ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Mar 2026
Jan 2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
March 2026
Nuclear Technology
February 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
April 2026
Latest News
DOE nuclear cleanup costs, schedule delays continue to rise, GAO says
The Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management faces significant cost increases, schedule delays, and data management issues in completing nuclear waste cleanup projects, according to a new report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
M. Levenson, F. Rahn
Nuclear Technology | Volume 53 | Number 2 | May 1981 | Pages 99-110
Technical Paper | Realistic Estimates of the Consequences of Nuclear Accident / Nuclear Safety | doi.org/10.13182/NT81-A32614
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
In estimating the real risk to the public from an accident at a nuclear power plant, several quantities are important: the probability and consequence of the accident itself and the risk resulting from any mitigating action taken. The uncertainties of the risk associated with the accident seem to be dominated by the uncertainties of the consequence estimates. The current procedure of using “conservative” assumptions (usually at each stage) in the calculations produces an estimate of the risk that is likely to be much too high (by as much as an order of magnitude or more). In and of themselves, conservative estimates as typically made in the licensing process may in fact contribute additional risk by overestimating source terms and thus overestimating benefits of activities such as evacuation. This process, in turn, leads inadvertently to putting major segments of society at greater risk than is necessary by encouraging decisions that have higher risk. The principal areas of concern focus on the treatment of a number of physical processes. These processes are always operative and can be counted on to limit the consequences of a reactor accident. Sufficient credit is not taken for their ability to reduce the release of radioactivity and confine it relatively close to its source. Estimates of risk will improve in direct proportion to improvements in quantification of these phenomena. Empirical evidence from many sources shows that these processes are indeed operative and very efficient in reducing the release of radioactivity. As a result, the policy decisions based on the source term in the event of a major reactor accident must be reassessed.