TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Feds find "substantial'' safety issue at SC nuclear plant

118 点作者 DocFeind超过 1 年前

12 条评论

omgJustTest超过 1 年前
Nuclear engineer here:<p>These plants need on-site diesel generators to provide site-power in case of loss of off-site power (grid failure). Here the operator had leaks in fuel lines that fed both the A and B generators. These are the only generators of on-site emergency power.<p>An operating reactor needs approximately 2-5 days to cool due to build-up of radioactive decay products in the core, which continue to generate heat even after the reactor has been fully shutdown (in the case of an emergency, a sudden shutdown of the reactor is called a SCRAM).<p>On-site power serves the primary purpose of driving core-recirculating coolant loops to control the core temperature. Chief metrics in reactor safety generally relate back to core-damage-frequency (CDF), because when one damages the fuel-casing or core, this is the most-likely precursor to releasing radioactivity. CDF determinations are almost directly linked to loss-of-coolant-accidents (LOCAs) which imply that one can no longer cool the nuclear fuel core or elements.<p>Total station blackout, which is a result of loss of off-site and on-site power, combined with a SCRAM is essentially the scenarios that led to Fukushima and Chernobyl disasters. The NRC will not treat this lightly.
评论 #37827098 未加载
评论 #37836004 未加载
Animats超过 1 年前
Found the NRC inspection reports leading up to this.[1]<p><i>Significance: P (pending)</i><p><i>Jun 30, 2023</i><p><i>Identified By: SR</i><p><i>Item Type: AV Apparent Violation (AV)</i><p><i>Failure to Identify and Correct a Condition Adverse to Quality Associated with the EDG Fuel Oil System</i><p><i>A self-revealed finding with significance to be determined (Pending) and associated AV of Title of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, &quot;Corrective Action,&quot; was identified when the licensee failed to identify and correct a condition adverse to quality for the EDG fuel oil system that left the system vulnerable to premature piping cracks and eventually resulted in the failure of the ‘A’ EDG during testing on November 2, 2022. Specifically, inspectors determined that, based on the failure history of the EDGs and the licensee’s documented conclusions that attributed pipe cracks to prior maintenance events, the licensee had sufficient information to identify the existence of a condition adverse to quality related to the design of the EDG fuel oil system. This condition caused threaded fuel oil piping connections to be vulnerable to maintenance activities that over torqued, strained, or impacted the piping. Despite the challenge to maintain leak-tight connections and repeat occurrences of cracked piping, no significant changes were made to maintenance practices, procedures or system design, and the licensee continued to reactively monitor for leakage even after vulnerabilities were identified.</i><p>Previous report:<p><i>Significance: W (white)</i><p><i>Mar 31, 2022</i><p><i>Identified By: NRCI</i><p><i>Item Type: NOV Notice of Violation (NOV)</i><p><i>Failure to Correct Condition Adverse to Quality Resulting in Inoperable Emergency Diesel Generator</i><p><i>An NRC-identified apparent violation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, was identified for the licensee failing to correct a condition adverse to quality resulting in the inoperability of the &#x27;B&#x27; emergency diesel generator (EDG). Specifically, there were indications of erratic governor performance following the January 2022 maintenance package that were identified during testing January 16, 2022. The governor performance was also erratic during the February 9, 2022, surveillance test, after which the licensee declared the EDG inoperable. As a result of this condition, the ‘B’ EDG was inoperable for a time in excess of its technical specification (TS) allowed outage time.</i><p>The scale is Green, White, Yellow, Red. Normal is green. This problem reached White in March 2022, and the June 2023 problem shows as Pending, which means the NRC had not assigned a color level yet. Now they have escalated that to Yellow, according to the press coverage. Which is a good move, considering that troubles have been observed in both the A and B emergency generator systems. Anyone know if they have more than two emergency generators? Two is kind of low.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nrc.gov&#x2F;docs&#x2F;ML2322&#x2F;ML23223A006.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nrc.gov&#x2F;docs&#x2F;ML2322&#x2F;ML23223A006.pdf</a>
kogus超过 1 年前
The V.C. Sumner site has been a multi-decade slow motion financial and management catastrophe on many fronts[1][2][3]. It does not surprise me that the rot that apparently existed (and maybe still exists) at the top has filtered down into operational and maintenance issues.<p>One lesson for me is that excellence is a symptom of a healthy organization, not the other way around.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.chooseenergy.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;article&#x2F;failed-v-c-summer-nuclear-project-timeline&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.chooseenergy.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;article&#x2F;failed-v-c-summer-...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wsj.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;south-carolina-utility-agrees-to-137-5-million-settlement-to-resolve-fraud-charges-11607037368" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wsj.com&#x2F;articles&#x2F;south-carolina-utility-agrees-t...</a><p>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;theintercept.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;02&#x2F;06&#x2F;south-caroline-green-new-deal-south-carolina-nuclear-energy&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;theintercept.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;02&#x2F;06&#x2F;south-caroline-green-new...</a>
nightpool超过 1 年前
The problems being related to the backup generators make me think about the current Freefall arc (written by a nuclear engineer, even), which focuses in part on a unethical space station manager who is skimping on maintenance regimes to create a temporary life-support failure (requiring the use of backup generators) that would trigger the automatic reallocation of unused manufacturing robots from a nearby in-orbit factory to bolster his workforce and lower his labor costs (storyline starting around ... here <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;freefall.purrsia.com&#x2F;ff3800&#x2F;fc03702.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;freefall.purrsia.com&#x2F;ff3800&#x2F;fc03702.htm</a>, although prior to that are a few fun strips about procurement bureaucracy)
shadowgovt超过 1 年前
The good news is that the yellow card is for not resolving issues with the backup diesel power system, not anything to do with the reactor vessel or primary loop.<p>This is the right abundance of caution for the NRC to use (after all, that kind of reactor can melt down if power completely fails and cannot be maintained to sink heat), but it should be an easy fix. If anything, the yellow card was given for how long Dominion&#x27;s been letting itself sit on an easy fix.<p>(On the other hand, the justifiably-paranoid might ask what else is wrong if they&#x27;ve let a maintenance issue this relatively unimportant slide...)
评论 #37825042 未加载
评论 #37824433 未加载
eatonphil超过 1 年前
Reminds me a little bit of what happened in Ohio.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Ohio_nuclear_bribery_scandal" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Ohio_nuclear_bribery_scandal</a>
mrlonglong超过 1 年前
Management assholes not spending the money to fix it properly, they&#x27;d rather take the profits instead. This is a disease that should be eradicated with jail and massive fines.
amadeuspagel超过 1 年前
Nuclear power should be run by the state, like in France.
评论 #37827163 未加载
评论 #37826079 未加载
BeastMachine超过 1 年前
I&#x27;m an advocate for nuclear power but it seems ridiculous that this warning was given 20 years after the initial find.<p>I understand that nuclear facilities are not like regular buildings and require more logistics for repairs but there&#x27;s no way it would require 20 years.
评论 #37823449 未加载
评论 #37824803 未加载
评论 #37823573 未加载
hanniabu超过 1 年前
This is why many, including myself, are against nuclear power.<p>They have an engineered lifespan and things start falling apart and becoming dangerous when you exceed that. Many should never have been extended. They&#x27;ve had to change safety tests and infrastructure tests so the order plans would pass inspection.<p>This has always been my concern with nuclear. Yes we can make it safe, but the human greed factor is always the weak point. Regulations weakened, automated systems bypassed, skimping on design decisions, etc.<p>This first link makes me absolutely furious. There&#x27;s too much to quote from here, but here&#x27;s just one excerpt. The post has numerous examples of very concerning issues.<p>&gt; When valves leaked, more leakage was allowed — up to 20 times the original limit. When rampant cracking caused radioactive leaks from steam generator tubing, an easier test of the tubes was devised, so plants could meet standards.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nbcnews.com&#x2F;id&#x2F;wbna43455859" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nbcnews.com&#x2F;id&#x2F;wbna43455859</a><p>&gt; The proposal comes as most of the nation’s nuclear power plants, which were designed and built in the 1960s or 1970s, are reaching the end of their original 40- to 50-year operating licenses. Many plant operators have sought licenses to extend the operating life of their plants past the original deadlines, even as experts have warned that aging plants come with heightened concerns about safety.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;07&#x2F;17&#x2F;climate&#x2F;nrc-nuclear-inspection-weakening.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;07&#x2F;17&#x2F;climate&#x2F;nrc-nuclear-inspe...</a><p>&gt; The nuclear industry is also pushing the NRC to cut down on safety inspections and rely instead on plants to police themselves. The NRC “is listening” to this advice, the Associated Press reported last month. “Annie Caputo, a former nuclear-energy lobbyist now serving as one of four board members appointed or reappointed by President Donald Trump, told an industry meeting this week that she was ‘open to self-assessments’ by nuclear plant operators, who are proposing that self-reporting by operators take the place of some NRC inspections.”<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;newrepublic.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;153465&#x2F;its-not-just-pork-trump-also-letting-nuclear-plants-regulate-safety" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;newrepublic.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;153465&#x2F;its-not-just-pork-tru...</a>
评论 #37824728 未加载
评论 #37824954 未加载
评论 #37824076 未加载
评论 #37823634 未加载
评论 #37823578 未加载
londons_explore超过 1 年前
Time to consult Homer Simpson? His expertise can be had for the low low cost of a few doughnuts.
fluxem超过 1 年前
Good news is that nuclear energy is safe and has zero long lasting ecological effects! Also management and governments are always competent. Otherwise, we would be in big, big trouble
评论 #37823831 未加载
评论 #37824623 未加载