Make a New Account

Forget your username or password?

Advanced Search

Active Users

Currently 1 user(s) logged on.

	Follow us on Twitter! or join our Facebook group!
	Follow us on Twitter! or join our Facebook group!

Nuclear Dreams Dealt a Critical Blow

by: Sue Prent

Thu Apr 22, 2010 at 18:00:00 PM EDT

As a fountain of oil spills into the Gulf of Mexico, confirming the worst fears of opponents to Obama's drilling decision, nuclear energy proponents have been dealt an equally profound setback. In a report filed yesterday by a coalition of environmental groups, Vermont's own Arnie Gundersen has revealed fatal design flaws in the new Westinghouse AP 1000 reactor that was expected to drive a new generation of power plants. The reactor still has not received approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but it was believed to represent significant advances in safety over existing designs.

At issue in the new design is the relationship between the free-standing interior steel vessel and its exterior concrete containment structure, which was intended to represent an improved cooling system. Gunderson's report details how undetected deterioration of the unsupported inner chamber could result in a catastrophe ten times worse than what might occur with the reactors currently in service. The New York Times shares the story and includes Gunderson's illustrations of how such an accident might play out in the new reactor.

Well-respected in Vermont by the environmental community, Maggie and Arnie Gundersen's testimony regarding the re-licensing of Vermont Yankee has been central to the effort to shut-down the 40-year old reactor before its many structural failures finally amount to something truly catastrophic. A press release from their consulting firm, Fairwinds Associates, explains the Westinghouse reactor findings in detail.

Sue Prent :: Nuclear Dreams Dealt a Critical Blow

Tags: Fairwinds Associcates, Westinghouse AP 1000, nuclear energy, Arnie Gundersen, Maggie Gundersen, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

Nuclear Dreams Dealt a Critical Blow | 3 comments

Heh (0.00 / 0)

I think "containment" is the wrong word. Looks like "concentrator" is a better word. A containment vessel would keep things in if something bad happened, not act as an accelerator. Even gas pipelines have a downward-pointing U joint at the emergency pressure vents - to prevent the chimney effect from turning a simple leak into a 50 ft tall flaming plume.

Sure, the inner steel on the new plant design will be thicker than the current designs, but that doesn't mean it will be (a) flawless or (b) immune to the laws of physics.

The Titanic was believed to be un-sinkable, because of the great strength of the 1" steel used, but guess what? There is always a flaw, somewhere - in the case of the titanic, it was in the rivets. What will be the flaw in this style reactor dome?

Beware the Everyday Brutality of the Averted Gaze

by: mataliandy @ Thu Apr 22, 2010 at 22:15:56 PM UTC

And that's not the only problem with the design (0.00 / 0)

According to this Wall Street Journal article:

"This is a situation where fundamental engineering standards will have to be met before we can begin determining whether the shield building meets the agency's requirements," said Michael Johnson, director of the NRC's Office of New Reactors.
...
There are two ironies here. First, Westinghouse modified the shield building design, in part, to address regulators' concerns about nuclear plants being robust enough to withstand the impact of jet airliners, such as in a terrorist attack. Older reactors didn't have to pass that particular stress test. Now, the modified design seems vulnerable to old-fashioned attacks from Mother Nature.

Beware the Everyday Brutality of the Averted Gaze

by: mataliandy @ Fri Apr 23, 2010 at 01:20:53 AM UTC

But, aside from all the problems, (0.00 / 0)

nuclear remains the greenest, safest energy option, right?

And, why bother to build new ones, if they're going to be unsafe? Just keep using the old ones - they're already unsafe, and they're paid for!

We can govern ourselves better than they govern us!

by: govt4all @ Sat Apr 24, 2010 at 01:01:41 AM UTC