A Designers View of Nuclear Energy - Department of Materials ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$Writing in LaTeX under Windows or Linux$

Fukushima 1 IncidentQuake OccursFriday11 Mar 2.46pmAll threeoperatingReactors units1/2/3 shutdownSuccessful shutdownLoss of gridpowerTsunamiarrives11 Mar 3.45pmDieselsproviding powerSwamped by>7m waveNo significantelectrical powerCore HeatDamageReactorpressureincrease dueto decay heatEnergyrelieveddischarge todry wellRestoring watersupplies12 Mar 0000amLack of reactormake-up leadsto falling waterlevelsTemp powersuppliesPart of coreuncoveredDecay heat raisefuel temp above700cSteam-Zircalloyreaction producehydrogen -some coredamageHydrogenExplosion12 Mar 4.17pmDry well pressureincrease above4bar (60psi)Concern aboutdry well rupture –decision to ventdry well. Coolingby fire sprayusing sea waterRelease ofsteam, hydrogen& some fissionproducts (I, Cs)radiation levelsEvac orderedRadiationRelease12 Mar 4.17pmRelease ofhydrogen led toexplosion –spark + airDamage tooutercontainmentbuilding but notdry well orreactor vesselRadiation levelraised to 1000μSv for shortperiod - fallingto
Fukushima 2• Similar sequence of events to unit 1 until Monday and was of less concern than units 1/3 –unit being cooled by external fire pump;• On Sunday unit 2 viewed as under control with 3m of water over the core;• At some time its fire pump either ran out of fuel, or failed in some other way;• Monday 14 Mar:ooRising pressure in unit 2 lead to concerns about extended uncovering of core and loss of fuelcooling -> about larger release of radiation – Xenon & Krypton gases, plus Iodine & Caesium;Extension of the site exclusion zone.• Tuesday 15 Mar 6.10amooExplosion thought to failure of dry well containment vessel due to high steam pressure;Larger rise in radiation levels up to 8000μSV/hr rapidly falling to about 2000 μSV/hr – hazardto health for workers on site;• Also, confusion about a fire at unit 4, which was already shut down – fire caused byearthquake – fire now out - may have also led to radiation hazard from spent fuel at site??17
Page 1 and 2: A Designers View ofNuclear EnergyTo
Page 3 and 4: The First Nuclear Reactor• Enrico
Page 5 and 6: Neutron Fission Cycle100 fissionsn
Page 7 and 8: Pressurised Water ReactorPWR overvi
Page 9 and 10: Some Design & Safety Considerations
Page 11 and 12: Nuclear Safety approach affects the
Page 13 and 14: BWR Reactor Cooling & Containment
Page 15: Steam Venting & Hydrogen Explosion
Page 19 and 20: PWR Passive Safety• The cost and
Page 21 and 22: Fukushima et al - The Broader Issue
Page 23 and 24: MPhil in Nuclear Energy - Programme
Page 25 and 26: Engagement with IndustryWho?EDF Ene
Page 27: Endarmr2@cam.ac.uk2727

A Designers View of Nuclear Energy - Department of Materials ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?