Has anyone taken note of this?

[Skybird]

http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=4487

Nuclear plant 'could have gone into meltdown'

Published: 1st August 2006 15:18 CET
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=4487
The sudden stop at the Forsmark nuclear power plant just north of Stockholm was the most dangerous international nuclear incident since the destruction of the Russian Chernobyl plant 20 year ago, said nuclear expert and former boss at Forsmark Lars-Olov Höglund in Uppsala Nya Tidning on Tuesday.

Two of the four generators turned off last week at the plant. Höglund said the construction flaw that caused them to shut down existed in the remaining two and could have lead to a complete meltdown.


“It was pure luck that there was not a meltdown,” he said. “Since the electricity supply from the network didn’t work as it should have, it could have been a catastrophe.”

He said without power the temperature would have been too high after 30 minutes and the reactor would have been damaged. Within two hours there would have been a meltdown

Ingvar Berglund, head of safety at Forsmark, said there wasn’t a risk of a Chernobyl-like accident.

“We know exactly what happened and it was an incident that could have been serious … but that it could have been the most serious incident since the nuclear power incident at Chernobyl is totally wrong,” he said.

He said backup power could have been used to circulate the water needed to cool off reactors by tapping into a smaller, separate electrical network. In a handwritten report of the incident the backup power was described as “wobbly.”

Forsmark began producing power in 1980, and now supplies one-sixth of Sweden’s electricity.

http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?I...0adcb9e6782fef

Two more Swedish reactors close

Published: 3rd August 2006 09:14 CET
Online: http://www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=4503
Some 20 years after Chernobyl’s devastating nuclear meltdown, possible faults at two Swedish facilities have led four of the nation’s 10 reactors to go offline.

Late on Wednesday night, OKG, the company operating the boiling water reactors in Oskarshamn, in southeast Sweden, decided to shutdown two of its three reactors after analysis showed their safety could not be guaranteed.


The nuclear power industry in Sweden had a wake up call last week when the Forsmark nuclear plant, just north of Stockholm, faced a sudden stop at two of its three reactors.

The plant was heavily criticized by longtime nuclear power expert and former boss at Forsmark, Lars-Olov Höglund, who said, “Since the electricity supply from the network didn’t work as it should have, it could have been a catastrophe.”

He said without power the temperature would have been too high after 30 minutes and the reactor would have been damaged. Within two hours there would have been a meltdown

OKG decided not to take further risks.

"Since we cannot yet be certain that our station could cope with an incident like that in Forsmark we have decided to halt operations until we get clearance, or instructions on what needs to be improved,"said Anders Österberg, OKG spokesman. “The inspection will continue and we will make those changes needed.”

He said at 11:30 p.m. on Wednesday that after careful review there was good reason to turn off the two reactors.

Since the sudden stop last week, Forsmark, which said it did not recognize the faults detailed by Höglund, decided to shut down two of its reactors. Forsmark said one reactor was simply undergoing a yearly checkup.

Ringhals, the third nuclear power production facility located near Gothenburg, said it has found no reason to shut down any of its three pressurized water reactors or its one boiling water reactor. However, one of the Ringhals reactors is currently offline for its yearly maintenance check.

Anders Bredfell, spokesman at the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate, told The Local that Höglund’s comments were a stretch.

“In our opinion it was probably an exaggeration,” Bredfell said regarding Höglund’s remarks on Tuesday. “I won’t say he is wrong, but he doesn’t have all of the facts. We agree it was a serious accident, but comparing it to Chernobyl was a bit over the top.”

Bredfell said his office would sit down early on Thursday morning and review the assessments done at all three production facilities and determine whether proper safety measures were taken.

Bredfell said the problems at Forsmark last week were caused by a short circuit outside the plant caused a flaw in the safety system. He said the plant has four diesel motors that are in place to produce the needed power to runt he plant and cool the reactors.

Last week two diesel motors failed to turn on, but the other two were there were sufficient to cool the reactors. He also said there is a gas generated motor separate from the plant that is the backup’s backup.

Sweden has been producing nuclear power since the early 1970s. The three production facilities now produce about half of the nation’s electricity.

------

A German site quoted Höglund saying that they were only seven minutes away from total meltdown.

[SUBMAN1]

Nukes are a very good thing for this world. Cheap and clean electricity that is unmatched in power and cleanliness except by only 1 dam in the entire world - Grand Coulee.

Only bad thing is - cost cutting and getting rid of your staff = a bad thing. We still haven't learned this after all these years. You should 'never' see articles like this.

-S

[McBeck]

I live in Denmark...right next to Sweden so im glad it didnt melt down.

Only 30 km from Denmark capitol Sweden has placed a Nuclear plant a long time ago of the same design I believe as the others.

For many years the danish goverment has pressed for the 2 reactors to be shutdown due to the proxemity to the danish captital.

It finally happend last year I think.

Do they still wonder why Denmark was so persistent about it???

[Skybird]

I compared these two Swedish articles, with articles from BBC, and German newspapers (when it even was mentioned). Interesting that the international press plays down the thing massively, saying it all is harmless and meaningless. the critisim of that former security chief even is not mentioned at all. Which is strange if four of ten national reactors are driven down more or less abruptly and unplanned.

[TteFAboB]

We accept fission reactors because we are transparent about it. No transparency, no reactor. But I wouldn't trust the Swedish government with nuclear reactors even if they were built with glass! I wouldn't trust the Danish either, in fact I wouldn't trust any government with it, and certainly not Iran.

I'm not exactly sure, however, if a nuclear meltdown in Scandinavia wouldn't be for the better in the end. Not the best, but a benefit anyway. Because of Skybird's previous signature (necessity breeds strength).

[Skybird]

German TV news today broadcasted the event, describing it as a serious accident and the worst and most threatening since Chernobyl, and characterizing the event as having been short of a complete and total meltdown. At the centre of examination seem to be some technical components by AEG that have failed to work as intended, causing problems in backup power supplies, and that are also used in German powerplants. As a consequence, German "AKWs" , as we call them, are also undergoing massive technical inspections currently.

[tycho102]

That's fairly hardcore for 50% of their backup generators to fail. Our reactors are required to run-test them on a monthly basis here in the US. That's part of scheduled maintenance cycles.

Sounds like either they're not getting the funding they need, or worse, they've been using their funding to bribe politicians. This is one of the main reasons, understandably, why people want idiot-proof reactor designs like the generation IV "pebble bed" reactors.

Part of the problem in the states stems from the fact that SEC violations aren't always a felony. There are crooked bastards that go from one company to another with a whole damn string of violations at each one, and pull severance packages of $10m after running the company into a $300m quarterly loss for 2 years straight. Look at Infinity Labs, for Christ's sake!



So, unfortunately, that's an issue with reactors. I have making the government larger, but in this case, it takes regulation. The problem is that we have no real deterrance for this kind of behavior, and if you start executing CEO's and CIO's and COO's, you're going to deter investment. However, if you do nothing, the good old boy network just keeps running right along like it always has.

[McBeck]

Originally Posted by TteFAboB

We accept fission reactors because we are transparent about it. No transparency, no reactor. But I wouldn't trust the Swedish government with nuclear reactors even if they were built with glass! I wouldn't trust the Danish either, in fact I wouldn't trust any government with it, and certainly not Iran.

I'm not exactly sure, however, if a nuclear meltdown in Scandinavia wouldn't be for the better in the end. Not the best, but a benefit anyway. Because of Skybird's previous signature (necessity breeds strength).

First, Denmark doesnt have nuclear reactors for obvious reasons
Second, I would be carefull with statements like " I'm not exactly sure, however, if a nuclear meltdown in Scandinavia wouldn't be for the better in the end." I read this as we deserve a meltdown!

[Skybird]

ON TV it was said, that all four generators showed the same identical technical problem - and that it therefore was by pure chance that only 50% (2 of 4) did not work. It could have been easily a failure of all four. Checkups at other Swedish and German reactors are becasue of this. The more I red or heard about this incident, the more I realize how extremely close it was to a Chernobyl-sized desaster. We were lucky again this time - nothing else.

[gdogghenrikson]

wow scary stuff