Chernobyl Tragedy - Insight into Engineering Disaster of the Past - Case Study Example

Insight into an Engineering Disaster of the Past Man has been in a very challenging ambiance since his early life on earth. He has strived hard to overcome difficulties confronted in the wake of creating a congealing habitat. It is with this endeavor that human journey has been able to conquer landmark challenges through intellect. With the dawn of technological aptitude, societies have evolved into most sophisticated forms. Science and technology, thus, share a large credit for our today’s development. Engineering is a special stream of implementing scientific concepts for the ease of mankind. From manufacturing a pen to the building of mega structures, like skyscrapers and mammoth naval vessels, engineering has been a technique to stride over decades by one simple innovation and invention. As sciences are attributed for being a self correcting knowledge, engineering has been a practical example. It involves risks and stakes that can cost even thousands of lives, and at the same time it can help millions of lives to live well. As it is seen, even today, that people are prone to the results of their tests and trials in the field of engineering, disasters sometimes become complementary. It is therefore necessary to analyze one such epitome that can provide an example of what was deemed and what was harvested. In modern times uncalled for events do occur. They somehow manage to escape in depth analysis and scrutiny for contingencies. A system that is aimed for the sake of ease of mankind goes out of control and costs people dearly, should be thoroughly studies from different angles in order to be avoided in future. One such event of our times is discussed here. The event, which will be discussed, is a major engineering failure that reminds every engineer of the outcomes of an under-engineered system design. Case of “Chernobyl disaster, that gobbled heavy life toll and exposed many to nuclear radiation, is one of the biggest examples of modern times”. (NEA) The Soviets were in charge of the site and its operations and they were in the know about the potential nuclear hazards that could kick off anytime during its operation. As known for their use of crude technology and low level of quality assurance in engineering sector, Soviets took the issue trivially. “On 26th April, 1986, the nuclear plant that was inducted with low quality and under-engineered steam turbines and fissile material, started malfunctioning”. (safetycouncil.org.nz) This malfunctioning was of very serious nature as the steam turbines showed a stark increase in revolution due to spike in uranium fission reaction. Soon the steam turbines started reaching its maximum revolution capacity and blew up with a thud. The explosion engrossed fissures in the main core which started melting. Eventually the whole core melted and the proximity areas caught fire. The bursting of core emanated tremendous radioactive waves and particles that in the form of a radioactive fallout engulfed large swathes of USSR (Ionizing Radiation, 23). Region in a circle of more than a hundred miles was immersed in this catastrophic fall out. A cost of “Ruble 18 billion was spent and around 500,000 rescue workers and volunteers started emergency operations in the radiation stricken area”. The failure to comprehend the sensitivity of advance engineering practices to ensure nuclear core development is what is being said as the main reason for such a big loss (Yamada, 4). An answer to the question of what actually went wrong with the nuclear reactor is now clear. International organizations like IAEA have been able to formulize basic requisite for the development and deployment of such facilities. The engineering field has been given a specialized faculty of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Management to ensure fidelity with the international practices of engineering. An analysis shows that there was “no energy-spike-control mechanism”. (secondsfromdisaster.net) Further the boilers and steam turbines were not segregated from the core of reactor. Problem in one section could produce a domino effect leaving nothing intact once failed. Engineering practices are credited with high level of tolerance for such contingences, yet proper follow up of best engineering practices was compromised. Another problem was the lack of quality assurance of the running parts of turbines and fissile material that being used. There was no checking mechanism after a cycle of operation had completed. For emergency conditions complete shutdown is sought by nuclear engineers yet in the case of Chernobyl shutdown tactic was a failure. Further investigations in the disaster proved that three main engineering aspects were responsible for such an accident that took many lives and exposed thousands to fatal radiations. First, endurance in the design was simply an under-estimate. Universal safety factor is said to be more than two times the normal operational limits of a system. This means, for example, if a steel plate is to operated bear a load of not more than 2lbs, it should be designed to endure 4lbs. This safety factor has been universally acknowledged by engineers and scientists of the world. Second, the inspection mechanism was inadequate. Checking of the systems and reactor-core for subsequent cycles of energy production was not in line with the international standards. Third, the nuclear hazards and safety measures were not explicit. Despite evacuation in the simulation room, 31 deaths were reported on spot. The civil engineering design for safe exits, location of the site and transportation was not adequate which caused severe damage to the life and property. Although the solution to the disaster was a sham, yet, to the world, a clarion call was made to ensure room for improvement all the times to come. Soviet Union concealed a lot of facts about the death toll and amount of destruction that was cause by the incident. In vanity the Union stated to be full in control of the situation and borrowed little help during the rescue operation. Fukushima Daiichi, disaster proved to be one such example, where solution, devised, for such situations, helped saving hundreds of thousands of lives in Japan in 2011. The solution was concluded in a moot convened under IAEA. Quality Management, Inspection Practices, Redesigning and other such practices became pervasive practices in nuclear powered nations. After the disaster, steps on war footing were taken in order to curtail such fatal accidents that have a potential to gobble hundred thousand lives in a nick of a second. International Atomic Energy Agency has been able to comprehend such vulnerable situations and weak points in nuclear resource development. The policies were formulated by experts of the relevant fields to provide safe, sustainable, dependable and robust security framework for the protection of people. Similarly, New Zealand Safety Council was empowered with pointing out measures and techniques for energy projects related to Nuclear energy. And the protective measures in engineering and operational quality were made mandatory for every nuclear powered nation. Strict compliance was made part of the statute for them and the moot is still evolving that point outs problems and short comings in Nuclear Engineering practices. These measures have given hope and confidence to the international community in containing the threats and accidents related to nuclear energy. Further it is hoped that an international consensus will one day bring all nations on same page over such issues (SafteyCouncil.org). References Ionizing Radiation. "Principles Of Ionizing Radiation." ATSDR Home. ATSDR, n.d. Web. 30 May 2013. . Yamada, Ken. Dilena Takeyama Center for the Study of Japan and Japanese Culture - San Francisco State University. Dilena Takeyama Center, 2011. Web. 30 May 2013. NEA. "Executive summary -Chernobyl: Assessment of Radiological and Health Impact."Nuclear Energy Agency. oecd-nea.org, 2002. Web. 30 May 2013. Secondsfromdisaster.net. "S01E07 Meltdown in Chernobyl: Chernobyl disaster : Seconds From Disaster – National Geographic Full Episodes Watch Online." Seconds From Disaster - National Geographic Full Episodes Watch Online. N.p., 13 Jan. 2013. Web. 30 May 2013. SafteyCouncil.org. "Chernobyl - Russia." New Zealand Safety Council. New Zealand Safety Council, July 2008. Web. 30 May 2013. Read More