Lessons Learned in Protection of the Public for the Accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant

Abstract

What insights can the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant provide in the reality of decision making on actions to protect the public during a severe reactor and spent fuel pool emergency? In order to answer this question, and with the goal of limiting the consequences of any future emergencies at a nuclear power plant due to severe conditions, this paper presents the main actions taken in response to the emergency in the form of a timeline. The focus of this paper is those insights concerning the progression of an accident due to severe conditions at a light water reactor nuclear power plant that must be understood in order to protect the public.

ICRP Publication 146: Radiological Protection of People and the Environment in the Event of a Large Nuclear Accident

“…The main urgent protective actions to be considered in the early phase are evacuation, sheltering, iodine thyroid blocking, restrictions on local food and water supply, and protection of pets and livestock. As these actions must be implemented promptly, it is necessary to prepare them in advance, particularly in terms of outlining their practical arrangements and geographic extent (Callen and Homma, 2017). (83) Protective actions taken before any significant release should be designed to avoid the occurrence of direct serious radiation injuries, and should generally also prevent or significantly reduce radiation exposures (IAEA, 2015b).…”

“…The main urgent protective actions to be considered in the early phase are evacuation, sheltering, iodine thyroid blocking, restrictions on local food and water supply, and protection of pets and livestock. As these actions must be implemented promptly, it is necessary to prepare them in advance, particularly in terms of outlining their practical arrangements and geographic extent (Callen and Homma, 2017).…”

Resilient design in nuclear energy: Critical lessons from a cross-disciplinary analysis of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear accident

“… 14 Meanwhile, several studies focus on the offsite emergency response issues, extracting lessons in emergency preparedness and radiation protection. 15 , 16 At the same time, many others address the environmental consequences of the accident, 17 estimating the amount of released radioactivity (source term), 18 , 19 investigating the radionuclide atmospheric transport, 20 , 21 and determining the long-term contamination extent. 22 , 23 , 24 In addition, there have been numerous research estimating the radiation exposure of residents in the Fukushima prefecture, 25 , 26 alongside many others exploring the mental-, 27 , 28 , 29 evacuation-, 8 , 28 and lifestyle-related 25 , 30 , 31 health consequences of the accident.…”

“…Just half an hour later, the national government issued an evacuation order for residents within 3 km of the plant and ordered sheltering within 3–10 km from the plant. 15

Figure 2 Time sequence of the FDNPP accident (A–C) the pressure history in the RPV (cyan) and PCV (black) of (A) Unit 1, (B) Unit 2, and (C) Unit 3; (D) release rates of 131 I (black) and 137 Cs (orange) radioisotopes corrected at shutdown time; and (E) emergency response decisions. In (A)–(C), the vertical blue lines mark the timings of the RPV venting events, the vertical green lines mark the timings of the successful PCV venting events or the ones with associated radioactive release, and the red arrows mark the notable events (hydrogen explosions and structural/functional PCV failures).

…”

Guest editorial: The SHAMISEN project – Applicability or lessons learnt and recommendations for disaster situations

“…Serious accidents at nuclear power plants have been rare, but their stories can teach us how to prevent or mitigate the effects of future nuclear catastrophes. The accidents at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and Chernobyl nuclear power plant occurred 9 years and 34 years ago, respectively, and there are still lessons to learn from them regarding numerous issues, including radiation exposure assessment and medical follow-up of emergency responders, evacuees and residents; decisions to lift evacuation orders; and communication with responders and stakeholders ( Bazyka et al, 2016 , Callen and Homma, 2017 , Lester, 1983 , Soffer et al, 2008 ). Some of the lessons from these accidents have been extensively reviewed and taken into consideration by national and international organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, the International Commission on Radiological Protection and the World Health Organisation and are reflected in published literature ( Bennett et al, 2006 , Carr et al, 2016 , Clarke and Valentin, 2009 , IAEA, 2015a , IAEA, 2015b , Nisbet et al, 2009 , SGDSN, 2014 ).…”