• AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The part that I’m amazed by is that no civilian seems to know about the TVA meltdown. It’s the only full meltdown we ever had, and the Army Corps of Engineers lost all access to nuclear power because of that incident, as they intentionally melted it down to test China Syndrome. This was in the 50s. They did build the thing inside of a mountain to contain all the radiation, but had the physicist that came up with China Syndrome been right, that wouldn’t have really mattered. They also could have just done the math to figure out that, yet again, the physicist in question understood physics just fine, but lacked in mathematics.

    Chernobyl and Fukushima were chemical explosions. Three Mile Island didn’t get to the meltdown stage, just got dangerously close. Seems that running nuclear power as a for profit venture isn’t a good idea.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      i’ve never heard of it, i would assume it isn’t out there. Technically there is one other meltdown we had though, the SL-1 reactor, killed three people. Caused a bit of a mess, wasn’t super significant though.

      Was that a naval/sub reactor? Or was this something else?

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          ye, i was mostly mentioning it because it is technically another true meltdown of a reactor within the US.

          Naval sub reactors i know have a spotless record, across the aisle, amusingly. Ship reactors i would imagine are less of a problem, though im guessing those are just stolen from subs so equally spotless most likely.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It is my understanding that the Three Mile Island incident was a meltdown, that the fuel rods got hot enough to melt themselves and pool in the bottom of the reactor vessel but did not escape containment, unlike Chernobyl whose reactor core is currently a big lump in a sub-basement.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        TVA meltdown

        Ok so TMI, is actually a cumulation of three primary factors, none of which should’ve happened.

        The first was that they had bad/broken gauges and equipment that was hard to read, meaning they didn’t know the state of the reactor exactly like they should have been able to.

        Second, they had the auxiliary cooling pumps shutdown for maintenance. Now normally this wouldn’t be a huge problem if you’re following procedure, as procedure dictates (this was also the law btw) that when your reactor core is running, the auxiliary cooling lines need to be active.

        And third, the reactor core was operated under only the primary water feed lines. I.E. power generating feed water. Which as i said is not allowed.

        Once they had a crew change, the new crew immediately realized everything had melted down, and called for shutdown. Only took like 8 hours or something.

        Chernobyl was a little more complicated, because chernobyl wasn’t designed with a PCV (primary containment vessel), technically it had a secondary containment, which would be the building around it, but obviously that didn’t help. It was theorized and believed by the engineers (and the operators, ignoring a certain condition where this wouldn’t be true, which nobody knew about) that it was impossible for the plant to have a meltdown, primarily due to the fact that it was such a spread out core, making it react slower to immediate changes in the power production.

        However, during the day when this happened, (i wont go into all the detail because i will be here for hours otherwise.) the plant was in a xenon well, meaning that it was able to produce virtually zero fission (xenon absorbs neutrons) and the operators didn’t realize it, so they pulled out nearly all of the control rods trying to bring it back up (for a loss of power test) only to then have all the xenon start decaying at about that period of time, which meant the power level started to aggressively increase, and since there were no control rods, it sort of hit a runaway condition. Leading to the entire plant fucking exploding, due to a steam explosion specifically. This one was a lot more like a steam boiler explosion in a locomotive than a nuclear explosion or even hydrogen explosion (though that could’ve been the second explosion that happened)

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Chernobyl is a big lump in a sub basement, but that was still the result of a chemical explosion, not a meltdown. My point was that the only meltdown incidents have been caused by the US.

        TMI is a bit of a sticky wicket, because as you say the roda did melt, but we got it back under control before abything more than some steam escaped containment.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          so technically, it wasn’t a chemical explosion at chernobyl, it was a steam explosion, followed by a possible hydrogen explosion, though that would have been due to chemical reactions ultimately iirc.

          Also technically, chernobyl is a meltdown incident, meltdown is described as “severe core damage” And considering that core no 4 no longer fucking exists, i think it’s fair to call it a meltdown incident.

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            You can have severe core damage without any nuclear reactions. A meltdown is severe core damage caused by a nuclear reaction that got out of control. Severe core damage here means that radioactive material or fissile material escaped the containment of the core.

            There aren’t “steam explosions” in physics. There are chemical reactions that cause an explosion, pressure buildups that cause an explosion, and nuclear explosions.

            The steam was a pressure buildup that caused the incident resulting in an initial pressure explosion. The thing that “melted” the core of Chernobyl was the hydrogen exploding, hence a chemical explosion. Had it been a nuclear event that melted that core, neither Kiev nor Moscow would be inhabitable. The capital of Russia would be St. Petersburg, and Ukraine wouldn’t exist, as well as several other Soviet Oblasts in the area.

            Fucking with the literal power of atoms, in a mostly controlled environment, is the closest we’ve ever come to the Icarus myth. I’m fairly certain that fusion power, should it ever come out of the theoretical stage, won’t be nearly as dangerous as fucking around with fission the way that we currently do.