I. S. Skiter1, V. V. Derenhovskyi1, V. M. Rudko1, V. F. Hrechaninov2
1 Institute for Safety Problems of Nuclear Power Plants, NAS of Ukraine, 36a, Kirova st., Chornobyl, 07270, Ukraine
2 Institute of Mathematical Machines and Systems Problems, NAS of Ukraine, 42, Akademika Hlushkova Ave, Kyiv, 03187, Ukraine
DOI: doi.org/10.31717/2311-8253.25.2.1
Abstract
The article presents further development of the previously developed methodology for strategic analysis of the process of selecting sites for the construction of nuclear power plants using fuzzy logic methods. The development of the research is based on the analysis of the safety factor and its criteria. The object of the study is the process of analyzing potential sites for the construction of radiation and nuclear facilities. The subject of the study is a comparative analysis of potential sites based on a comprehensive assessment of safety factor criteria. The goal is to compare potential sites based on an assessment of the safety factor and its criteria. The assessment is carried out using a model developed in previous studies based on fuzzy logic methods. The objective of the study is achieved through fuzzy expert assessment based on developed expert forms, methodological approaches, and a mathematical model. The selection of input data for the implementation of the model was carried out taking into account practical recommendations and safety documents from the IAEA and national regulators of leading countries in the field of nuclear safety. The consistent use of the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (AHP), the center of area (CoA) method, and fuzzy simple additive weighting (SAW) allows for a qualitative and reliable expert assessment, minimizing the influence of subjective expert judgments. As a result of implementing the model when comparing sites for the construction of new AP1000 reactors, the following results were obtained: fuzzy importance coefficients and relative weights of safety factor criteria for all sites were determined; the probability of the impact of criteria for each site was assessed; fuzzy estimates of the level of impact of safety criteria for each site were determined. Based on the results obtained and their visualization using the Wilson Matrix, the Khmelnytskyi NPP site was selected as the optimal one in terms of safety. The application of the proposed methodological approach made it possible to draw reasonable conclusions about the impact of safety factor criteria on the preparation and adoption of strategic decisions regarding the selection of the optimal location for the construction of radiation and nuclear facilities.
Keywords: safety factor, nuclear power plant sites, radiation and nuclear facilities, fuzzy logic mathematical model, fuzzy importance coefficients, weights of criteria, probabilities of criteria influence, levels of criteria influence, Wilson’s matrix, optimal decision-making.
References
1. Galushhenko G. (2021). [Memorandum of understandung between Energoatom and Westinghouse Electric-a step towards significant investments in Ukraine’s nuclear energy]. Uriadovyi portal [Government portal]. Available at: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/news/german-galushchenko-memorandum-provzayemorozuminnya mizh energoatomom-ta-westinghouse-electric-krok-do-znachnih-investicij-v-atomnu-energetiku-ukrayini (in Ukr.)
2. Skiter I. S., Derenhovskyi V. V., Mykhailov O. V., Menshenin Ye. A., Savchuk O. B., Trunov O. I. (2024). [Strategic analysis in the selection of sites for NPP construction based on fuzzy logic methods]. Nuclear Power and the Environment, vol. 3 (31), pp. 12−22. doi.org/10.31717/2311-8253.24.3.2.
3. IAEA (2019). Application of Multi-criteria decision analysis methods to comparative evaluation of nuclear energy system options: Final report of the INPRO collaborative project KIND. Vienna: IAEA, 229 p. Available at: www.iaea.org/publications/12373/application-of-multi-criteria-decision-analysis-methods-to-comparative-evaluation-of-nuclear-energy-system-options-final-report-of-the-inpro-collaborative-project-kind.
4. SSR6.177‑2005‑09‑02. Basic Sanitary Rules for ensuring radiation safety in Ukraine, no. 54, dated February 02, 2005. Available at: ґzakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0552-05#Text (in Ukr.)
5. Skiter I. S., Derenhovskyi V. V., Rudko V. M. (2024). [Comparison of nuclear power plant sites using expert assessment of parametric criteria]. Nuclear Power and the Environment, vol. 2 (30), pp. 13−22. (in Ukr.)
6. IAEA (1999). Basic safety principles for nuclear power plants. 75-INSAG‑3 rev. 1. STI/PUB/1082. Vienna: IAEA, 97 p.
7. IAEA (2006). Fundamental safety principles: safety fundamentals. STI/PUB/1273. Vienna: IAEA, 21 p.
8. NR306.2.144‑2008. Requirements for safety in choosing a site for the placement of a nuclear power plant, dated April 07, 2008. Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0467-08#Text. (in Ukr.)
9. IAEA (2019). Site evaluation for nuclear installations specific safety requirements. Vienna: IAEA, 56 p.
10. Susiati H., Udiyani P. M., Setiawan M. B. (2022). An external event identification for nuclear power plant (NPP) siting project at West Kalimantan, Indonesia. IOP Confer Series Earth Environ Sci, vol. 986 (1). Available at: doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/986/1/012066.
11. Abudeif A. M., Abdel Moneim A. A., Farrag A. F. (2015). Multicriteria decision analysis based on analytic hierarchy process in GIS environment for siting nuclear power plant in Egypt. Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 75, pp. 682−692. Available at: doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2014.09.024.
12. Agyekum E. B., Amjad F., Aslam F., Ali A. (2021). Application of weighted linear combination approach in a geographical information system environment for nuclear power plant site selection: the case of Ghana. Annals of Nuclear Energy, vol. 162. Available at: doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2021.108491.
13. Ekmekçioglu M., Can Kutlu A., Kahraman C. (2011). A fuzzy multi-criteria swot analysis: an application to nuclear power plant site selection. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, vol. 4 (4), pp. 583−595. Available at: doi.org/10.1080/18756891.2011.9727814.
14. Barzehkar M., Dinan N. M., Salemi A. (2016). Environmental capability evaluation for nuclear power plant site selection: a case study of Sahar Khiz Region in Gilan Province, Iran. Environmental Earth Sciences, vol. 75 (12), art. 1016. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1007/s12665‑016‑5825‑9.
15. Salsabila K., Saraswati R., Shidiq I.P. A., Susiati H. (2021). GIS-based multi-criteria analysis for nuclear power plant site selection in West Kalimantan. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, vol. 623 (1). Available at: doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/623/1/012049.
16. Hussein F. M., Obeid M. A., El-Malahy K. S. (1987). Site selection of a dual purpose nuclear power plant in Saudi Arabia. Nuclear Technology, vol. 79 (3), pp. 311−321. Available at: doi.org/10.13182/NT87-A34020.
17. Lugasi Y., Mehrez A., Sinuany-Stern Z. (1985). Nuclear power plant site selection: a case study. Nuclear Technology, vol. 69 (1), pp. 7−13. Available at: doi.org/10.13182/NT85-A33590.
18. Baskurt Z.M., Aydin C.C. (2018). Nuclear power plant site selection by Weighted Linear Combination in GIS environment, Edirne, Turkey. Progress in Nuclear Energy, vol. 104, pp. 85−101. Available at: doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2017.09.004.
19. Basri N. A., Hashim S., Ramli A. T., Bradley D. A., Hamzah K. (2016). Regulatory requirements for nuclear power plant site selection in Malaysia. Journal of Radiological Protection, vol. 36 (4). Available at: doi.org/10.1088/0952-4746/36/4/R96.
20. Erol I., Sencer S., Özmen A., Searcy C. (2014). Fuzzy MCDM framework for locating a nuclear power plant in Turkey. Energy Policy, 67, pp. 186−197. Available at: doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.056.
21. IAEA (2023). Experience in applying IAEA principles for design safety to new nuclear power plants. IAEA TECDOC series. Vienna: IAEA, 149 p.
22. IAEA (2016). Safety of nuclear power plants: Design. Safety Standards Series No. SSR‑2/1 (Rev. 1). Vienna: IAEA, 71 p.
23. IAEA (2021). Design of nuclear installations against external events excluding earthquakes. Specific Safety Guide. Safety Standards Series No. SSG‑68. Vienna: IAEA, 91 p.
24. IAEA (2021). Seismic design for nuclear installations. Specific Safety Guide. Safety Standards Series No. SSG‑67. Vienna: IAEA, 65 p.
25. National Nuclear Safety Administration (2007). Site Survey for Nuclear Power Plant. Chinese National regulatory guide HAD101/07.
26. National Nuclear Safety Administration (1989). External human induced events in relation to nuclear power plant siting. Chinese National regulatory guide HAD101/04-1989.
27. National Nuclear Safety Administration (1991). Design basis tropical cyclone for nuclear power plants. Chinese National regulatory guide HAD101/11-1991.
28. Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) (2012c). Technical standards for locations of nuclear reactor facilities. Nuclear Safety and Security Commission, NSSC Notice No. 2012-03. (in Korean)
29. Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) (2012d). Technical standards for the location of low and intermediate level radioactive waste disposal facilities. Nuclear Safety and Security Commission, NSSC Notice No. 2012-50. (in Korean)
30. Nuclear Regulation Authority (2013). Ordinance Prescribing Standards for the Location, Structures, and Equipment of Commercial Power Reactors and their Auxiliary Facilities, Reactor Establishment Permit Ordinance.
31. Western European Nuclear Regulators’Association (2014). Safety reference levels for existing reactors – Update in relation to lessons learned from TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi accident, WENRA Reactor Harmonisation Working Group.
32. Taghavifard M. T., Mahdiraji H. A., Alibakhshi A. M., Zavadskas E. K., Bausys R. (2018). An extension of fuzzy SWOT Analysis: An application to information technology. Information, vol. 9 (3), pp. 46. Available at: doi.org/10.3390/info9030046.
33. Milošević D. M., Milošević M. R., Simjanović D. J. (2020). Implementation of adjusted fuzzy AHP method in the assessment for reuse of industrial buildings. Mathematics, vol. 8 (10), art. 1697. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/math8101697.
34. Simon J., Sánta R. (2023). Energy efficient smart home heating system using renewable energy source with fuzzycontrol design. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, vol. 6 (2), pp. 948−974. Available at:
doi.org/10.31181/dmame622023825.
If the article is accepted for publication in the journal «Industrial Heat Engineering» the author must sign an agreement on transfer of copyright. The agreement is sent to the postal (original) or e-mail address (scanned copy) of the journal editions.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License International CC-BY that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.