TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a case history of major hazards in nuclear power plants, including the Three Mile Island Chernobyl disaster and the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, as well as a detailed description of the types of hazards involved.
Abstract: CONTENTS INCLUDE: Introduction Hazard accident and loss Legislation and law Major hazard control Economics and insurance Management systems Reliability engineering Hazard identification and safety audit Hazard assessment Plant siting and layout Process design Pressure system design Control system design Human factors in process control Emission and dispersion Fire Explosion Toxic release Plant commissioning and inspection Plant operation Plant maintenance and modification Storage Transport Emergency planning Personal safety Accident research Information feedback Safety systems Computer aids Artificial intelligence and expert systems APPENDICES - Case histories Flixborough Seveso Mexico City Bhopal Pasadena Canvey Reports Rijnmond Report Laboratories Pilot plants Pollution Noise Safety factors for simple relief systems Failure and event data Earthquakes San Carlos de la Rapita ACDS Transport Hazards Report Offshore Piper Alpha Nuclear energy Three Mile Island Chernobyl Rasmussen Report ACMH Licence Model Conditions HSE Guidelines on Developments Near Major Hazards Public enquiries Standards and Codes Institutional publications Information sources Units and unit conversions
TL;DR: The aim of this contribution is to give an outline of the challenges each step of a multi-hazard (risk) analysis poses and to present current studies and approaches that face these difficulties.
Abstract: Many areas of the world are prone to several natural hazards, and effective risk reduction is only possible if all relevant threats are considered and analyzed. However, in contrast to single-hazard analyses, the examination of multiple hazards poses a range of additional challenges due to the differing characteristics of processes. This refers to the assessment of the hazard level, as well as to the vulnerability toward distinct processes, and to the arising risk level. As comparability of the single-hazard results is strongly needed, an equivalent approach has to be chosen that allows to estimate the overall hazard and consequent risk level as well as to rank threats. In addition, the visualization of a range of natural hazards or risks is a challenging task since the high quantity of information has to be depicted in a way that allows for easy and clear interpretation. The aim of this contribution is to give an outline of the challenges each step of a multi-hazard (risk) analysis poses and to present current studies and approaches that face these difficulties.
TL;DR: The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13) as discussed by the authors is a consistent seismic hazard model for Europe and Turkey which overcomes the limitation of national borders and includes a through quantification of the uncertainties.
Abstract: The 2013 European Seismic Hazard Model (ESHM13) results from a community-based probabilistic seismic hazard assessment supported by the EU-FP7 project “Seismic Hazard Harmonization in Europe” (SHARE, 2009–2013). The ESHM13 is a consistent seismic hazard model for Europe and Turkey which overcomes the limitation of national borders and includes a through quantification of the uncertainties. It is the first completed regional effort contributing to the “Global Earthquake Model” initiative. It might serve as a reference model for various applications, from earthquake preparedness to earthquake risk mitigation strategies, including the update of the European seismic regulations for building design (Eurocode 8), and thus it is useful for future safety assessment and improvement of private and public buildings. Although its results constitute a reference for Europe, they do not replace the existing national design regulations that are in place for seismic design and construction of buildings. The ESHM13 represents a significant improvement compared to previous efforts as it is based on (1) the compilation of updated and harmonised versions of the databases required for probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, (2) the adoption of standard procedures and robust methods, especially for expert elicitation and consensus building among hundreds of European experts, (3) the multi-disciplinary input from all branches of earthquake science and engineering, (4) the direct involvement of the CEN/TC250/SC8 committee in defining output specifications relevant for Eurocode 8 and (5) the accounting for epistemic uncertainties of model components and hazard results. Furthermore, enormous effort was devoted to transparently document and ensure open availability of all data, results and methods through the European Facility for Earthquake Hazard and Risk (
www.efehr.org
).
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a survey of the field of natural hazards and disaster studies from a GIS perspective, including the role of GIS as a tool for the assessment of flood hazard at the regional scale.
Abstract: Preface. 1: A Survey of the Field of Natural Hazards and Disaster Studies D. E. Alexander. 2: GIS and Natural Hazards: An Overview from a GIS Perspective J. T. Coppock. 3: Vector and Raster Structures in Generating Drainage-Divide Networks from Digital Terrain Models R. Detti, V. Pasqui. 3: Deterministic Modelling in GIS-Based Landslide Hazard Assessment Mark T.J. Terlien, C. J. van Westen, T. W. J. van Asch. 5: Determining Paths of Gravity-Driven Processes: The `Vector Tree Model' C. Hegg, H. Kienholz. 6: Statistical and Simulation Models for Mapping Debris-Flow Hazard R. K. Mark, S. D. Ellen. 7: Multivariate Regression Analysis for Landslide Hazard Zonation Chang-Jo F. Chung, A.G. Fabbri, C.J. van Westen. 8: GIS Technology in Mapping Landslide Hazard A. Carrara, M. Cardinali, F. Guzzetti, P. Reichenbach. 9: Flood Delineation and Impact Assessment in Agricultural Land Use Using GIS Technology D. Consuegra, F. Joerin, F. Vitalini. 10: The Role of GIS as a Tool for the Assessment of Flood Hazard at the Regional Scale L. Lanza, F. Siccardi. 11: Information Technology for the Design of Computer-Based Models in Seismic Hazard Assessment V.G. Gitis. 12: GIS-Aided Volcanic Activity Hazard Analysis for the Hawaii Geothermal Project Environmental Impact Statement J. Kauahikaua, S. Margriter, R. B. Moore. 13: GIS Potential for Regional and Local Scale Groundwater Hazard Assessment A. Cavallin, B. Floris, P. Cerutti. 14: Application of GIS Hazard Assessment, with Particular Reference to Landslides in Hong Kong A. Hansen, A. J. Brimicombe, C. M. A. Franks, P. A. Kirk, Tung Fung. 15: The San Mateo County California GIS Project for Predicting the Consequences of Hazardous Geologic Processes E. E. Brabb. 16: GIS Used to Derive Operational Hydrologic Products from In situ and Remotely Sensed Snow Data T. R. Carroll.