Europe wide nuclear alert

[Il Saggiatore]

From BBC:

Slovenia sparks EU nuclear alert

A leak of coolant prompted Slovenia to completely shut down the reactor at its only nuclear power plant.

The European Commission said parts were still cooling after the shutdown, but the situation was under control.

It said there appears to have been no discharge into the environment at the Krsko plant, which supplies energy to Slovenia and Croatia.

The Commission alerted all 27 EU member states under its Ecurie early warning system for nuclear emergencies.

Slovenia's nuclear safety chief Andrej Stritar said there was a water leak from the primary circuit inside the containment area.

He said operators had shut down the plant safely.

"Situation is under control," he said in a statement. "The plant is in stable condition. There is no off-site impact and there is no need for off-site protective measures. "

The Krsko plant has a US-made pressurised water reactor.

I saw a follow-up this morning on the German news channel N24: apparently the EU Commission sent out a Europe-wide nuclear warning (now withdrawn), because the Slovenian authorities overreacted and filled in the wrong form (I am not kidding...).

The worst thing was that the news channel had a nuclear expert, as a guest... from Greenpeace...
The "expert" basically said that a loss of coolant has as a consequence the meltdown of the reactor. As if there were no other ways to stop the reactor from over-heating, and the technicians and engineers would just sit there and watch the thing blow... Standard FUD from Greenpeace.

[Stark]

It's pretty funny they'd say that after a reactor leaked some coolant and ... didn't go into meltdown.

I bet he doesn't even know what a meltdown IS, and just thinks it means 'reactor explodes'.

[SpacedTeddyBear]

It's pretty funny they'd say that after a reactor leaked some coolant and ... didn't go into meltdown.

I bet he doesn't even know what a meltdown IS, and just thinks it means 'reactor explodes'.

Well what most people know about nucular ( yes that was purposeful) is from watching the Simpsons.

BTW. Did the news channel really refer to the G-tard as a "nuclear expert"?

[Il Saggiatore]

It's pretty funny they'd say that after a reactor leaked some coolant and ... didn't go into meltdown.

Especially because already last night the news reports were saying that the reactor was being shutdown.

I bet he doesn't even know what a meltdown IS, and just thinks it means 'reactor explodes'.

I can believe that he knows what a meltdown is. He just does not seem to be interested in informing the public correctly.

BTW. Did the news channel really refer to the G-tard as a "nuclear expert"?

He was introduced as "atomic expert". The fact that Greenpeace is well known to be heavily biased against nuclear power did not seem to bother them.

[PeZook]

He had it right in that the consequence of a catastrophic loss of coolant accident would result in a meltdown. The key word being "catastrophic".

My wife got scared when she heard about that and I had to spend half an hour explaining to her why this is not a catastrophe.

[Broomstick]

What sort of containment building does the Slovenian reactor have? The containment structure at Three Mile Island contained most of the bad stuff from the meltdown there, and there has never been any proof of harm to those living near the plant at the time (other than panic-induced distress), which is in sharp contrast to Chernobyl - more recent and, to Europe, much closer so I wonder if folks where thinking of something along those lines?

I am, however, happy to hear that apparently the safety systems and personnel reacted appropriately.

[CaptainZoidberg]

Well what most people know about nucular ( yes that was purposeful) is from watching the Simpsons.

Given that they're popular slogan is "Hell no we won't glow", I honestly wouldn't say that the Simpsons comment is far off.

Why on Earth do they think that a person would glow from a radioactive nuclear plant? It's almost like they think that radioactivity is some sort of disease that you can get by getting hit by radiation.

If only we told them that visible light is radiation...

[PeZook]

Why on Earth do they think that a person would glow from a radioactive nuclear plant? It's almost like they think that radioactivity is some sort of disease that you can get by getting hit by radiation.

Because enriched Uranium glows, so that must surely mean all radioactive things glow.

So if you're irradiated, you glow.

I never had the opportunity to explain to these guys just why nuclear fuel glows, but hey, I'm not the ignorant one

[K. A. Pital]

I never had the opportunity to explain to these guys just why nuclear fuel glows

Probably hearing stuff like "Cherenkov effects" and the like would pop their heads.

[Luzifer's right hand]

I saw a follow-up this morning on the German news channel N24: apparently the EU Commission sent out a Europe-wide nuclear warning (now withdrawn), because the Slovenian authorities overreacted and filled in the wrong form (I am not kidding...).

It seems that this was not the only form they filled out wrong, they told our government that it was only a test as they not cross the "test" part out , must be some multiple choice thing, it does not really matter to people here in Austria, we are that anti-atom captial of the eu after all, for most here it's just more evidence that the people behind nuclear power are either incompetent or dishonest.

[Coyote]

Hey, people still believe that radiation will cause "mutant babies". Because thyroid cancer isn't scary enough by itself.

[Kane Starkiller]

Over here in Zagreb, about 40km from Krško, it was on the news but no one really gives a shit. From the beginning it was clear it was just a minor glitch.

[phongn]

What sort of containment building does the Slovenian reactor have? The containment structure at Three Mile Island contained most of the bad stuff from the meltdown there, and there has never been any proof of harm to those living near the plant at the time (other than panic-induced distress), which is in sharp contrast to Chernobyl - more recent and, to Europe, much closer so I wonder if folks where thinking of something along those lines?

IIRC, it's a standard PWR with containment structure..

[CJvR]

Well overreaction is always preferable when it comes to running atomic reactors IMPO.

[CaptainZoidberg]

Well overreaction is always preferable when it comes to running atomic reactors IMPO.

Not when they're the only solution to our serious power problems and the overreaction is done by people with no comprehension of science or the risks involved.

Perhaps only 10% or so of any given class at my high school was ever taught what radiation really is.

[starslayer]

Probably hearing stuff like "Cherenkov effects" and the like would pop their heads.

Eh? I thought it was because it excited the air around it, causing it to glow in the same manner as a neon sign. That famous blue glow from waste coolant water is from Cherenkov radiation though.

[PeZook]

Eh? I thought it was because it excited the air around it, causing it to glow in the same manner as a neon sign. That famous blue glow from waste coolant water is from Cherenkov radiation though.

Air simply won't glow when excited this way ; Why do you think neon tubes need neon to work?

Most nuclear fuel actually doesn't glow like it is popularly depicted ; It only does so in certain circumstances. Most of the time, the glow is simply due to heat, like this plutonium pellet. Naturally, you can't "inherit" that kind of glow without being...dead

[SpacedTeddyBear]

Probably hearing stuff like "Cherenkov effects" and the like would pop their heads.

Eh? I thought it was because it excited the air around it, causing it to glow in the same manner as a neon sign. That famous blue glow from waste coolant water is from Cherenkov radiation though.

The glow due to particles that move through a medium faster than the speed of light. Neon signs work by ionizing the gas through a high voltage source.

[starslayer]

Air simply won't glow when excited this way ; Why do you think neon tubes need neon to work?

Most nuclear fuel actually doesn't glow like it is popularly depicted ; It only does so in certain circumstances. Most of the time, the glow is simply due to heat, like this plutonium pellet. Naturally, you can't "inherit" that kind of glow without being...dead

Actually, actium at least can seem to glow in the dark from air glow. I will conceed that most nuclear fuel and waste having this effect is rather unlikely, as most of it just isn't as radioactive as actium is.

And when I said "same manner as a neon sign," I didn't mean the unmistakable red glow of neon; I meant that it can cause the air around it to ionize and glow, the mechanism at work in a neon sign, only this time it's mostly nitrogen and oxygen doing it. So, you'd tend to get greens, purples, and blues, IIRC.

The glow due to particles that move through a medium faster than the speed of light. Neon signs work by ionizing the gas through a high voltage source.

I don't mean to sound indignant, but I know how neon signs work and what Cherenkov radiation is. I find it unlikely for air to glow because of Cherenkov radiation due to radioactivity because it has a refractive index of only about 1.0003. I could very well be wrong though. Is there a source which is definitive on this floating around somewhere?

[CaptainZoidberg]

The glow due to particles that move through a medium faster than the speed of light. Neon signs work by ionizing the gas through a high voltage source.

Can I ask if they'd have imaginary time or imaginary energy?

[Rogue 9]

Holy Hell, who cites Greenpeace as expert on anything, to say nothing of nuclear reactors?

[starslayer]

Can I ask if they'd have imaginary time or imaginary energy?

It's just a sonic boom, but with light instead of sound. See the Wikipedia article on it here. So, to answer your question, the particles have finite kinetic energy, and experience real time progression.

[Netko]

Over here in Zagreb, about 40km from Krško, it was on the news but no one really gives a shit. From the beginning it was clear it was just a minor glitch.

Are you sure about that? Thankfully, the newspapers are downplaying it (aside from their usual idiocy whenever something technical is involved, and even there I'm mostly pleasantly surprised about the level of coverage), stressing how it was mostly a non-event, however you can be sure the greens along with the uninformed (check out any of the standard cesspits like Jutarnji's forums) will use this incident to try to block the planned Slovenian expansion of Krško along with the planned 1-2 Croatian nuclear plants.

Short-term nobody really gives a shit, however, as stupid as it is, it will be ammunition against said projects which are really needed (Croatia is currently importing electricity and Krško isn't counted as imports since we own half of it, even if it is located in Slovenia), despite every single measuring equipment, both inside and outside the plant, not showing any radiation increase, and this being a relatively routine failure that already occurred a few times, but was not as widely publicized do to lower reporting requirements back then.

[Netko]

What sort of containment building does the Slovenian reactor have? The containment structure at Three Mile Island contained most of the bad stuff from the meltdown there, and there has never been any proof of harm to those living near the plant at the time (other than panic-induced distress), which is in sharp contrast to Chernobyl - more recent and, to Europe, much closer so I wonder if folks where thinking of something along those lines?

I am, however, happy to hear that apparently the safety systems and personnel reacted appropriately.

The leak was contained within the primary circuit which is a wholly sealed and closed system - the water that leaked is used for creating the steam that powers the turbines, and was fully contained in a tank included in the system for exactly this kind of eventuality. As I noted in the other post, no radiation increase was noted in any of the areas.

The current reactor at Krško is a standard Westinghouse PWR design, with all the appropriate safety features for that design - definitely not a potential Chernobyl, not that that will stop the greens from painting this incident as a prelude for a Chernobyl catastrophe.

[Phantasee]

Holy Hell, who cites Greenpeace as expert on anything, to say nothing of nuclear reactors?

I'm sure they're the go-to guys if you want to learn about dropping from the roof in a harness during a speech by the Premier of Alberta, or maybe sailing a ship through a nuclear testing area.