9 ms·
Unplanned exposure during diving in the spent nuclear fuel pool (2011)
- Mindless2112 2y agoYou might say it was NSFW.
- queuebert 2y agoOSHA has entered the chat.
- boomboomsubban 2y ago*2010/2011.
- DavidSJ 2y agoHere's a Wayback mirror since the server appears to be struggling: http://web.archive.org/web/20240402165313/https://isoe-network.net/publications/pub-proceedings/symposia/north-american-tc-symposia/fort-lauderdale-usa-january-2011/slides-14/session-iv-1/1756-ritter2011-ppt/file.html http://web.archive.org/web/20240402165313/https://isoe-netwo... Edit: While the above link works for me, this link might work better for some: http://web.archive.org/web/20240402165313if_/https://isoe-network.net/publications/pub-proceedings/symposia/north-american-tc-symposia/fort-lauderdale-usa-january-2011/slides-14/session-iv-1/1756-ritter2011-ppt/file.html http://web.archive.org/web/20240402165313if_/https://isoe-ne...
- bamboozled 2y agoIt just displays an image c
- xattt 2y agoWayback link seems to only show the first slide without an option to move forward.
- max-ibel 2y agoThat's a pretty good post-mortem report. I hope they have implemented all the proposed process changes.
- staplung 2y agoI think this is the incident referenced in WhatIf's exploration of how long you could swim in a nuclear reactor's spent fuel pool. https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
- atomic128 2y agoPiece of a fission reactor became radioactive due to neutron bombardment. Lost track of this radioactive piece in the pool, found it by accident, zap! Neutrons make hardware radioactive. Many on Hacker News fantasize about fusion (not fission) reactors. These fusion (not fission) reactors will be an intense source of fast neutrons. All the hardware in a fusion (not fission) reactor will become radioactive. Not to mention the gamma rays. If you have to deal with radioactive materials, why not just use fission? After 70 years of working with fission reactors, we know how to build and operate them at 95%+ efficiency. Fission can provide all the power we will need in our lifetimes. Quoting John Carmack: "Deuterium fusion would give us a cheap and basically unlimited fuel source with a modest waste stream, but it is an almost comically complex and expensive way to generate heat compared to fission, which is basically 'put these rocks next to each other and they get hot'."
- LargoLasskhyfv 2y agoButt whaddäbbaut https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneutronic_fusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneutronic_fusion ?
- jiggawatts 2y agoI assume you're joking, but for others who might not realise: aneutronic fusion is mostly aneutronic, not entirely. Some neutrons are still released, and the reactor walls will still become radioactive over time, just slower. Oh, and also, the fuel types that do produce a usefully lower level of neutron radiation are absurdly hard to get to fuse. We're talking 100x harder than the "easy" D-T fusion... which in turn is five decades of technology development away from producing useful amounts of power. Aneutronic fusion reactors will be used on interstellar craft... in the 2100s. See the "residual radiation" section in the same article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneutronic_fusion#Residual_radiation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneutronic_fusion#Residual_rad...
- LargoLasskhyfv 2y agoHmmmm. Then let's try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaseous_fission_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaseous_fission_reactor instead!1!! :)
- funOtter 2y agoWhere did this happen at?
- dredmorbius 2y agoBased on slide captions, "Kernkraftwerk Leibstadt", a/k/a Leibstadt Nuclear Power Plant, in Switzerland (not Germany as initially written): <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibstadt_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibstadt_Nuclear_Power_Plant>
- AdamJacobMuller 2y agoNear Germany, but, it's in Switzerland.
- dredmorbius 2y agoGah! Too late to edit, but thanks.
- fy20 2y agoOne interesting fact about nuclear energy I came across the other day is at both Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, other reactors on the site continued to operate - and produce electricity - for many years after the incidents. In Russia today - just outside St Petersburg, a stones throw from Finland and Estonia - they still operate reactors of the same design as Chernobyl (with retrofits) and don't plan to shut them down for at least another decade.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- SunlitCat 2y agoWell, at least they now know what better not to do and what to watch out for, no?
- oneshtein 2y agoYes, this is the problem with any kind of nuclear reactors: cost of upgrade is too big, so it's cheaper to risk life on a continent than to fix a reactor.
- chickenbig 2y ago> cost of upgrade is too big Are you sure the other reactors were not upgraded, the procedures were not updated, the operators were not better trained? > cheaper to risk life on a continent than to fix a reactor Considering the reactor operators didn't work from home it suggests there was not a great risk in living on a continent with these reactors. Plus why stop at "on a continent" ... this is one world, no planet B etc.
- oneshtein 2y agoYou assume that nuclear stations are in a world without wars, isn't? In real world, one nuclear country invaded another nuclear country, shelled and then captured two nuclear stations, and use one of them as shelter for soldiers and as ammo depot, while openly claims that they will bomb other nuclear stations in month or two. If a experienced operator of a nuclear station will want to make harm to another nation, can it use a RBMK-1000 type reactor to repeat Chornobyl? It's not a theoretical question any more, because Russians forcefully migrate operators from Ukrainian nuclear station to RF stations and from RF to Ukrainian station.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- p0w3n3d 2y agoRelated and easily explained: https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/
- lokimedes 2y agoI have great respect for the safety culture that IAEA has mandated. These accident reports always contain great learnings. Yet, it is so easy for non-experts (and experts forgetting that risks and rewards are connected) to misread this as conclusive evidence og the universal dangers of nuclear. That a relatively simple human error, with little consequence, is treated like a flight crash signals disproportionately to the public that nuclear isn’t worth the risk.
- rurban 2y agoThis incident in 2010: https://www.ensi.ch/de/2010/08/31/kkl-ueberschreitung-der-zulaessigen-strahlendosis-bei-einem-mitarbeiter-stand-21-12-2010/ https://www.ensi.ch/de/2010/08/31/kkl-ueberschreitung-der-zu... Worker touches something he shouldn't. Unlike in Los Alamos he survived though, and didn't loose his hand. With higher voltages such incidents are usually deadly, that's why we were explicitly trained to NOT touch anything, and put our hands behind our back.
- vintagedave 2y agoDoes anyone understand what the second to last slide about the diver’s TLD being broken and repaired with glue means? Was that part of the dosimeter?