Leave a comment

doco March 12 2011, 20:48:44 UTC
I'm finding it rather interesting they're apparently using a rather small containment building, judging from what I've seen in the pictures.

We've got a reactor of similar age (built 1971-1974, gone critical 1978) that uses a massive cupola instead, and that's the usual design around here. Then again, we normally don't suffer from earthquakes, although these cupolas are supposed to be holding off a fighter jet (which, apparently, they do not).

Anyhow. The most important news weekly here is already ushering in "the end of the atomic age" on its title, so I foresee interesting weeks ahead, at least from the political point of view.

Reply

doco March 12 2011, 21:20:43 UTC
(on second thought, I've just found out that the subtle difference between boiling water reactors and pressure water reactors seems to play a role in the design - most BWRs we have over here also have another block with a PWR, so the cupola design often is for the latter.)

Reply

wingywoof March 13 2011, 02:12:02 UTC
Ever heard of a Pebble Bed Reactor?

Reply

doco March 13 2011, 02:50:38 UTC
Oh yes. That was the Hamm-Uentrop accident, where one of the pebbles got stuck. :P

(Learned that from my physics teacher who, oddly enough, was a member of the Green party and staunchly anti-nuclear, yet organised a tour of the local plant for us in 10th form.)

Reply

wingywoof March 13 2011, 05:53:42 UTC
Wow. I had never heard of Hamm-Uentrop before today.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up