As a fountain of oil spills into the Gulf of Mexico, confirming the worst fears of opponents to Obama’s drilling decision, nuclear energy proponents have been dealt an equally profound setback. In a report filed yesterday by a coalition of environmental groups, Vermont’s own Arnie Gundersen has revealed fatal design flaws in the new Westinghouse AP 1000 reactor that was expected to drive a new generation of power plants. The reactor still has not received approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but it was believed to represent significant advances in safety over existing designs.
At issue in the new design is the relationship between the free-standing interior steel vessel and its exterior concrete containment structure, which was intended to represent an improved cooling system. Gunderson’s report details how undetected deterioration of the unsupported inner chamber could result in a catastrophe ten times worse than what might occur with the reactors currently in service. The New York Times shares the story and includes Gunderson’s illustrations of how such an accident might play out in the new reactor.
Well-respected in Vermont by the environmental community, Maggie and Arnie Gundersen’s testimony regarding the re-licensing of Vermont Yankee has been central to the effort to shut-down the 40-year old reactor before its many structural failures finally amount to something truly catastrophic. A press release from their consulting firm, Fairwinds Associates, explains the Westinghouse reactor findings in detail.
I think “containment” is the wrong word. Looks like “concentrator” is a better word. A containment vessel would keep things in if something bad happened, not act as an accelerator. Even gas pipelines have a downward-pointing U joint at the emergency pressure vents – to prevent the chimney effect from turning a simple leak into a 50 ft tall flaming plume.
Sure, the inner steel on the new plant design will be thicker than the current designs, but that doesn’t mean it will be (a) flawless or (b) immune to the laws of physics.
The Titanic was believed to be un-sinkable, because of the great strength of the 1″ steel used, but guess what? There is always a flaw, somewhere – in the case of the titanic, it was in the rivets. What will be the flaw in this style reactor dome?
According to this Wall Street Journal article:
nuclear remains the greenest, safest energy option, right?
And, why bother to build new ones, if they’re going to be unsafe? Just keep using the old ones – they’re already unsafe, and they’re paid for!