Master_Snipe said: Chernobyl was in Ukrainian SSR (Though was under Soviet Russia's control). So in turn...be fair to say that was where Utsuho was born.
It was a Russian design and staffed by the Ukrainians. The ultimate failure, although Russia still maintains its the Ukrainians incompetence, was with a flawed design, primarily the use of graphite in the reactor. Other things played into this failure dramatically, but the crew more or less acted within protocols.
Anelaid said: It was a Russian design and staffed by the Ukrainians. The ultimate failure, although Russia still maintains its the Ukrainians incompetence, was with a flawed design, primarily the use of graphite in the reactor. Other things played into this failure dramatically, but the crew more or less acted within protocols.
Actually Chernobyl disaster was pretty much made by staff. faulty RBMK reactor design was one of the factors but if crazy experiments wasn't done in first place, nothing bad would happen. ATM Russia still uses 11 RBMK reactors and even in Chernobyl NPP last RBMK reactors worked without problems until year 2000.
sotonya said: Actually Chernobyl disaster was pretty much made by staff. faulty RBMK reactor design was one of the factors but if crazy experiments wasn't done in first place, nothing bad would happen. ATM Russia still uses 11 RBMK reactors and even in Chernobyl NPP last RBMK reactors worked without problems until year 2000.
The experiment was a standard safety test to see how the reactor would perform in a power outage in the short time it took for the back-up generators to come online. There was a sudden drop of power and the crews were slowly increasing the power, per protocol, when there was a large power spike that set the disaster in motion.
The Chernobyl NPP being active until 2000 was met with severe criticism and concern from the international community and the official consensus by every agency, except Russia of course, is that the use of graphite, the nature of how the coolant rods worked, not to mention that there wasn't a great containment system in place to begin with in the event of a disaster, were the roots of the issue and not the Ukrainian staff.
Of course, it didn't help that the night shift (and only the night shift) had been trained for the test, but due to various complications the test was delayed until the morning, and whoever was in charge decided to go ahead with the test instead of waiting another sixteen hours. Plus, the reason the test was initially scheduled for the night in the first place was because there would be decreased power demands, which would make for a safer testing environment. Really, it was a combination of environmental factors, stupid decisions, and bad luck.
BadRoad said: Of course, it didn't help that the night shift (and only the night shift) had been trained for the test, but due to various complications the test was delayed until the morning, and whoever was in charge decided to go ahead with the test instead of waiting another sixteen hours. Plus, the reason the test was initially scheduled for the night in the first place was because there would be decreased power demands, which would make for a safer testing environment. Really, it was a combination of environmental factors, stupid decisions, and bad luck.
They couldn't help it, they changed the schedule for the test because Kiev still needed power and that time was the only time available to perform the test. To my knowledge, the decision to continue the test was beyond the crew's ability to decide otherwise. I'm not even sure if it was within the plant's bureaucracy to continue the test.
I do not know, in the circumstances that led to the disaster, if having the night shift working at the time would have changed anything, sadly.
Anelaid said: The experiment was a standard safety test to see how the reactor would perform in a power outage in the short time it took for the back-up generators to come online. There was a sudden drop of power and the crews were slowly increasing the power, per protocol, when there was a large power spike that set the disaster in motion.
there is a lot of documentated evidence that there was a lot of people who was aware of faulty design, who just expected that in normal situation this flaws would not cause problems (they were right - on NORMAL circumstances RBMK works flawlessly). or may be they were just afraid to object...
Which leads us to conclusion that the main problem - is bad documentation. Moreover Fucushima accident shows that NPP operators still don't have plans on action in critical situations.
Anelaid said: The Chernobyl NPP being active until 2000 was met with severe criticism and concern from the international community and the official consensus by every agency, except Russia of course, is that the use of graphite, the nature of how the coolant rods worked, not to mention that there wasn't a great containment system in place to begin with in the event of a disaster, were the roots of the issue and not the Ukrainian staff.
yet once again it was just political decision. google it, RBMKs are not the only graphite reactors working now. There are even some experimental reactors ment to become 4th generation - based on graphite moderation.
Leave a comment