The Industrial Safety Accident Rate in the Nuclear Energy Industry

The World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO)'s mission is

To maximise the safety and reliability of the operation of nuclear power plants by exchanging information and encouraging communication, comparison and emulation amongst its members.

WANO provides a wide variety of data on the nuclear industry, and today, we're going to look at the Industrial Safety Accident Rate or ISAR. According to WANO, the ISAR at U.S. nuclear power plants is far lower than the rate at related industries like electric utilities or manufacturing.

The ISAR is calculated by taking the number of accidents resulting in lost work, restricted work, or fatalities for every 200,000 worker hours. The Bureau of Labor Statistics refers to this as 100 full-time workers (100 workers * 40 hours per week * 50 weeks = 200,000 worker hours). Please note that the rate reported from BLS does not include fatalities.

To find what these rates are for other industries in the U.S. go to the BLS IIF webpage. If you scroll down to Get Detailed IIF Statistics under Create Customized Tables (one screen), you can click on Occupational injuries and illnesses (2003 forward). From here you can query any industry in the U.S. You won'’t be able to find nuclear power plants but you will be able to find Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution as well as the Manufacturing industry. For kicks, check out what some of the rates are for Financial Activities -- you'll be surprised at what you find.

On WANO's website, world performance indicators are available. The ISAR for the world is lower (.21) than the U.S. (.25) for 2004. However, only half of the plants outside the U.S. report that data. The WANO data I refer to here is for members only, so here'’s NEI'’s link to the data back to 1980.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Electricity, Energy, Industrial Safety

Comments

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog