German nuclear energy proves to be utterly incompetent again

[Thanas]

A bit of a background - a while back they shut down a reactor and now are preparing to demolish it. Well, turns out that they kept rusting barrels as primary means of storing nuclear waste in the basement, around 630 in total. Of 70 checked, 18 were already rusting. Some apparently are already leaking, even though the concrete surrounding the barrels kept it from getting out.

Link in German with pictures of some of the rusting barrels here.

The thought process is pretty alarming. What did they think? "Let's just chuck those barrels in the basement and hope nobody notices for the next thirty years, oh and btw we won't carry out inspections whether they are rusting away or not"? Great way to ensure the public that you totally can be trusted to run a well-managed power plant.

[Simon_Jester]

What inspection regime should have been in place given the standard rules of the German equivalent of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission?

[Thanas]

What inspection regime should have been in place given the standard rules of the German equivalent of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission?

Apparently the companies managed to either hide the things or nobody cared. Either way just another notch in the long list of "nuclear energy in Germany = incompetence".

[aerius]

Is there a reason that you Germans bung up nuclear as badly as the US fucks up healthcare?

[tezunegari]

The caverns were supposed to be a temporary storage until the "Schacht Konrad" repository for low to middle-radioactive material is finished, which was supposed to happen in the late 1990s...

But as of March 2013 the conversion from iron mine to radiactive waste repository is now planned for 2021.

[Thanas]

The caverns were supposed to be a temporary storage until the "Schacht Konrad" repository for low to middle-radioactive material is finished, which was supposed to happen in the late 1990s...

But as of March 2013 the conversion from iron mine to radiactive waste repository is now planned for 2021.

Sure but I don't get why "lets just not inspect them ever" follows from that.

[tezunegari]

Sure but I don't get why "lets just not inspect them ever" follows from that.

Oops.
I deleted a part of my post before submitting it... how embarassing.

It might be a gross clerical error that misplaced the records of the barrels and if it is the company running the plant should be heavily fined and all their records and facilities should be inspected for "suprises" like this - no exceptions. This shouldn't have happened at all.

I think there are annual inspections taking a month to complete for the reactors but storage units might fall under the same "no regulations for it" just like the Freedom Industries idiocy.

On government side the "Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit" (Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Construction and Nuclear Safety) has jurisdiction over this, but to my knowledge there is no agency tasked directly with making sure reactors are safe.

The information who inspects nuclear reactors / repositories and what they check should be public information in my opinion.

[Thanas]

t might be a gross clerical error that misplaced the records of the barrels and if it is the company running the plant should be heavily fined and all their records and facilities should be inspected for "suprises" like this - no exceptions. This shouldn't have happened at all.

I think there are annual inspections taking a month to complete for the reactors but storage units might fall under the same "no regulations for it" just like the Freedom Industries idiocy.

Apparently the company claims that since no regulations were ever made about that - just as you assumed - nobody actually had the right to care about it.

But the greens are already claiming that this is asinine and that when the plant was built there were indeed upper limits set - limits the company apparently broke and did not care for as the storage area is now as radioactive as Fukushima.

On government side the "Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit" (Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Construction and Nuclear Safety) has jurisdiction over this, but to my knowledge there is no agency tasked directly with making sure reactors are safe.

The information who inspects nuclear reactors / repositories and what they check should be public information in my opinion.

Actually it is. There are several agencies responsible for checking here. First, the state regulatory agencies (Atomaufsichtsbehörde) are part of the state environment ministries. They are the ones responsible for checking on a local level and the federal Ministry (the one you mention) is more about the big picture and about federal nuclear installations.

Anyway, my guess is that the local regulatory agency (as they are wont to do) conveniently forgot to check in on one of the largest employers in the state, who also conveniently forgot about checking on stuff that might cause them hundreds of millions.

[TheHammer]

Its stories like this that make would otherwise be irrational fears about Nuclear power suddenly seem viable. It's not the Nuclear power itself to fear, so much as it is human incompetence or malfeasance in dealing with it. Unless and until these companies are hit with not only major fines, but jail time for corporate officers, they are going to cut corners wherever they can in the name of profit.

[Purple]

It's stories like this that make me want to point out just how idiotic it is to let major infrastructural projects of state intrest with potential for great harm if mismanaged be run by corporations rather than the state.

[TheHammer]

It's stories like this that make me want to point out just how idiotic it is to let major infrastructural projects of state intrest with potential for great harm if mismanaged be run by corporations rather than the state.

Well in theory you still have oversight/inspection by the state, but it appears that was neglected as well. Its enough that you almost want to pay inspectors bonuses for finding violations. Obviously that opens up its own potential for abuse, but at least those abuses aren't likely to lead to the local population glowing in the dark.

[AniThyng]

It's stories like this that make me want to point out just how idiotic it is to let major infrastructural projects of state intrest with potential for great harm if mismanaged be run by corporations rather than the state.

It's not as if the state is infallible anyway, even in projects of interest to it. Considering the regulatory failures, does it matter if the corporate layer was removed?

[Magis]

Without more information it's difficult to estimate the radiological consequences of these leaks, as well the extent to which facilities staff were being neglectful, if at all.

It's conceivable that regulations even contributed to the problem since the storage container requirements are tightly regulated, as are the dose rate limits of potential inspectors. Safety is the number one priority at nuclear facilities, and that means not sending inspectors into active areas unless necessary.

As far as the consequences go, we don't even know the activity of the waste that escaped storage (except that it will be less than 4000 Bq/g and with a thermal power of less than 2 kW per cubic meter). Generally, intermediate-level waste is not really the scary stuff, but does require some shielding to meet dose rate regulations.

To me, this seems very overblown.

It's stories like this that make me want to point out just how idiotic it is to let major infrastructural projects of state intrest with potential for great harm if mismanaged be run by corporations rather than the state.

Then you must be unaware of the radiological incidents and safety records of state-run nuclear facilities.

[Zeropoint]

The state obviously isn't infallible, but . . . I served as a Nuke ET in the US Navy, and the Navy sure seems to be able to run a nuclear power program without having this kind of disastrous ****-up. It seems to me that taking it seriously is the main requirement to operate nuclear plants safely and reliably.

[Sky Captain]

Storing hazardous materials in such flimsy barrels seems to be inadequate in first place. At least you would want a container that does not rust full of holes if neglected for few years.

[Purple]

It's stories like this that make me want to point out just how idiotic it is to let major infrastructural projects of state intrest with potential for great harm if mismanaged be run by corporations rather than the state.

It's not as if the state is infallible anyway, even in projects of interest to it. Considering the regulatory failures, does it matter if the corporate layer was removed?

Less layers equals less complexity and less possible points of failure. Plus, the headman of a government run power station can't reasonably bribe a government inspector to keep quiet.

Then you must be unaware of the radiological incidents and safety records of state-run nuclear facilities.

I am not. I merely believe that with less layers there are less points of failure and thus the odds of failure are smaller.

[Irbis]

A bit of a background - a while back they shut down a reactor and now are preparing to demolish it. Well, turns out that they kept rusting barrels as primary means of storing nuclear waste in the basement, around 630 in total. Of 70 checked, 18 were already rusting. Some apparently are already leaking, even though the concrete surrounding the barrels kept it from getting out.

You know, had Germany had sane nuclear industry, they would make either non-reactive barrels or just use throughburning, breeding reactors leaving little radioactive materials behind making this non-isssue.

I love how that thing is blown out of proportion. Most serious nuclear incident in Germany in years, ineptitude, stupidity, cutting corners combined together...

...and all it did was leaking some mildly radioactive water to basement no one ever walks in. Meanwhile, just a single accident on "green" farm in Germany killed sixty people, disrupted international trade and left 4000 more seriously ill and in need of hospitalization. Had it been nuclear accident, howls of green organizations would be loud enough to power wind electricity plants in Germany all by themselves, but because it was result of green ideology no one dared to criticize it.

But the greens are already claiming that this is asinine and that when the plant was built there were indeed upper limits set - limits the company apparently broke and did not care for as the storage area is now as radioactive as Fukushima.

Do these idiots know what else is as radioactive as Fukushima? Their own houses.

Radioactivity isn't binary 0/1 process, vast majority of Fukushima has radiation barely above (or even below) background radiation of many countries. The problem are a few isolated hot spots left by ineptitude of private company, Tepco, that is responsible for the whole accident. Of course, using real arguments would just show the public how non issue this is, so they prefer to just slap buzz words masking their weakness. Chernobyl! Fukushima! Tsunamis in Bavaria!

Fuck, eating a banana, potatoes, or nuts for a month is more dangerous than a trip to Fukushima, assuming we're not talking about direct vicinity of reactor. Do you use potassium salt substitutes? Radiation! Natural potassium content in human body? Equivalent of 10 current Fukushmas per year!

Anyway, my guess is that the local regulatory agency (as they are wont to do) conveniently forgot to check in on one of the largest employers in the state, who also conveniently forgot about checking on stuff that might cause them hundreds of millions.

Yeah. Aren't we glad for Saint Reagan and Holy Thatcher's hand of market now?

Considering the regulatory failures, does it matter if the corporate layer was removed?

Yes, because running of the facility will cost less than running of the facility + profit for someone who won't even take responsibility for accidents. Why we need to pad unrelated pockets, again? Nuclear industry is one thing where you don't want people to look where they can cut corners for profits.

[Thanas]

You know, had Germany had sane nuclear industry, they would make either non-reactive barrels or just use throughburning, breeding reactors leaving little radioactive materials behind making this non-isssue.

Yes but as everybody knows the German industry is not really sane.....

Had it been nuclear accident, howls of green organizations would be loud enough to power wind electricity plants in Germany all by themselves, but because it was result of green ideology no one dared to criticize it.

Or maybe everybody realized that farming accidents contaminate food all the time and there was nothing green or no green about that?

Do these idiots know what else is as radioactive as Fukushima? Their own houses.

Radioactivity isn't binary 0/1 process, vast majority of Fukushima has radiation barely above (or even below) background radiation of many countries. The problem are a few isolated hot spots left by ineptitude of private company, Tepco, that is responsible for the whole accident. Of course, using real arguments would just show the public how non issue this is, so they prefer to just slap buzz words masking their weakness. Chernobyl! Fukushima! Tsunamis in Bavaria!

500 millisievert is not background radiation. How can you even claim such a thing?

EDIT: Also can we keep the talk about the evils of the free market out of this thread? This happened in one of the left states of Germany.

[Magis]

You know, had Germany had sane nuclear industry, they would make either non-reactive barrels or just use throughburning, breeding reactors leaving little radioactive materials behind making this non-isssue.

Yes but as everybody knows the German industry is not really sane.....

Fast reactors produce nuclear waste just like thermal reactors do. While there is a small reduction in the mass of actinides produced, the fission product inventory is about the same. In any case, those are both examples of high-level wastes. The material in question at the German facility is low and intermediate-level waste of non-fuel materials, and so they would be an issue with basically any reactor design. Not to mention that fast reactors face a list of technological problems about a zillion pages long.

But I think the rest of your (Irbis) post is right on the money.

Do these idiots know what else is as radioactive as Fukushima? Their own houses.

Radioactivity isn't binary 0/1 process, vast majority of Fukushima has radiation barely above (or even below) background radiation of many countries. The problem are a few isolated hot spots left by ineptitude of private company, Tepco, that is responsible for the whole accident. Of course, using real arguments would just show the public how non issue this is, so they prefer to just slap buzz words masking their weakness. Chernobyl! Fukushima! Tsunamis in Bavaria!

500 millisievert is not background radiation. How can you even claim such a thing?

You're right. 500 mSv is not background radiation... because mSv is not a unit of radioactivity, nor is it even a unit of dose rate. For anyone to compare the radioactivity of the two sites, then by definition they're comparing the number of nuclear desintegrations per second, the Becquerel.

I think what Irbis means is that the dose rates in the surrounding populated areas is no higher than background dose rates elsewhere, which is completely true. The only dangerous "hot spots" are on the reactor facility premises, and even there the typical dose rate is about 50 mSv per hour (don't forget the per hour part ).

Anyway, Irbis is right that the comparison to Fukushima is completely fucking dumb. For starters, as already addresses, the a dose rate comparison is meaningless because it's not specific - dose rate at Fukushima where/when? Also, Fukushima discharged nearly 10^18 Bq of radioactivity, and the intermediate-level waste in question is by definition less than 4000 Bq/g. So unless you think the German plant leaked over 250 million tonnes of material, I think equating the release to Fukushima is delusional. This leak is a zero on the INES scale.

The whole story is a non-issue. There will be no consequences. No worker will reach or exceed their regulated dose limits as a result of the leak. No significant radioactivity, if any, will be released to the environment. The reality here is that things leak. Especially when things are filled with highly reactive species. Especially when radiolysis is involved. And especially over such timescales. If any of you want to present some magical material that is leak-proof and corrosion-proof in these conditions, please do, and don't forget to pick up your Nobel Prize on the way out.

The real failure is a political one, since this should have all gone into a deep geological repository long ago. If a government is too cowardly or to cheap to build one, despite the fact that every nuclear engineer on planet Earth can tell you that it's an inevitability, blame the government.

[Sky Captain]

The whole story is a non-issue. There will be no consequences. No worker will reach or exceed their regulated dose limits as a result of the leak. No significant radioactivity, if any, will be released to the environment. The reality here is that things leak.

I think problem is not that this leak is particulary dangerous, but the attitude of a company who let this happen when simple periodic visual inspections would have prevented this. Events lke this help to fuel anti nuclear attitude because thought process of most people is something like this: companies always look where to cut corners in the name of profit, well this time it was minor accident, but what if next time they neglect something critical like integrity of spent fuel cooling pool or reactor pressure vessel.

[Thanas]

The whole story is a non-issue. There will be no consequences. No worker will reach or exceed their regulated dose limits as a result of the leak. No significant radioactivity, if any, will be released to the environment. The reality here is that things leak. Especially when things are filled with highly reactive species. Especially when radiolysis is involved. And especially over such timescales. If any of you want to present some magical material that is leak-proof and corrosion-proof in these conditions, please do, and don't forget to pick up your Nobel Prize on the way out.

I don't consider the company losing that many barrels to be just a trivial thing. And apparently they did not think they would leak either because no inspection at all was done.

The real failure is a political one, since this should have all gone into a deep geological repository long ago. If a government is too cowardly or to cheap to build one, despite the fact that every nuclear engineer on planet Earth can tell you that it's an inevitability, blame the government.

The deep geological repositories that have been discussed are full of leaking barrels already as well.