue issue, c) the perplexity generated from the examination requirements after hydrostatic test and d) the safe end welding problems. In this paper, the necessities of these proposed improvements on the ASME B&PV code are further explained and discussed case by case. Hopefully, through these efforts, the near future development direction and assignment of the ASME B&PV-III China International Working Group can be set up.

Shaping Public Opinion on Nuclear Power

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shenjun Xu ◽  
Jing Xu ◽  
Jing Sun ◽  
Li Qiu ◽  
Ru Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
International Perspective ◽  
Public Acceptance ◽  
The Public ◽  
Nuclear Disaster

After the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the public acceptance of nuclear power has dwindled to historical low. Governments were forced to cancel and postpone new projects or even shut down reactors in operation due to an increased anti-nuclear sentiment. This paper aims to provide an international perspective of how various factors can affect public opinion of nuclear power. In this paper, we rebut the previous-held argument that nuclear education is conducive to the public support of nuclear power. It is found that the relationship between educational efforts and public support is captured by a downward-sloping line. The paper then assesses the effect on the public acceptance of demographics, socioeconomic status, political environment and risk orientation using correlation coefficients table. The largest public concern comes from the insecurity of nuclear power plants and radioactive materials. The health of an economy also plays a major role in determining people’s attitude toward building new nuclear power plants. The paper also suggests some solutions for each category of countries based on the research analysis.

Inspection of Buried Piping in Nuclear Power Plants: Field Observations and Challenges

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Ogundele ◽  
Guylaine Goszczynski ◽  
Darcy VanSligtenhorst
Keyword(s):  
Cathodic Protection ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Cathodic Current ◽  
Pipe Surface ◽  
The Past ◽  
Piping Systems ◽  
External Corrosion ◽  
Significant Attention

The issues over the integrity of buried piping in Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) have received significant attention over the past few years. These piping systems have been in operation for over 30 years. Leaks from buried piping have the potential to raise safety, radiological, environmental, and financial concerns. Buried piping are subject to degradation mechanisms from the outside (soil side) as well as from the inside (fluid side) and they are primarily protected from external corrosion by applying coating on the pipe and then using cathodic protection to protect any bare areas or holidays in the coating. However, over a period of time the coating may lose its integrity and fail to provide the protection for which it was intended. As this happens, the amount of cathodic current needed for adequate protection increases. In some instances, the coating will disbond from the pipe and shield the cathodic protection from the pipe surface. Because of the economic, environmental, and safety consequences of a failure, NPPs embarked on inspection programs to determine the pipe’s condition and its suitability for continued service. This paper presents some of the observations made during the indirect and direct inspections of buried piping. In addition, the challenges encountered are reported.

scholarly journals The Development of an Algorithm of Evacuation Plans in Emergencies for Client-Server Architecture

2019 ◽  
pp. 30-34
Author(s):  
V. Arutiunian
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Movement Speed ◽  
Calculation Algorithm ◽  
Notification System ◽  
Client Server ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Notification ◽  
Server Architecture ◽  
Client Server Architecture

A sufficient number of public notification systems in the case of emergencies at nuclear power plants have been developed and implemented. However, most of them have some drawbacks related to system performance, the ability to direct the public to evacuation points, promptness in warning. Mostly, they do not use the capabilities of state- of-the-art technologies — mobile applications for smartphones, which allow elimination of these drawbacks. This research is aimed at the design and development of the public notification system using an algorithm for making effective plans of evacuation in emergencies based on the client- server architecture. In addition to the server and client parts, the package also uses Google Maps services for dealing with an interactive map. A special characteristic of this software solution is an innovative approach to the calculation and transfer of the evacuation plan to the victim. The following three parameters are the most important in finding an effective way for each victim: distance to the shelter; time to cover an estimated distance; movement speed. Such an algorithm makes it possible to calculate an adequate route of evacuation separately for each victim, adjusting the distance depending on the speed of movement and fullness of shelters. The efficiency of the developed algorithm for the distribution of potential victims in shelters and evacuation points is presented in AnyLogic models. The paper presents the analysis of using the evacuation model for short path and using the developed path calculation algorithm. The simulated situations have shown the possibility of saving a larger number of people. The developed information system effectively deals with the models built in the AnyLogic program.

Communicating about Nuclear Energy and Climate Change

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley S. Ho
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
General Public ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Public Acceptance ◽  
Media Images ◽  
The Public

In comparison to fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases, nuclear power plants are a cleaner energy source that could help to mitigate the problems of climate change. Despite this, the general public often associates nuclear energy with risks that include nuclear accidents, nuclear waste contamination, nuclear weapons proliferation, and many others. People’s experience with the 1979 Three Mile Island incident in Pennsylvania and the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine have caused a sharp decline in public support for nuclear energy over the past few decades. In addition, media images of the 2011 Fukushima-Daichii nuclear accident are still fresh in the minds of the public. These now iconic media images and portrayals have perpetuated a perception of nuclear energy as a risky technology. Against these backdrops, scientists, communication practitioners and other key stakeholders increasingly face an uphill struggle to communicate about nuclear energy as a possible strategy for addressing climate change. Though the general public may reluctantly accept nuclear energy for climate change mitigation, research suggests that messages emphasizing the benefits of nuclear power for energy security and economic growth appear to have greater impact on public acceptance of the technology. Furthermore, public perception of nuclear energy is shaped by a host of other factors such as trust in nuclear governing institutions, knowledge, political inclinations, geographical proximity, and socio-demographic variables. At the same time, nuclear experts and the general public differ in their perceptions of risk, in nature and strength, relative to nuclear energy. Understanding these key differences between the experts and the public, and how beliefs, values, and perceptions influence public acceptance of nuclear energy is necessary to formulate effective public communication and engagement strategies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document