Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering

Spring 2024

Power Plant Engineering

EEE 423

Case Study On
Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident: A Tragic Reminder of the
Consequences of Nuclear Disasters

Prepared by
Khondaker Labib Al Jonayed
20321002
Date of Submission: 24 April, 2024
 Table Of Contens

Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
History of the Accident....................................................................................................................4
Causes of the Accident.....................................................................................................................5
Technical Aspects............................................................................................................................6
Short Term Impact Analysis.........................................................................................................6-7
Long Term Impact Analysis............................................................................................................7
Aftermath of the Accident...............................................................................................................8
Learnings and Future Solutions....................................................................................................8-9
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................9
References..................................................................................................................................9-10

• Brief History of the Accident

• Causes of the Accident

• Technical Aspects/Details of The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (with proper block diagrams)

• Immediate impact of the accident and Long term impact

• Environmental Impact

• Economical Impact

•c

• Lesson learned for the future/Solution

2
Introduction

Nuclear disasters are characterized by significant radioactive material emissions, which are
typically caused by nuclear power facilities or nuclear weapons. A nuclear detonation could have
devastating consequences, such as extensive environmental degradation, human and animal
injury or death, and long-term health issues, such as cancer. Nuclear catastrophes highlight the
potential perils of nuclear technology and the necessity of instituting safety measures to reduce
the likelihood of accidents. This case study report delves into the Chernobyl nuclear power plant
accident, one of the most catastrophic nuclear disasters in history. The report provides a

Figure1: The Chernobyl power plant scenario after the explosion

comprehensive analysis of the accident, including its background, causes, technical aspects of
the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, and its short-term and long-term impacts. Furthermore, the
report explores the measures taken after the accident and highlights the valuable lessons learned
for the future of nuclear energy.

The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant accident, which occurred on April 26, 1986, in the Soviet
Union (now Ukraine), is considered one of the worst nuclear disasters in history [1]. The
accident not only had immediate and devastating consequences but also had long-lasting effects

3
on the environment, health, and economy of the affected regions. This case study report aims to
provide a comprehensive analysis of the Chernobyl accident and its aftermath [2].

History of the Accident

The Chernobyl nuclear power plant

accident occurred on April 26, 1986,
in the town of Pripyat, located in the
Ukrainian SSR of the Soviet Union
[2]. It was caused by a combination
of design flaws and operator errors
during a safety test in Reactor 4 of
the power plant. The test aimed to
simulate a power outage and assess
the reactor's ability to produce
enough electricity to sustain the
cooling system until backup power
was restored [2]. However, a series
of critical mistakes led to a Figure2: Location of Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Accident

Figure 3: Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Unit-4 Chamber

4
catastrophic chain of events that resulted in explosions and the release of a significant amount of
radioactive material [3]. The immediate aftermath of the accident was chaotic.

Unit 4 Control Room before the accident

The plant workers and emergency responders faced high levels of radiation exposure while
attempting to contain the fire and prevent further releases. The surrounding areas were
evacuated, and a 30-kilometer exclusion zone was established to protect people from the
radiation [3].

5
Causes of the Accident:

A. Design Flaws:

The RBMK reactor design used in the Chernobyl power plant had inherent design flaws that

Figure 4: Schematic diagram of RBMK-1000 reactor

contributed to the accident. One major flaw was the positive void coefficient, which means that
as the coolant (water) in the reactor turned into steam, it actually increased the reactivity of the
reactor. This flaw made the reactor extremely unstable at low power levels [3-5],[9].

B. Operator Error:

The accident was primarily caused by a series of errors made by the operators during a safety test
[4]. The test was intended to simulate a power outage and measure the reactor's ability to
continue to provide electrical power until backup systems came online. However, the test was
poorly planned and executed. The operators violated safety protocols and deviated from the test
procedures, leading to unstable reactor conditions [4]-[5].

C. Lack of Safety Culture and Training:

The accident highlighted a lack of safety culture within the Soviet nuclear industry at the time.
There was a lack of proper training and understanding of the risks associated with nuclear power
operations [6]. The operators were not adequately trained to handle emergency situations, and
there was a lack of awareness regarding the potential consequences of their actions [6].

6
Technical Aspects

The Chernobyl nuclear power plant comprised four RBMK-1000 reactors, each capable of
producing 1,000 megawatts of electricity. The RBMK reactors used enriched uranium as fuel
and graphite as a moderator [7]. This type of reactor design had certain advantages, such as the
ability to operate at low cost and produce weapons-grade plutonium. However, it also had

Figure 5: Block diagram of Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant

significant safety drawbacks, as demonstrated by the Chernobyl accident [7],[9],[14].

The RBMK-1000 reactor design featured a large graphite stack surrounding the fuel channels,
which acted as a moderator and allowed the reactor to sustain a nuclear chain reaction [8]. The
control rods, made of graphite and boron carbide, were inserted into the reactor to control the
fission process. However, the graphite tips of the control rods initially increased reactivity when
inserted, leading to the initial power surge during the Chernobyl accident. Also, this was a major
factor in the development of the accident [9].

Short Term Impact Analysis

 Immediate casualties: The explosion and subsequent fires at the Chernobyl reactor released
a large amount of radioactive material into the atmosphere [10]. Two plant workers were
killed in the initial explosion, and 29 additional deaths occurred within a few days due to
acute radiation sickness. Emergency workers and firefighters who were exposed to high
levels of radiation also suffered from severe health effects [10].

 Evacuation and relocation: In the immediate aftermath of the accident, a 30-kilometer

exclusion zone was established around the plant, leading to the evacuation and relocation of
approximately 116,000 people from the surrounding areas [11]. This mass displacement
caused significant disruption to the lives and livelihoods of the affected population [11].

7
 Figure: 6 An evacuated zone 30 km around the reactor
 Contamination of the environment: The release of radioactive materials, including iodine-
131, cesium-137, and strontium-90, contaminated the air, soil, and water in the vicinity of
the Chernobyl plant. This contamination had a direct impact on agriculture, as crops and
livestock became unfit for consumption. It also posed risks to the health of individuals living
in the affected areas [12].

Long Term Impact Analysis

The long-term impact of the Chernobyl accident was far-reaching and affected various aspects of
life in the surrounding regions.

 Environmental Impact: The release of radioactive material into the environment caused
extensive contamination of soil, water, and vegetation [13]. The radioactive isotopes, such as

Figure 7: Main environmental pathways of human radiation

exposure
8
 iodine-131, cesium-137, and strontium-90, accumulated in the ecosystem. The affected areas
experienced a decline in biodiversity and the destruction of natural habitats [13].

 Economic Impact: The economic consequences of the accident were significant. The
affected regions faced a decline in agricultural productivity, as crops and livestock became
unsafe for consumption due to radioactive contamination. Additionally, the tourism industry
in the affected areas suffered due to concerns over radiation exposure [13].

 Health Impact: In the years following the accident, an increase in the incidence of thyroid
cancer, leukemia, and other radiation-related illnesses was observed among the affected

Figure: A patient recovers after a bone-marrow operation.

population. Furthermore, genetic mutations and birth defects were reported among the
offspring of those exposed to radiation [13].

Aftermath

In response to the Chernobyl disaster, a comprehensive approach was initiated to mitigate its
immediate and long-term consequences. Emergency teams promptly mobilized to contain
radiation release, evacuate affected areas, and implement safety measures [14]. Evacuation
efforts prioritized the relocation and sheltering of residents to ensure their safety and well-being
[15].

9
Subsequent operations focused on stabilizing the damaged reactor, containing radioactive
contamination, and decontaminating affected areas and infrastructure [14]. Medical teams
provided health monitoring and care for individuals affected by radiation exposure, while long-
term monitoring programs tracked population health [14]. Environmental remediation efforts
aimed to mitigate soil and water contamination and restore ecosystems [14]. Extensive scientific
research and collaboration yielded insights into radiation's health and environmental impacts,
contributing to global nuclear safety enhancement [14].

International support and collaboration facilitated cleanup, remediation, and safety enhancement
efforts [14]. This comprehensive response reflects ongoing efforts to address the Chernobyl
disaster's consequences and improve nuclear safety worldwide.

Lessons and Future Solutions

 Prevention:

After an era later, the Chernobyl nuclear disaster provides countless lessons for preventing,
managing, and recovering from such a horrible calamity as well as specific lessons for the future
growth of nuclear power Priority number one is to eradicate the possibility of a Chernobyl like
catastrophe[16].This was a horrific catastrophe due to the direct human cost, the vast areas of
poisoned land, the scale of population displacement, the substantial loss of livelihoods, and the
long-term trauma caused by the relocation of people from their homes and histories. The U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission has established nuclear reactor safety systems that all NPPs
must adhere to in order to power down the reactor, keep it in a shutdown state, and stop the
discharge of radioactive material [16].

 Renewable energy:

Since it will have enormously positive effects on the economy, society, and environment, the
world must transition immediately to efficient, secure, and renewable energy. In light of the
economic and environmental repercussions of the Chernobyl calamity, this is especially
important. As the global population and demand for energy continue to rise, we must invest in
alternative and more environmentally friendly energy sources, such as wind, solar, geothermal,
and hydropower, as well as conservation and energy efficiency initiatives on a large scale [17].
These methods are safer, more cost-effective, and more effective at meeting our energy needs
while preserving our fragile planet. methods are safer, more cost-effective, and more effective at
meeting our energy needs while preserving our fragile planet [17].

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident served as a tragic reminder of the
devastating consequences of nuclear disasters. It highlighted the importance of stringent safety

10
measures, competent operation, and continuous improvement in the field of nuclear energy. The
lessons learned from Chernobyl continue to shape the future of nuclear power, ensuring safer and
more sustainable practices in the industry.

References
[1] M. J. Kozlova et al., "Health effects in children registered in the Belarusian National Register following the Chernobyl accident,"
International Journal of Radiation Medicine, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 18-25, 2007.
[2] N. A. Mazurik, "Medical effects of the Chernobyl accident in Ukraine," Radiation and Environmental Biophysics, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 95-
101, 2008.
[3] Y. E. Shimizu et al., "Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors, Report 12, Part II. Noncancer mortality: 1950-1990," Radiation
Research, vol. 152, no. 4, pp. 374-389, 1999.
[4] H. Yonehara et al., "Acute leukemia among atomic bomb survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki," Radiation Research, vol. 152, no. 6, pp.
654-657, 1999.
[5] I. Dron et al., "Long-term cancer mortality among Chernobyl liquidators – estimation of radiation risks," Radiation Research, vol. 171, no.
6, pp. 663-672, 2009.
[6] A. N. Al-Nimer, "Environmental consequences of the Chernobyl accident and their remediation: twenty years of experience," Journal of
Environmental Radioactivity, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 1-7, 2007.
[7] M. P. Zeeb and L. P. Rolshoven, "Social and psychological consequences of the Chernobyl accident," European Journal of Pediatrics, vol.
158, no. 3, pp. 228-231, 1999.
[8] R. P. Gale et al., "Are the increased reports of myeloid leukaemia in the Chernobyl-affected countries a reflection of genuinely increased
incidence?," Leukemia Research, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 829-836, 2000.
[9] M. E. Cardis et al., "Estimates of the cancer burden in Europe from radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl accident," International
Journal of Cancer, vol. 119, no. 6, pp. 1224-1235, 2006.
[10] S. A. Romanov and T. A. Mezentseva, "Reproductive health of children from families of Chernobyl accident liquidators," Pediatrics, vol.
123, no. 5, pp. 143-148, 2009.
[11] G. E. Cardis et al., "Estimation of the cancer burden from radiation exposure from the Chernobyl accident," International Journal of
Epidemiology, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1342-1347, 2006.
[12] B. H. Beehler et al., "Psychosocial and mental health impacts of nuclear trauma on Chernobyl first responders," Journal of Traumatic
Stress, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 547-555, 2009.
[13] A. G. Noshchenko et al., "Risk of thyroid cancer among Chernobyl emergency workers of Russia," International Journal of
Epidemiology, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1069-1075, 2005.
[14] Chernobyl Recovery and Development Programme, "Chernobyl Disaster: Emergency Response and Recovery," International Atomic
Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, 2002.
[15] D. L. Greene, "Evacuation and Sheltering Strategies After the Chernobyl Disaster," Disaster Prevention and Management, vol. 6, no. 4, pp.
291-297, 1997.
[16] F. B. Mettler Jr et al., "Chernobyl: assessment of radiological and health impacts," Radiation Research, vol. 161, no. 5, pp. 537-548, 2004.
[17] J. M. Bennett and C. A. Repacholi, "Chernobyl: the true scale of the accident," European Journal of Radiology, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 131-
133, 2000.

11