|
|||||
|
|
Evaluating hazard results for Switzerland and how not to do it: A discussion of “Problems in the application of the SSHAC probability method for assessing earthquake hazards at Swiss nuclear power plants” by J-U Klügel |
|
| Authors: | RMW Musson GR Toro JJ Bommer H Bungum F Scherbaum NA Abrahamson |
| Institution: | a British Geological Survey, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3LA, UK b Risk Engineering, Inc., 3 Farmers Row, Acton, MA 01720 USA c Coppersmith Consulting, Inc., 2121 N. California St., Suite 290, Walnut, Creek, CA, 94596, USA d Department Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College, London, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, UK e Swiss Seismological Service, Institute of Geophysics, ETH Hoenggerberg, CH-8093 Zurich, Switzerland f NORSAR, Kjeller, Norway g Laboratoire de Géophysique Interne et Tectonophysique, Université, Joseph Fourier, BP 53, 38041 Grenoble cedex 9, France h Institut für Geowissenschaften, Universität Potsdam, Postfach 601553, D-14415 Potsdam, Germany i Istituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale, Borgo Grotta Gigante 42c, 34010 Sgonico (Trieste), Italy j Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Francisco, CA, USA |
| Abstract: | The PEGASOS project was a major international seismic hazard study, one of the largest ever conducted anywhere in the world, to assess seismic hazard at four nuclear power plant sites in Switzerland. Before the report of this project has become publicly available, a paper attacking both methodology and results has appeared. Since the general scientific readership may have difficulty in assessing this attack in the absence of the report being attacked, we supply a response in the present paper. The bulk of the attack, besides some misconceived arguments about the role of uncertainties in seismic hazard analysis, is carried by some exercises that purport to be validation exercises. In practice, they are no such thing; they are merely independent sets of hazard calculations based on varying assumptions and procedures, often rather questionable, which come up with various different answers which have no particular significance. |
| Keywords: | Seismic hazard analysis Epistemic uncertainty Aleatory variability Hazard methodology Validation PEGASOS Strong ground motion Ground-motion prediction |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ | |