You need JavaScript to view this

Economic and social aspects of the Chernobyl accident in Finland

Abstract

After the Chernobyl accident at no stage did the radiation situation in Finland require actual protective action, such as taking shelter indoors or in civil defence shelters. Civil defence plans for emergency situations include a warning level at 200 {mu}Sv/h (population has to stay indoors) and an alarm level at 2000 {mu}Sv/h (populaiton has to seek shelter immediately). Both levels are `at the latest` levels, given as guidance in case regional or local authorities have to make the decision. The highest confirmed gamma radiation reading in Finland was 5 {mu}Sv/h. During the first days of the Chernobyl fail-out it also became evident that no large scale restrictions for use of foodstuffs were needed in the Nordic countries. Various mitigating actions were adopted in the days and weeks following Chernobyl, but mostly in the form of recommendations. The situation in Finland can serve to explain the various types of mitigating actions considered, how they were adopted, and to some extent give information on how efficient and how expensive the mitigating actions were.
Authors:
Blomqvist, L; Mustonen, R; Paakkola, O; [1]  Salminen, K [2] 
  1. Saeteilyturvakeskus (STUK), Helsinki (Finland)
  2. The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Helsinki (Finland)
Publication Date:
Jan 01, 1991
Product Type:
Technical Report
Report Number:
STUK-B-VALO-64; AKTU-280.
Reference Number:
SCA: 290600; 560180; 570100; PA: AIX-23:009101; SN: 92000619813
Resource Relation:
Other Information: PBD: Jan 1991
Subject:
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; 99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS//MATHEMATICS, COMPUTING, AND INFORMATION SCIENCE; RADIATION PROTECTION; FINLAND; REACTOR ACCIDENTS; SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS; CHERNOBYLSK-4 REACTOR; FALLOUT; FOOD; MITIGATION; PEAT; PUBLIC HEALTH; RECOMMENDATIONS; TRANSFRONTIER CONTAMINATION; 290600; 560180; 570100; NUCLEAR ENERGY; RADIATION PROTECTION PROCEDURES; REAL ACCIDENTS
OSTI ID:
10104295
Research Organizations:
Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety (STUK), Helsinki (Finland)
Country of Origin:
Finland
Language:
English
Other Identifying Numbers:
Other: ON: DE92612998; ISBN 951-4334-2; TRN: FI9100129009101
Availability:
OSTI; NTIS (US Sales Only); INIS
Submitting Site:
FIN
Size:
33 p.
Announcement Date:
Jun 30, 2005

Citation Formats

Blomqvist, L, Mustonen, R, Paakkola, O, and Salminen, K. Economic and social aspects of the Chernobyl accident in Finland. Finland: N. p., 1991. Web.
Blomqvist, L, Mustonen, R, Paakkola, O, & Salminen, K. Economic and social aspects of the Chernobyl accident in Finland. Finland.
Blomqvist, L, Mustonen, R, Paakkola, O, and Salminen, K. 1991. "Economic and social aspects of the Chernobyl accident in Finland." Finland.
@misc{etde_10104295,
title = {Economic and social aspects of the Chernobyl accident in Finland}
author = {Blomqvist, L, Mustonen, R, Paakkola, O, and Salminen, K}
abstractNote = {After the Chernobyl accident at no stage did the radiation situation in Finland require actual protective action, such as taking shelter indoors or in civil defence shelters. Civil defence plans for emergency situations include a warning level at 200 {mu}Sv/h (population has to stay indoors) and an alarm level at 2000 {mu}Sv/h (populaiton has to seek shelter immediately). Both levels are `at the latest` levels, given as guidance in case regional or local authorities have to make the decision. The highest confirmed gamma radiation reading in Finland was 5 {mu}Sv/h. During the first days of the Chernobyl fail-out it also became evident that no large scale restrictions for use of foodstuffs were needed in the Nordic countries. Various mitigating actions were adopted in the days and weeks following Chernobyl, but mostly in the form of recommendations. The situation in Finland can serve to explain the various types of mitigating actions considered, how they were adopted, and to some extent give information on how efficient and how expensive the mitigating actions were.}
place = {Finland}
year = {1991}
month = {Jan}
}