In this blog post, we’ll examine the nuclear accident response system and current safety management practices at South Korea’s nuclear power plants, compare them with international examples, and discuss areas that need improvement.
The accident at Unit 4 of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine, which occurred about 40 years ago, resulted in numerous casualties and led to the spread of radioactive materials across Europe, depending on weather conditions. Subsequently, the 2011 accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan also forced countless residents to leave their homes and live in evacuation for an extended period, demonstrating just how long-lasting and far-reaching the impact of a nuclear accident can be on society and the environment. These accidents served as a reminder to the world of just how critical safety management and accident response systems are for nuclear power plants.
Nuclear energy is produced through nuclear fission reactions that occur inside a reactor. It is highly energy-efficient, allowing a small amount of nuclear fuel to generate a massive amount of electricity; it is known that 1 kg of uranium produces energy equivalent to thousands of metric tons of coal. Furthermore, because carbon dioxide emissions during the power generation process are very low compared to thermal power generation, nuclear power is regarded as one of the key low-carbon energy sources in the effort to address climate change and achieve carbon neutrality.
However, while nuclear power offers the advantages of high efficiency and environmental friendliness, it also carries the serious risk of radioactive material leaks. Although the probability of an accident is very low, a single major accident can cause long-term damage to both people and the environment. In particular, as the issue of radioactive contamination—highlighted by the use of nuclear weapons and nuclear power plant accidents—has come to be recognized as a safety concern for the entire international community, the importance of nuclear power plant safety management has grown even more.
Radiation emitted from nuclear power can have various effects on the human body. High doses of radiation can damage DNA, destroying cells or causing genetic mutations, and prolonged exposure can increase the risk of cancer. However, the effects of radiation vary significantly depending on the dose and duration of exposure. Even in the natural environment, people are constantly exposed to natural radiation from cosmic rays, soil, and rocks, and medical institutions utilize radiation for diagnosis and treatment in accordance with safety standards. Ultimately, the key is to strictly manage radiation doses to prevent harm to human health and the environment; to this end, systematic safety management and emergency response systems at both the national and international levels are essential.
The Nuclear Security Summit held in Seoul in 2012 was an international conference that discussed measures for international cooperation to protect nuclear materials and facilities from nuclear terrorism. Key agenda items included the prevention of nuclear terrorism, the safe management of nuclear materials and facilities, and the prevention of illicit trafficking in nuclear materials. The fact that the Republic of Korea served as the host country and chaired the summit was viewed as a reflection of its experience in the civilian use of nuclear energy and its international standing. It holds particular significance given that it was held at a time when the international community was paying close attention to strengthening nuclear safety in the immediate aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear accident.
Nevertheless, opinions vary regarding the actual level of preparedness for radiation accidents at South Korea’s nuclear power plants. Greenpeace, an international environmental organization, has previously pointed out that South Korea’s regional radiation disaster response plans require improvement and has consistently argued that emergency response capabilities and resident protection measures in areas with a high concentration of nuclear power plants must be continuously strengthened. In particular, given that the area surrounding the Kori Nuclear Power Plant is close to densely populated areas, Greenpeace has suggested that disaster response plans must be prepared even more thoroughly—not only to address the possibility of an accident itself but also to ensure the evacuation of residents and mitigate the spread of radiation in the event of an accident.
Currently, international guidelines recommend establishing preventive protection zones and emergency protection planning zones to develop resident protection plans in preparation for nuclear accidents. South Korea also operates emergency planning zones around its nuclear power plants and has established response systems covering resident evacuation, radiation monitoring, stockpiling of protective supplies, and securing thyroid protection medication. However, since a large number of residents live within 30 km of nuclear power plants, determining how effectively rapid evacuation, traffic control, medical support, and the supply of protective equipment can be carried out in the event of an actual large-scale accident remains a challenge that requires ongoing review and training.
The differences become even more apparent when compared to examples from other countries. France pre-distributes thyroid protection medication to residents living near nuclear power plants and has a system in place to provide additional supplies via mail or other means if necessary. Switzerland also implements a policy of pre-distributing protective medication to residents within a certain radius of nuclear power plants, and several European countries conduct regular emergency evacuation drills and disaster preparedness training for residents living near nuclear power plants. Although operational methods vary by country, they share a common approach: rather than merely establishing plans, they are strengthening preparatory measures to ensure that residents can respond immediately to emergency situations.
Given this reality, South Korea also needs to continuously improve its nuclear power plant safety management and disaster prevention systems. Decisions regarding the construction of new nuclear power plants or the continued operation of existing ones must be made after comprehensively considering factors such as power supply and demand, carbon neutrality policies, economic feasibility, local community acceptance, and safety. Above all, in regions with a high concentration of nuclear power plants, it is crucial to continuously strengthen facility safety and emergency response capabilities to minimize the likelihood of accidents.
Past incidents—such as the social controversy caused by the delivery of components with forged quality control documents to some nuclear power plants—demonstrated just how important it is to enhance the reliability of the nuclear safety management system. Although relevant regulations and oversight have been significantly strengthened since then, even a single minor defect at a nuclear power plant could potentially lead to a major accident; therefore, thorough quality control and continuous monitoring must be maintained throughout the entire process—from design and construction to component management, operation, and maintenance.
South Korea is one of the countries with the highest share of nuclear power generation globally. However, the share of nuclear power fluctuates somewhat from year to year, and recently, nuclear power has accounted for around 30% of total electricity generation. Furthermore, as the expansion of renewable energy and carbon neutrality policies are being pursued in tandem, energy policies that combine nuclear power and renewable energy are continuing. Following the Fukushima nuclear accident, some countries pursued policies to reduce or shut down nuclear power plants, but recently, an increasing number of countries are expanding or maintaining their nuclear power programs for reasons of energy security and carbon neutrality. As such, countries around the world are choosing different paths based on their respective energy landscapes and policy goals.
However, regardless of which policy a country adopts, safety is a value that can never be compromised. Accidents involving large-scale releases of radioactive materials can have extremely long-term consequences, including not only loss of life but also environmental pollution, economic losses, and the collapse of local communities. Since restoring contaminated areas can sometimes require enormous costs and take more than several decades, preventing accidents in the first place is of the utmost importance.
Therefore, South Korea must continuously enhance its national nuclear accident response system. It must regularly update detailed response manuals that account for various types of accidents, strengthen coordination among relevant agencies, and consistently conduct resident evacuation drills and disaster prevention education. Furthermore, laws and systems related to nuclear safety must be continuously improved, and facility inspections and safety oversight must be carried out more thoroughly to enhance public trust. It is also important to continuously assess the effectiveness of Emergency Planning Zones and to regularly refine the systems for securing and distributing protective supplies, such as thyroid protection medication. Efforts must also continue to establish a foundation for rapid response in the event of an accident by utilizing advanced monitoring technologies and real-time information-sharing systems.
While nuclear power is an important energy source with the advantages of high efficiency and reduced carbon emissions, the principle that safety is the top priority will never change. Only when thorough prevention, continuous investment, and repeated inspections and training are carried out together will a nuclear safety system that reassures the public be fully established. As the proverbs “Mangwoo Boroe” (mending the barn after the cow is lost) and “Yubi Muhwan” (preparedness prevents trouble) suggest, a mindset of thorough preparation in advance—rather than reacting after an accident occurs—must be the most important principle of South Korea’s nuclear safety policy.
