Understanding Nuclear Power Plants: Total Station Blackout
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 01. 2013
- This CNSC video shows the progression of an accident scenario involving a total station blackout at a Canadian #nuclear power plant. It describes multiple #safety system layers and highlights that, even during an extremely severe accident, nuclear reactors in Canada will safely shut down and contain #radioactivity.
- Věda a technologie
Legend says that someone is still supplying water to the Calandria using emergency fire trucks to stop the accident
but what if the emergency fire trucks that supply water to the calandria fail too?
@@Sharpless2 it explode,simple
I need to get myself an emergency Generator or a Firetruck. These things can solve any problem
I see canada is low key throwing shade at japan
Yes. Yes we are. CANDU reactors are fucking awesome and we have every right to be proud of them...
...especially when Japan is still running reactors that they _specifically chose over CANDU reactor designs because they were American,_ when those designs even at the time were known by GE to be pretty awful and wouldn't build them themselves in the US.
@@liesdamnlies3372 You saw what happened at Fukushima! Loss of power=loss of coolant flow, and there are no passive systems. Big problem.
2:18 ExTrEmLy UnLiKlY!!!!
@@liesdamnlies3372 American is best build ;)
@@kushpaladin *oldest
FTFY ;)
6:33 just get the mental image of a bunch of panicked dudes with buckets running back and forth from the bathroom sinks with buckets muttering"shitshitshitshitshitshit"
Now I've got this image too lmao
YOU ARE IDIOT
Nice. hehehe
That’s not going to correctly it
Yeah pretty much lmao
i know shes giving this presentation like shes talking to a 10 year old, but still. its a good run through of their emergency procedures. and its nice to know they have multiple layers of protection that are not only compliant, but exceed the lawful requirements.
This is how you win public confidence. a detailed plan carefully made by leading experts, explained transparently.
Wish more companies would realise this instead of throwing jargon and big numbers out to confuse people before saying " its ok, we know what we are doing, dont sweat it."
It doesn’t matter, a major accident is always a possibility, no mater what, and how much is in place.
We get it, putting water into the calandria using firetrucks or pumps will stop the accident
i love how you just replyed that to every comment in this video
yep
But the accident would totally keep going because they forgot how to pump water in.
But won't the heat keep evapourating the water you pump in and produce radiated steam? How to get rid of it?
LMAOOO
If you have a bad accident, simply supply water with emergency equipment such as fire trucks.
yes yes
They did that at Fukushima and it caused the cores to melt further
But never forget that supplying water with emergency equipment such as fire trucks stops the accident. It's very important to remember that supplying water with emergency equipment such as fire trucks stops the accident. But in case the accident is not stopped, you can always supply water with emergency equipment, such as fire trucks. That stops the accident.
Mgtow-M3 Modern Masculine Men
How? Those isotopes are contained within the fuel rods unless the cladding has a hole, which is rare.
that's because the fukushima reactor had a different set of things that had happened uncontrollably before they started spraying water on it, the point of this reactor is that the states of a meltdown are very controlled and relatively easy to remedy. In the fukushima meltdown, there was a large hydrogen explosion before emergency personnel were able to intervene. That's the main 'final blow' to a lot of these meltdowns. If there is no hydrogen explosion, the situation is under much more control because the vessels can do what they're designed to do, because all they have to do is soak up heat. But once you apply an explosion from large amounts of hydrogen that's already under high pressure BEFORE the explosion, then things go to hell. That's the reason their system that supposedly converts hydrogen to water is there, to prevent a hydrogen explosion, if there is no explosion then their safeguards can continue to operate as intended, and water can be added to supplement that, as all their safeguards are just trying to reduce pressure of hydrogen, and add coolant.
I'm a Canadian who was brought here by a single line in an article that said my country's reactors were the polar opposite of Chernobyl. I couldn't believe it until I saw the (8? 10?) levels of safety redundancy built into our reactors. It's arrogant to say there could never be a disaster even with the best standards. But I would say with Canada's from all the research I've done it would be a statistical anomaly to have a failure.
The positive void coefficient aspect of the CANDU reactors are almost the same as RBMK-s from Chernobyl. Funny to say polar opposite with the same and not so safe characteristic. Also the online refueling with robots and natural uranium as fuel also similar to the RBMK-s. CANDU is the well made RBMK. Not the polar opposite.
@@namelesske For the sake of semantics - RBMKs used slightly enriched Uranium Dioxide fuel (~2% U235) wheras CANDUs use completely unenriched Uranium Dioxide (~0.7% U235) which is why heavy water (D2O) is required for both the moderator and coolant.
Any reactor that uses light or heavy water (BWR, PWR, CANDUs, etc) are subject to positive void coefficients - it is unavoidable as the main heat transport system cannot reasonably be pressurized to the point where voids don't form at the temperature which they operate at (for context, CANDUs MHTS is pressurized to ~11MPa, on average across the system). (One of) the issue(s) with the RBMK was the insanely large reactor core which made transients (areas of increased fission due to high neutron density in a region, and one of the causes of voids forming in the core) common and difficult to deal with. CANDU reactors mitigate this by inserting adjuster rods (not the same as control rods) as well as tanks of light water where the water level varies based on the neturon flux of that area - these act as neutron absorbers and are littered throughout the reactor core. This, in turn, reduces neutron flux in a region and mitigates the formation of voids. And for additional context, at 80%-100% full operational power there will be a void of 2% (2% of the volume being steam, 98% being D2O) that forms on the outlet side of the heat transport system. This is closely monitored and controlled.
Of course it is plausible to draw connections between CANDU and RBMK reactors, they are, at their core, similar instruments. But there are truthfully very few major similarities between the two reactor types. A few examples of which are (CANDU vs RBMK): Heavy water vs Graphite moderator, vertical fuel rods vs horizontal, massive containment structure around the reactor vs virtually no containment structure. All these things aside the main difference lies in the incredible amount of safety systems in place within CANDUs.
@@Jvdg3m3nt BWRs and PWRs have a negative void coefficient because the moderator acts as the coolant, so when a void forms in the moderator, locally the fuel is under-moderated and the chain reaction slows down. Positive void coefficients happen when the moderator is different from the coolant and the coolant acts like a neutron absorber, like light water in both CANDU and RBMK; when the void forms, locally there's a reduction in neutron absorption but not in neutron moderation, so the chain reaction increases.
@@Z80Fan A fair point, although inherently it would become slightly under-moderated as well since the coolant does act to slightly moderate neutrons (both the coolant and moderator in CANDUs are heavy water). Should be noted that the 2% void coeff is built into the design of CANDU reactors in order to maximize heat transfer to the secondary side. My main point was the degree of independent and redundant safety systems built into CANDUs draws no comparison to the RMBKs
@@Jvdg3m3nt I was under the impression that CANDU used light water for coolant. My bad.
The CANDU reactors are really safe design, the great example for all anti - nuclear activists. The nuclear power plants are clean, green and safe energy source also for the future. I live in the Czech republic, the nuclear power friendly state with 6 units in 2 stations: The Temelin NPP and Dukovany NPp. The reactors are PWr (VVER type), watter cooled, watter moderated reactor equiped with all safety features, so Czech power stations are inherently safe energy source. I am proud to live in our amazing, nice pro - nuclear country. I wish you all the best and stay healthy...
IF ONLY IDIOTS DID NOT RULE
meanwhile :
anti nuclear activists :
👉😑👈
Why some countries keep the nuclear plant functionality secret. I am feeling very confident in nuclear power generation after watching Canadian Nuclear Safety commission videos.
They have all the designs online too. It's pretty crazy to think they're okay for everyone knowing what they are doing because of how safe it really is.
Civilian reactors have public documentation, you just need to know where to find the safety report
2:51 *laughing in AZ-5 that took 20 seconds*
*Cries in Soviet*
It is clear that Nokia 3310 Nuclear reactors would be the best
WHAT CANDU IS CANDU
Damn
Canada are really nice to their power plants as well now
A very informative video and the planning for the worse left me impressed. Canada you are doing good
I don't live in Canada, but these videos were made so well I'm watching them religiously.
I only ended up finding them now, but I'm indeed binge watching them. No doubt it'll be on Netflix soon enough.
This is one of the things they got wrong at Fukushima, the backup generators were in the basement. They should have been behind the plant, further up the hill at a higher elevation.
That's the problem with life, Hindsight is a wonderful educator, but no use at the time you need the ideas. The shuttle was a fine example.... after Columbia every shuttle got a once over by the ISS to check for damage, didn't help the Columbia crew though.
straight fire content as always
Once again, supplying water to the Calandria would prevent the accident
I just can hear Jager (from rainbow 6 siege) saying "You Can Stop Worrying About nuclear accidents now"
Excellent video.
Well this is reassuring: the system is very clearly thought out to cover even extremely unlikely eventualities.
I was glad to see Canada has approved the building of a Gen 4 reactor pilot plant. Nuclear is the future if you want the lowest pollution and 24/7/365 reliability
"Can u make a nuclear reactor?" " CANDU" see what I did therr
Mix a bunch of heavy water with uranium nitrate in a steel container 1-2m in diameter.
@@leerman22 Interesting reply.
This seems like a good and safe system
If the fuel did melt all the way down to the thick concrete slab underneath, is there any chance it could continue to melt through that and down into the ground? How long would it take for the melted fuel to cool on its own? Would you have to wait for it to cool before you could begin cleaning it up? Or once power is restored could you flood the building and keep water circulating until it's cooled enough to be disposed of properly?
These videos are great! Thank you for posting them! I'd love to work in a nuclear power plant one day.
+Shawn Thompson Just to add to what cnscccsn already said:
At Chernobyl, the melted fuel (the "elephant's foot", I encourage you to check it out) only pierced a few cm into the concrete in the building foundation, so we have no reason to believe it would melt into the earth very far, even if it were dumped on bare soil at peak operating temperature (although I wouldn't recommend trying it!). But if it somehow did melt arbitrarily far into the Earth, once it hits ground water it would shoot a slurry of radioactive mud high into the air like a geyser in a (theoretical) phenomenon known as the China Syndrome.
Thanks for your interest in Nuclear Power!
Shawn Thompson Supplying water to the calandria would prevent an accident
im surprised you wouldnt have a ginormous battery bank to power the water pumps just incase the worst was to happen and all the generators quit
it might buy you another few days before losing the core
or perhaps cover the roof with solar panels and use the power from those to cool the reactor during the day and to recharge said battery bank
fi you are going to spend $200 million on a nuclear reactor you might as well drop another $2 million on solar panels and batteries to protect your investment if all other power sources fail
CANDU should have wolfranium floor/calandria. Tungsten is the only corium-resistant material on Earth! It's melting point is around 3500 degree when corium reach max 3100. Wolfranium as heavy metal have excellent heat conduction!
If Fukushima have tungsten shield, it corium wouldn't melt through the vessel.
the battery banks only power instruments
did YOU watch the video?
I got to say, you people really figured everything out. Glad to see how Nuclear power plants work and all those insane worst scenario safety system step in in all events even in events which, like you said, would probably never (hopefully) happen. I really hope other countries who use nuclear power plants look to you people.
The Marshmellow supplying water to the calandria would prevent the accident
We (Canada) really, _really_ took the lessons learned at NRX to heart and got super-serious, even almost paranoid, about reactor safety. NRX was a small research reactor in the 50s which had an accident; the entire thing started with human error and was worsened by human error, and that lesson (and others) became central to our reactor designs. Automatic safety systems that do not rely on any human input were simply a given after that (and was/is why an incident like Chernobyl simply cannot happen, amongst other reasons).
Here's some experts going into gritty details if your curious. I find nuclear plant safety fascinating.
czcams.com/video/cf9G8vddUjk/video.html
czcams.com/video/ryI4TTaA7qM/video.html
Nice to know how to fix it if we ever have a problem
GOOD VIDEO THANKYOU!
Now I notice that Canada haven’t had a bad nuclear accident in who knows how long
They had some pretty bad accidents on the prototypes for this reactor in the 50s
@@samalbury9183 I think that is the case, but we were also some of the earliest adopters of nuclear reactors.
6:26 Are the spent fuel cooling system connected to the standby & emergency generator? Is there a gravity cooling system installed? This was a major concern in Japan as if these fuel rod catches fire, the results is much worst then a core melt down.
Yes. Anything associated with safety is connected to the power distribution buses that can be powered from standby generators, emergency power generators, and portable diesel generators.
There are several gravity supply systems that supply water to the boilers, including the emergency storage water tank, the steam generator emergency cooling system and the deaerator feedwater tank. There's also external headers that can use firetrucks and portable pumps to drive water into the feedwater systems to keep the boilers full.
The spent fuel is quite content to sit unattended for weeks. If the water levels in the spent fuel pool drops (somehow) it can be replenished any number of ways throughout an accident response.
Can you please explain what went wrong with the Maple reactors? Information on it is hard to come by. I would love a detailed explanation that is still understandable to the lay man of what went wrong and why apparently no one can figure out why it went wrong.
Okay I did, thank you.
YetiOnCocaine you can supply water to the calandria to prevent the accident
My understanding of CANDU is that if the water inside the calandria boils off, the reaction would stop anyways since the water is the moderator? I was under the impression that that was one of the biggest advantages, that it's literally not possible for it to melt down due to passive effects
Wow, i didn't realise there were sp many layers of protection.
what is looping system in nuclear power plant? Kindly Reply as soon as possible
TYVM.
Use the residual decay heat to drive sterling engine water pump(s)
The problem is the lack of said fluid
@@user-vv7qp5nm4f the Great lakes have a tiny amount of water that you might be able to pump from
What happened to Chalk River?
Canada went through so many safety measures to ensure the reactor doesn't melt, like it is like there is too many systems.
Legend is there's a person called Kyle Hill on youtube who inspired a new generation of nuclear engineers.
After pressure is reduced, how many times can the vacuum building be used?
What are the "special devices that can reduce the risk of hydrogen explosion"?
Can these compensate for the massive amount of zircalloys in the reactor?
The special devices just catalyze the hydrogen into something else that is rather less prone to violent explosions...I forget what. Brain is foggy today.
So how many of these safety systems have ever been used in emergency conditions? I other words have we ever had minor medium or major nuclear issues in Canada or in Canadian built reactors? Also, how do our reactors compare to usa or user type reactors as far as safety systems?
As far as I'm aware, never. They have been tested, and tested, and had redundancies piled on them. e.g. the automatic shut-off systems are controlled by independent monitoring systems running on voting logic (three systems, where two must agree on the action to be taken; similar systems are used in other safety-critical applications like aircraft or train control systems).
There have been two accidents in Canada. The first was at a research reactor, NRX, in the 50s. All the lessons from that were taken quite seriously and incorporated into all future designs (the automated nature of CANDU reactors being the most obvious; human error was perhaps the most significant factor in the NRX accident). The other was, I would say, minor in comparison, where at NRU a fuel rod caught fire while being removed from the reactor, but it was fairly well contained.
Canada's been a world leader in nuclear power, especially safety, since the very inception of the field. I just wish of my fellow citizens were less paranoid about nuclear power so they could realize that (a) we're doing it right, and (b) we can be very proud of our accomplishments in this sector.
As for the US...our reactor designs are fundamentally different so that's a tough comparison. In some ways I would say that the US has been far more lax in their regulations, and more stubborn. They seem pretty bent on only using LWR designs.
Almost never, but they're drastically tested on a regular bases.
Now this is the type of training I’d sit through on the job
That is a good video about the safety features when an powerloss accours. But just in case, there is an planecrash maybe an A-330 or an earthquake. Can the containment withstand such an accident? and what happen when the reactorbuilding is colapsing? I think than a highly contamination of the enviroment accours.
Thank you for your answer.
You can supply water to the calandria to prevent accidents.
dddaammmnnn, you guys are really ready for anything! Thx for keeping us safe. Oh and if everything else fail, I will get my garden hose to supply water to the calandria to prevent accident....but seriously, at that point I think we have definitely bigger problems.
czcams.com/video/RZjhxuhTmGk/video.html Planes have always been an obvious hazard, and were planned for in the earliest days of nuclear power.
The newest reactors deigned after 9/11 "EPR" and "AP1000" have double wall containment structures with a gap between them, just to be extra paranoid. A plane would splatter like a bug, and missiles would need to hit the exact same spot at least twice. Even then the safeties would have a good chance of recovering.
I have a question. On a typical operating day, how much Radiation escapes the containment building? I know reactors are very safe but some radiation must escape? is it so low its unmeasurable?
I believe coal plants actually release more radioactive material per day than properly functioning nuclear reactors do.
compwiz00 To elaborate on this, I've heard that this is because of small amounts of uranium in coal.
Trevor Lawrence supplying water to the calandria would prevent the accident
Just supply water to the coal, that will stop the accident...
Trevor Lawrence Such a small amount that even if you stood right in that spot for 10 years you'd still get far less radiation exposure than you do from a single international airline flight.
Is there anyway to stop the accident by adding water to the calandria? Say using fire trucks?
Hello Evan, Multiple means of adding water to the reactor have been added or are in the process of being added. These are designed to prevent significant core damage. The added means also includes the use standard fire truck connections.
@@cnscccsn Also, the low pressure of the moderator, like helps with water addition in the case of CANDU reactors. I believe that relieving the high pressure in the core at Fukushima to allow water addition helped cause the hydrogen explosion?
Hi there, about how much radiation could one expect to be released into the environment in a controlled venting situation? As in, at the top of the vent, what is the level of radiation and amount of material being released? Thanks.
Yeah, and I would like them to elaborate how the controlled venting of radioactive steam is actually achieved...... rather than just take their word for it.... I like the video and the precautions, but some of it still comes off as shady with the lack of information they give in certain aspects.
Precisely @@MrKirk94 and Benjamin.
Depends on how bad the accident is. The answer is always as little as possible.
If there's an over pressure in the containment building a controlled venting of SOME material is done to prevent a breach which will uncontrollably vent ALL of the radioactive material. It's a last case 'lesser evil' solution. Most simulated models put it days after a worst case accident so in addition to being limited they try to time them with evacuations and weather patterns.
Did Canada make a bid for the Hinkley Point C project in Britain? Feels like this design would have been better than the EDF PWR design.
CANDU technology was sold off to SNC; it has not been widely licensed, nor is it likely to be due to cost of build.
Might wanna put another thick concrete slab under the first two.
They dont look like lasting very long
Only 5 Nuclear Reactors running in Canada? Canada needs more than that for their energy needs.
Actually, now it's 4. Gentilly-2 has been shut down since the video was published in 2013.
We can argue that the 4th backup system (portable) is kind of overkill and does not eliminate the risks all that much. The main two problems with nuclear safety in my point of view is that : 1) The main safety backups are fuel based and rely on the accessibility of the ressource for a prolonged period of time in case of a huge disaster (road blocked = no fuel in and no portable system can come in except by air delivery if even possible) 2) It is pre-assumed that the reactor will be restarted which is not necessarily desirable in case of a prolonged societal disaster in which the grid would be off for many months or years.
To me, considering the gravity of the possible impact: a safe nuclear plant would be automatic (or with minimal human intervention), grid independant and permanant shut down without melt down for neither the rod pool nor the reactor.
That being mentioned, I understand that the fact that CANDU can generate their own electricity from within the plant with one reactor only, which mitigate enormously the risk compared to other existing designs. But nonetheless, CANDU plants are not capable of permanant auto shut down without the grid.
For how long can you run your cooling pumps with the fuel that is present on site ?
"To me, considering the gravity of the possible impact: a safe nuclear plant would be automatic (or with minimal human intervention), grid independant and permanant shut down without melt down for neither the rod pool nor the reactor."
Then you're looking for molten-salt reactors, Terrestrial Energy's IMSR being one example that's being developed in Canada (quite a few companies establish themselves here instead of the US because of some absurdly restrictive regulations around reactor development).
Lets hope these technologies get installed and/or our grids get secured before for instance a major solar flare happens.
India has PHWRs based on the same CANDU design. Thanks, Canada!
BUT it's sad that Canada isn't building new reactors while India is building 15 new IPHWR-700.
India has only 5 PHWRs under construction and 10 that are "planned" but nuclear reactors plans in India are quite prone to being delayed or derailed like the 6 french reactors that got "approved" to be built in Jaitapur in 2009 but hasn't been built
Jaitapur power plant was a "White-Elephant", good that it's cancelled(unofficially). And for 10 planned reactors, site work has been started.
What if it is struck by an astroid?
If It was large enough to deal significant damage, you would be worring about the environment you are in.
The ending is really vague, which is odd because the rest of the video is so in-depth. In the unlikely scenario that the reactor fuel would melt, all you say is "the reactor building would continue to isolate the reactor from the environment and contain radioactivity." How? What's stopping the pressure from continuing to rise if no one can come to vent it? Wouldn't the pressure just keep rising until it explodes?
Also what's wrong with BWRs and PWRs?
So a large hazard controll for the nuclear industry is a diesel generator
Look to solve all problems supply water to the calandria and it will stop the accident
Should be noted that these safeties are added to plants with a design and concept from the 60s and 70s.
Would be nice to have a rough timetable of how long each step takes to know how much time there is
Goodmorning.. Could you
IdentifyWhat.. IS.. Critical.. Risk.of
Construction
Operation &Maintenance
Retirement
And.manage That.Risk?
Thankyou
Hello Anoo, Risk is managed at all parts of the nuclear power plant life cycle: design, procurement, construction, operations and maintenance. The risk of an NPP drops considerably once the fuel is removed as part of the preparations for decommissioning. Risk is managed by the CNSC requiring facilities to have a management system see REGDOC-2.1.1 that is focussed on safety. nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/acts-and-regulations/consultation/comment/regdoc2-1-1.cfm
So....what if there's nobody left to manually pump water into the fuel pool? Like during a war or disease outbreak?
War or disease, this scenario would define certain workers as essential. They (or replacements) would be available to maintain water supplies to the irradiated fuel bay. Any source of water will do. The provincial emergency operations centres (with federal support) are more than capable of providing portable pumps.
CANDU spent fuel bays tend to have lower heat demands due to the spent fuel being natural uranium rather than the enriched fuels of other designs.
Are these the 3rd gen reactors 100% safe?
If anybody selling you something, that is 100% safe, run away,... there is no such thing,.. we are just about 99,999999% save,.... every 9 at the end multiplying building cost exponentionaly.
For the record the nuclear reactor in Japan, had one of these safety backups, including the generators, the batteries, the water, condenser, even used the firetrucks and none of them failed to prevent the meltdown. There’s no additional safety procedures here which Fukushima did not have& try. It all comes down to training and proper EMERGENCY exercises. In absent of that, a meltdown is just as likely to happen here.
04:24 at Fukushima they lost all back-up power systems, because they were flooded.
These Canadian reactors are designed to still have emergency mechanisms that need no power
Well yes but no , some generators were fine but the swichgear was flooded
@@bryankambuno6996 The back-ups on a Candu were built at ground level looking at the video not installed in a basement built under normal sea level like at Fukushima.
What happens if the cooling pool becomes full due to adding water manually, to cool spent fuel?
Nothing, you'd want to keep the spent fuel pool full.
Stop adding water for a bit
Nobody:
Canadian reactors: Backup of a backup of a backup of a Backup of a backup of a backup
CANDU IS CANDU SAFE
Can you be more specific on:
* How hot is the fuel before the accident?
* What temperature is ideal of the fuel after the accident?
* The emergency power generators what do they run on?
* How thick is the containment building of the power generator?
* Once meltdown fuel would fall onto the concrete slab.. how thick is that concrete slab?
* The radiation that is released... how toxic is this?
One shall do so as requested.
* How hot is the fuel before the accident?
- Really hot
* What temperature is ideal of the fuel after the accident?
- Less hot
* The emergency power generators what do they run on?
- Diesel
* How thick is the containment building of the power generator?
- You mean the reactor?
* Once meltdown fuel would fall onto the concrete slab.. how thick is that concrete slab?
- Really thick
* The radiation that is released... how toxic is this?
- Depend how fast you run from the contaminated area
You have failed!
1. 260C but thats under extreme pressure to keep it like that.
2. 49C after is what they try to keep it at.
3. Jet Fuel, diesel and batteries. (4 jumbo jet props for the main backup)
4. Thick, like 1.8 meters thick.
5. It would land in the fueling duct, same 1.8 meter thick.
6. They filter it and can scrub 99.9 percent of radioactivity through it if they had to do it, but it would never get to that point.
what is really needed here is a contaminated-steam driven pump to pump cooling water if all generators fail and a meltdown in inevitable. I worked on a Navy ship with mostly all steam driven pumps, this would be possible and could be a self-sufficient last ditch system.
Just imagining that ironic steam safety system: Using the heat from the meltdown to drive a steam engine, to pump water onto the radioactive core. That is basically how a nuclear reactor works! So when a nuclear reactor catastrophically fails, it becomes a mini nuclear reactor
Molten salt reactors just does a SCRAM and drains the radioactive liquid fuel into safe cooling tanks with no continuous cooling necessary to prevent meltdown.
you want to put toilet water on it?
brawndo: its got electrolytes!!!
its what plants crave
Nice.
But, how is this CANDU type compared to VVER nuclear reactor regarding to safety?
While, the CANDU and VVER are very different designs, in practical terms, they are equivalent in terms of safety.
VVER is comparable to PWR,...
What happens if the core melts through the containment building and into the ground water?
Wont ever happen. Just like the elephant foot in Chernobyl is no longer melting anything because its concentrations of nuclear fuel are very low
You would probably have a major nuclear catastrophe on your hands. Probably a large part of North America would have to be evacuated
@@MusicGamesEverything Chernobyl had no containment at all and the elephant foot stopped. Why with all of the Candu precautions would it be worse? Also Candu uses natural uranium not highly enriched which means that after the heavy water is gone the nuclear reaction stops.
I live in Romania we have 5 nuclear reactors, those Candu ones, 2 out of 5 work, there have been incidents, the problem was malfunction of safety sistems
Hmmmm let see, Canada has the oldest Candu and the biggest working reactors in the world. Maybe Romania's problems were caused by people who maintained the units. ie: Romanians
Has anyone thought about getting fire trucks to pump water into the calandria yet? Just an idea
what happened if sea water level encrease for some catastrofic event...emergency power supply can be shut down by sea water?
That was pretty much a situation unique to Fukushima. Nearly every other reactor in the world is built on ground water can't reach and/or has a superb flood abatement design. Since Fukushima everyone's double checked their plans and made changes where a very few mistakes have been found.
Water ingress of all types is a well known issue and should have been easily spotted at Fukushima, it probably was in fact, but the regulators in Japan are extraordinary slow and largely toothless.
Now every reactor in Japan has a tsunami wall that can stop anything, high ground redundant power, waterproof electrical areas, passive controlled cooling reservoirs, etc. But they're closing the barn doors after the animals have run out.
I am thinking that putting a battery backup, and a generator backup system in a basement below ocean water level on the ocean front might not have been a brilliant engineering idea.
Isn’t the candu reaction or “calandra” a rbmk on it’s side
Rbmk is the reactor at Chernobyl
Not even close.
RMBK used enriched uranium as fuel, graphite blocks as moderator and a light water coolant. Also had a poor design on their control rods and active shut off rods (requiring power)
CANDU uses natural uranium fuel, D2O moderator and D2O coolant. Passive shut down systems not requiring power to activate.
The thing they do share is a positive void coefficient but the RMBK design is far worse for reactor criticality.
RBMK is really good reactor in his class. Never go accident until you start messing with him. Just keep the buffer inside.
If you shut-down water-feeding for BWR or PWR....both will explode from the pressure.
I know I was joking
@@user-zp2ek7kp8r Right on. :-). And that is funny...
I’m use to bwr and pwr so not use to this Canadian stuff
This video it feels like im preparing for my Minecraft RBMK reactor incase of an accident happen
What's in the gas that would get vented? Radioactive iodine? Cesium?
Hello Erika, The filter will capture greater than 99.9% of the iodine, cesium, and strontium. Noble gasses such as krypton and xenon cannot be filtered out. Tritium will be partially filtered out.
@@cnscccsn And aren't the radioactive noble gasses not that big of a deal anyways since they quickly disperse and can't bioaccumulate?
ok here is a question. when the core does melt and burns through the housing into the vault which is filled with 500000L of water wouldn't that cause a rapid condensation on contact with the molten core? rapid as in explosivly rapid?! wasn't that the fear they had in 86? the fuel burning through into a basement filled with water that was used to cool the whole thing before?!
just wondering. or was that fear back then nothing but a fear because of not knowing?!
+cnscccsn I do understand that. I was just wondering in the highly unlikely case it happens and the core touches the water what would happen. or is the water under pressure as in a car radiator? stupid comparison but for the sake of understanding :)
+cnscccsn the molten core I mean. think that's rather important
Mike G well you could use fire trucks to supply water to the calandria
Proce that would stop the accident
It'd be like lava falling in the ocean, you can see lots of videos of that, it's not really explosive.
The fears of a second steam explosion at Chernobyl were wildly overblown. That calculation predicting it was from assuming the entire theoretically possible thermal energy of the core ended up in the flooded basement all at once. Which if possible would indeed have been really bad... But it had already lost much of it's energy by that point and was just slowly dribbling into the basement as it melted the piping and floor a bit at a time.
Their math wasn't the worst way to play things safe at the time in 86' and it was probably a good idea to send those three guys down there anyway, the water was probably going to become a small hazard in other ways. But in hindsight with careful calculations it's pretty silly to think that the reactor was going to super-heat the basement a week after it'd already melted down and spread out.
How do you glow like that.
Unlike fukashima? That's very specific.
Isn't it ironic that water is keeping the plant from exploding and solving every problem but in Japan water caused the whole Fukushima thing in the first place
Canada.. Greatest country in America..
“Even if we tried to blow this goddamn thing up, it won’t.”
Why not let spent fuel / or decay heat accumulate, and heat up to a high temperature, where...it would become useful in producing electricity again. Then, use that "decay electricity" to cool down the fuel.
E.g a negative feedback loop. the more decay heat there is...the more electricity it produces...the more fuel gets cooled.
In Fukushima they had steam from decay heat pump the emergency cooling around on reactors 2 and 3, for a while it worked too, but eventually other problems overwhelmed the situation. There was no electric generator in the mix, just a turbine coupled to a pump, it was one of the emergency backup systems.
So many failsafes, you could call this destiny 2.
There are lot of different systems to stop meltdown. Is it not much safer to use molten salt thorium reactors, where in case of total failure, the reactor shuts down itself, and there is no possibility of meltdown? And since there is no high pressure water or steam used, no chance of releasing radioactive vapour? And the thorium reactor can actually reuse the spend fuel from uranium reactor. Seems like no-brainer, I wonder why Canada is not investing heavily into MSR? Would it not be the best way of stopping carbon release and slowing down global warming?
Mandate
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission ... disseminate objective scientific, technical and regulatory information to the public....
If your mandate is disseminate objective scientific, technical and regulatory information to the public - should it not include dissemination of information of alternative technologies that could be magnitude safer than the existing technologies? With less chance of nuclear proliferation. With much less radioactive waste, that last only for 100 years instead of 1000 years? And with abundance of thorium to be used?
There is a Canadian-based company, Terrestrial Energy, that has been developing an MSR design for a few years now, actually. One of the primary reasons they are based here and not in the US is specifically because regulations here do a lot more to allow for innovation, which is sometimes paraphrased as Canada saying "prove your reactor design is safe" instead of "prove your LWR design is safe".
Terrestrial Energy's IMSR has a lot of potential. It is being designed with the thorium fuel cycle in mind for future use (the plan is to start with uranium though). They plan for production to essentially be similar to an assembly line (think airplane manufacturing) to drive down costs, and for the self-contained units to practically be plug-and-play at industrial facilities, to provide heat for any number of uses, including power.
Personally I hope for a day in the near future when Canada will start buying "spent" fuel from American LWRs to burn in IMSRs, and then sell the energy back to them at a profit. That'd be fun.
@@BlueArt2001 As someone with a materials science background, I am deeply interested in molten salt reactors, because it's my field that's holding everyone up. The physics works. It's the damn materials that holds the thing that need to be improved last I checked.
Think about how your car fares after a winter of driving on salted roads. If you make the salt molten, it'll be many many times more corrosive.
If only people knew about LFTR.
Oh, people do. In fact there's a company based in Canada, Terrestrial Energy, that is developing a molten-salt reactor right now. They'll start with uranium, but they do have their sights on thorium fuel down the line, with the benefit of being able to burn "spent" uranium fuel from other reactors. Who knows, maybe in the future we could buy "spent" fuel from the Americans on the cheap and then use it to make energy...and sell it back to them at a profit...
www.terrestrialenergy.com
This has nothing to do with the actual content of the video, but I swear I've heard the beginning song from a flash game many years ago.
How if nuclear plant canada hit by tsunami like fukushima?
Shade status: Thrown
okay but what if someone crashes fire trucks into calandria
what happens if the firetruck explodes next to the calandria?
Adding water to the warp core will not stop a warp core breech.
Are you sure?
The candu reactor is a very safe nuclear reactor but I wouldnt say it's fail safe. Remember when the titanic was unsinkable? What if there there was a hydrogen build up and explosion that damaged the containment building. Or maybe errors from construction that are unforeseen. I doubt it, but hey radiation is scary stuff lets not forget that. I have a question though in candu reactors does inserting the fuel rods or the poison system cause an increase in thermal energy for a brief moment? I know this was a design flaw in the Chernobyl reactors because the tips had graphite on them.
"I have a question though in candu reactors does inserting the fuel rods or the poison system cause an increase in thermal energy for a brief moment?"
Nope. That's something very unique to the rather terrible design of the RBMK: canteach.candu.org/Content%20Library/19910101.pdf
The containment structure, where there is a risk of hydrogen build up in the event of an accident has a system of hydrogen igniters which will ignite any hydrogen present to burn it off before the level gets high enough to be hazardous. They also have passive catalytic re combiners which will get free hydrogen to recombine with oxygen to form water.
Gotta keep the water flowing to the cloaca
Michael Belloli dude whut?
Safety enema
I know this is fantasy, but as a fan of the walking dead, I have always wondered what happened to the nuclear power plants. Did operators manage to shut down in time ? Are they leaking or exploded ? I know it a fantasy show but it always had me wondering.
SCRAM work without power when electromagnet lost his power.
A scenario in this movie happen if there is NOT humans in the nuclear power plant.
But STILL this isn't safe desing like LFTR...uranium is the problem.
wonniewarrior they added water to the chalandria and it was all fine
Probably very little. If they held off the zombies for even a few days they'd have achieved cold shutdown. The control system will be a brick in just a few days without maintenance and valves will rust in months. After that it's just a pile of concrete with some interesting metals on the inside.
With all the security at a nuclear power plant it'd probably be a great place to hide out. With basic survival skills you'd ironically have access to everything but electricity.
why the steam produced by reactors is transferred to U shapped vessels to produce steam of ordinary water?why its not utilized directly????
They use different fluid. The heat transport system, the loop associated with the reactor, utilizes heavy water in part due to its role as a moderator. Having an isolated loop is also important for containment purposes-- contamination doesn't get transferred to the conventional side of the plant, including the turbine.
The feedwater loop, the one that is on the shell-side of the boiler and used to spin the turbine, uses regular old light water. It's the preferred coolant because it's more abundant than heavy water, cheaper, and much easier to replenish.
verrin kindly elaborate
I thought I did. What in particular do you need elaborated?
Wait, why are *all* the supposedly redundant standby and emergency generators in the same building and right next to each other? This reduces their redundancy as if one were to start a fire, it would likely spread to the rest. Or if there was an explosion, plane crash, meteorite strike, collapse, terrorist attack, poison gas build up, or even flood: their proximity to each other increases the chance of a total loss. It also reduces the space for emergency workers.
Another thing, these devices that turn hydrogen into water...how many of these exist? Are they redundant? Are there extra devices stored at a different location that can be easily put into place if need be?
Also...what about valves and inlet/ outlet pipes...are these redundant? Can they be operated manually?
They are only like that in the video. In the real world, the stand by generators and emergency power generators are widely separated. All the elements of Shutdown System 1 and Shutdown system two are separate. They run off different power supplies, they are geographically separated in the plant, so a fire shouldn't damage components of both and they are made from different components from different manufacturers to prevent a common mode failure.
“Our power plants are perfectly safe”after Fukushima they add a new safty feature lol yep
so you mean there are No fire trucks in fukushima, Japan?
CANDU is very young, when Fukushima BWR are from 60's..
Actually the history of CANDU is older. The design basis of them is from ZEEP, which started operation just after World War II. The very first CANDU reactor was the Nuclear Power Demonstration; it ran successfully from 1962 to 1987.
We've just been nearly-paranoid about reactor safety since the accident at NRX. A ton of lessons were learned there and the principles developed from that are evident in every CANDU reactor since, the most obvious being redundant, fully-automated safety systems. Human error was the greatest contributing factor at the NRX accident, having both started it and led to it worsening greatly within seconds. The sheer speed of the accident made it very clear that humans are just too damn slow to be trusted with those safety systems, and far too unreliable to be trusted to manually operate critical systems without the system blocking them from doing something stupid.
Fire tucks were dispatched almost immediately. But that tsunami killed 15,000 people and wiped out infrastructure dozens of kilometers inland. There weren't any roads for them to drive on to get to the plant.
Thanks Canada.
We ensure every nuclear power plant meet’s ________ safety and operation standards [...].
What does she say here? 11:13
thank you very much :D
We ensure every nuclear power plant meets *rigorous* safety and operation standards to prevent accidents in the first place
Nuclear reactors nuclear reactor candu is so powerful I think the only way I could explode is by at Chernobyl Like explosion