Zaporizhya Nuclear Power Plant Issues

[etudiant]

There are reports of a renewed reactor shutdown at Zaporizhya, the Ukraine's largest nuclear power station, as well as rumors of possible radiation leaks:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-30/ukraine-hiding-huge-radiation-leak-largest-nuclear-power-plant-Europe
Given wretched weather and a civil war about 100 miles away, there are lots of ways for things to go seriously amiss in Ukraine.

Does anyone here have any insight into this situation?

 

[Doug Huffman]

Well Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge blog has no insight. Don't take science/technology from profit driven media.

Zaporizha has had some electrical issues. These issues may have led to a shutdown from high power that can instigate a release of coolant. Ukraine is the target of Russian agitating propaganda.

Radiation does not leak. Radioactive materials, water or gases, may leak. Dilution (in time and space) is always the solution to pollution, even radioactive pollution. Consider the dog poo on your shoe analogy. Dog poo on your shoe is contamination, be careful, don't step in it, clean it up. The stink of dog poo on your shoe is like radiation, get distance from it, smell it a short time and cover it up.

 

[jim hardy]

Beware of psuedojournalists who want to be exciting.

The only two numbers i saw in that link , ~5msv/year and around ten microroentgens/hour are not exciting.

"huge radiation leak" ? Ten microroentgens ? Liar, Liar, pants on fire. Empty heads are not empty they're stuffed full with this sort of rubbish.
There exists a standard guerrilla warfare tactic, to incite the gullible...

Wait for a better report before you start worrying.
But keep an eye out.

here's a calmer report
http://nuclear-news.net/2014/12/31/...ozhye-nuclear-power-plant-s-radioactive-leak/

this appears to be the source document but i can't read it
http://lifenews.ru/news/147890

 

[etudiant]

Beware of psuedojournalists who want to be exciting.

The only two numbers i saw in that link , ~5msv/year and around ten microroentgens/hour are not exciting.

"huge radiation leak" ? Ten microroentgens ? Liar, Liar, pants on fire. Empty heads are not empty they're stuffed full with this sort of rubbish.
There exists a standard guerrilla warfare tactic, to incite the gullible...

Thank you for your response. It is why I posted the question.
The documents seem murky, even at the basic level, such as are we talking milli or micro Sieverts/yr. (It would be nice if there were an agreement to dump milli in favor of something kilo derived, that way that particular confusion could be avoided.)
What caught my eye was the claim of site contamination, something that is not normal for nuclear plants, coming after a couple of poorly explained shutdowns.
Ukraine is broke and has power shortages along with a civil war, an environment propitious for problems to escalate.
Are corners getting cut to maximize output? It would be unsurprising.

Separately, the Russian press is also badmouthing the Westinghouse fuel the Ukraine is now purchasing, but as Russia is downwind from the Ukraine,
I can't believe the Russians would passively stand by if the Ukraine reactors were jeopardized.

 

[jim hardy]

What caught my eye was the claim of site contamination, something that is not normal for nuclear plants, coming after a couple of poorly explained shutdowns.
Ukraine is broke and has power shortages along with a civil war, an environment propitious for problems to escalate.
Are corners getting cut to maximize output? It would be unsurprising.

Contamination and unplanned outages are symptoms of a chaotic work environment .
That could be due to outside forces like the country falling apart around the guys, or unruly management.

I'd guess they're short on manpower and supplies because of the chaos in the country.

But really i have no idea.

 

[etudiant]

Jim Hardy says:
Contamination and unplanned outages are symptoms of a chaotic work environment .
That could be due to outside forces like the country falling apart around the guys, or unruly management.
I'd guess they're short on manpower and supplies because of the chaos in the country.
But really i have no idea.

It seems to me that this possibility should a concern for the entire nuclear community.
If current nuclear plant designs are too delicate to withstand the disruptions our societies are making more and more likely, then we need to adjust the requirements before we create serial messes. In that sense, the Ukraine situation may be an alarm that we would do well to heed.

 

[jim hardy]

If current nuclear plant designs are too delicate to withstand the disruptions our societies are making more and more likely, then we need to adjust the requirements before we create serial messes. In that sense, the Ukraine situation may be an alarm that we would do well to heed.

Technology seems to run ahead of the social advancement needed to cope with it.
US took a thirty year hiatus from building nukes.

In my life growth and increasing prosperity was the norm . I can't imagine what it must be like trying to keep things orderly in nuke plant in a war torn country that's sliding backward.

I'll twist your logic - If current political systems are too fragile to support safe operation of nuclear plants, what societal requirements should we adjust ?

Are some societies just not quite ready for technology?

Where to get energy will be a problem for the next generation. Mine used up most of the easy fuel.

 

[etudiant]

The societal adjustment needed would be to implement the golden rule more broadly, but progress on that front is glacially slow.
In the interim, just following the admonitions of wiser leaders not to go abroad in search of monsters to slay would be a start. I'm not optimistic about that either.

On the technical side, the absence of cheap fossil fuels makes a nuclear resurgence inevitable imho, but the current designs do increasingly seem to be hostages to fortune.
Ideally, there needs to be a modular nuclear unit that functions independently of outside supervision, something that can be sealed in place which simply produces power.
It would surely be much more expensive on a $/kWhr than a big modern plant, but given the costs of wind and other 'renewable' energy sources, that may not be a serious problem.
Is something like that even conceptually feasible?

 

[nikkkom]

Contamination and unplanned outages are symptoms of a chaotic work environment.
That could be due to outside forces like the country falling apart around the guys, or unruly management.

I'd guess they're short on manpower and supplies because of the chaos in the country.

Looks like you think the situation is worse than it really is.

Compared to March of this year, when old government fled, leaving some government branches' buildings in capital literally empty, there is no chaos in the country now.

The army has been reformed and managed to stop Russians somewhere around September-October timeframe. Putin starts to realize just how deep the sh*t he is in, so he seems unwilling to escalate. Fighting subsided.

Old Parliament, which did not flee, had a lot of ex-President people obstructing necessary measures, but now a new Parliament is elected, easing situation in this regard too.

Finances are in a bad shape, but nuclear power is the last place Ukraine would try to economize now - it needs energy generation to work over this winter.

 

[nikkkom]

given the costs of wind and other 'renewable' energy sources, that may not be a serious problem.

Perhaps you need to check more recent data. Wind and solar are approaching price parity with traditional generation. Solar's price falls 20% with each doubling of production. Currently, doubling time is 2.5 years. If this holds, in 10 years solar generation would increase x8 and price would fall by 50%.

 

[nikkkom]

I checked the forum of Ukrainian/Russian nuclear engineers, specifically this thread:

http://forum.atominfo.ru/index.php?showtopic=743&st=2840&start=2840

The conclusion thus far is that someone photoshopped screenshots of webpages with regular radiation sensor data, and subsequently Russian media used photoshopped screenshots to claim that there is a leak. Ukrainians say there was no leak at all.

 

[jim hardy]

Thanks nikkkom, for that good news.

Is that a Russian designed plant ? Are they able to get parts ?

The conclusion thus far is that someone photoshopped screenshots of webpages with regular radiation sensor data, and subsequently Russian media used photoshopped screenshots to claim that there is a leak. Ukrainians say there was no leak at all.

well, i suppose media has been known to exaggerate ... thanks for that great news as well...

The societal adjustment needed would be to implement the golden rule more broadly, but progress on that front is glacially slow.
In the interim, just following the admonitions of wiser leaders not to go abroad in search of monsters to slay would be a start. I'm not optimistic about that either.

Golden rule would help a lot, wouldn't it ?

Ideally, there needs to be a modular nuclear unit that functions independently of outside supervision, something that can be sealed in place which simply produces power.
...
Is something like that even conceptually feasible?

i think so.. there exist little units for spacecraft ... and we'll see what comes out of the "small modular reactor" plants.
Probably though it'll be an accidental discovery like Teflon.

old jim

 

[etudiant]

Thank you, Nikkom, for the very helpful info 'from the horse's mouth' so to speak.
The news regarding the Ukraine is so colored by the violent conflict that facts are hard to come by.
It is troublesome that this plant is not producing at full power, as the country surely could use it. Are there any indications of when operations can be brought back to normal?

Separately, re wind and solar, afaik the actual power produced by either source is usually a fraction of the rated potential, so there will be ample economic opportunity for some time yet for a nuclear alternative that is akin to a sealed power source. Small size would be a plus, probably much smaller than the current SMR designs, which generally run around a half gigawatt thermal. The SNAP designs Jim Hardy mentions indeed offer just the kind of blind power that is wanted, but unfortunately the economics are remote, maybe 20Kg of plutonium providing a 400 watt supply for 50 years. We need a serendipitous discovery.

 

[nikkkom]

Thanks nikkkom, for that good news.

Is that a Russian designed plant? Are they able to get parts?

All plants in ex-USSR are Soviet-era designs.

Ukraine was trying to minimize its reliance on Russia for nuclear supplies for many years already. I don't think there are significant problems in procuring parts for routine maintenance.

Russia was trying to prevent this - there are long threads on that forum about Ukrainian experiments with Westinghouse-designed fuel assemblies for VVERs, and Russian attempts to discredit them ("VVERs are not certified for Amerika's fuel, there can be accidents if you use it!1111eleven"). This saga seem to be coming to an end - despite Russian assurances that they will not cut supplies of nuclear fuel, Ukraine is going to buy most, or even all, future fuel from Westinghouse. (It would look stupid to ask West to sanction Russia but continue to trade with them yourself, right?).

 

[Hiddencamper]

One of the units at Zaporizhya had a generator lockout -> Turbine trip -> reactor scram last Sunday. The unit was back online the same day. I haven't seen detail as to what happened, but the hunch I get is it might have been an instrumentation issue.

As for 'radiation', it appears that they may have some fuel failures. Some news outlets are claiming that the plant recently switched to Westinghouse fuel. Westinghouse has had some trouble in the past with fuel failures in VVER-1000 and similar reactor types. If a fuel failure has happened, it means the site probably has a higher than normal amount of radioactive particulate in their offgas effluent (or whatever a PWR calls it). But this would not in any way, shape, or form, result in mSv/year levels of radiation outside the plant. That's well beyond the operating limits and license limits for a reactor in most countries, and I would believe the Ukraine as well.

It is very unlikely that fuel damage would be caused by a generator trip. I believe they are two completely independent events and this is being all brought up at the same time for media hype. Just like how the original generator trip a few weeks ago was being called an "Accident" when it was simply an anticipated operational occurrence (AOO - an event which occurs at least once a year on average, results in no fuel damage or exceeding any radioactive release rates).

That's what I've seen though.

 

[Astronuc]

PWRs usually report activity per unit volume of coolant, e.g., μCi/ml, or per unit mass μCi/mg, at least in the US. Activities are often reported for the Xe (133, 135, 138) isotopes, five iodine radioisotopes (131-135), Cs (134, 137) usually at shutdown, and Np-239.

Occasional leaking fuel is expected, even though utilities and their suppliers strive for zero defects. Plants are designed to handle a certain number of failures, but it is undesirable to have even one leaking (breach cladding) fuel rod.

Some failures coincident with a startup or restart may be indicative of debris failures, in which foreign objects, e.g., wire, from maintenance operations may become lodged in the fuel where the debris may wear (fret) a hole into the cladding. Otherwise, grid-to-rod fretting has a been a recent (last 20 years) problem for some plants and/or fuel designs. Activated crud (corrosion products) may also be an issue for some plants. Sometimes at shutdown, reactor cores might experience a crud burst. Rarely, one might find failures do to bad seal weld or primary hydriding (rod internal hydriding due to hydrogenous material contamination).Ukraine denies radioactive leak on Zaporizhzhya nuclear plant
http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-denies-radioactive-leak-zaporizhzhya-nuclear-plant-195020745.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/03/us-ukraine-crisis-power-minister-idUSKCN0JH12M20141203

It may take some time to get to the bottom of this. There is no reason that Westinghouse fuel should be less safe than Russian fuel. They are nominally the same. Coolability and reactivity control would be essentially the same.

Not sure about the use of Westinghouse fuel. If it was fresh, it would not be the cause of a radiation leak. The older (Russian) fuel could be a source of radiation if the cladding was breached.

It would help to know which unit. One unit may be down for refueling.

 

[.Scott]

this appears to be the source document but i can't read it
http://lifenews.ru/news/147890

Using translate.google.com, the first paragraph reads as follows:

Ukrainian nuclear scientists misinformed the public and the media about the real state of affairs in the Zaporizhzhya NPP. The Internet got a summary of the State Service for Emergency Situations of the 28 and 29 December, which refute the assurances leadership Zaporizhzhya that the sixth unit was put into operation in the evening on 28 December. In addition, the permissible level of radiation at the plant, according to the measurements, was above the norm by 16 times.

 

[nikkkom]

Westinghouse fuel is currently installed only on South-Ukraine NPP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ukraine_Nuclear_Power_Plant), not on this station.

 

[etudiant]

Thank you for the very helpful inputs, these voices of experience allow making sense of the news media garble. That a trip/restart could dislodge crud seems plausible. I'd not heard of fuel leaks from fretting, another little engineering issue that was probably found rather than anticipated.

One might think that Ukraine would be better served by continuing to buy its fuel from Russia, that way the Russians too are invested in the smooth functioning of those plants. As the late LBJ said 'better to have then inside the tent peeing out' rather than the other way around and they are doomed to be neighbors anyway.

 

[nikkkom]

this appears to be the source document but i can't read it
http://lifenews.ru/news/147890

This particular "news" outlet is all too well known in Ukraine and is even less reliable than RT.
Its stringers act as "attached reporters" with separatist troops in Eastern Ukraine, once they were even caught with antitank weapons in their car.
It disseminates outlandish (and proven false by other _Russian_ journalists) "news" about Ukrainian soldiers crucifying children.

 

[Astronuc]

PWR coolant systems have filter subsystems in a chemical volume & control system (CVCS) (or reactor water cleanup (RWCU) in a BWR) to filter out impurities or corrosion products to minimize activation and transport of activated species. That is a potential source of radioactivity. In addition, use of boric acid and lithium buffer produces tritium. Leaks in piping or accumulators could release radioactivity. However, VVERs typically use potassium hydroxide rather than LiOH for buffering the reactor water.

http://www.nucleartourist.com/systems/vc.htm (western type)

The situation is simply not clear.

 

[Hiddencamper]

Thank you for the very helpful inputs, these voices of experience allow making sense of the news media garble. That a trip/restart could dislodge crud seems plausible. I'd not heard of fuel leaks from fretting, another little engineering issue that was probably found rather than anticipated.

One might think that Ukraine would be better served by continuing to buy its fuel from Russia, that way the Russians too are invested in the smooth functioning of those plants. As the late LBJ said 'better to have then inside the tent peeing out' rather than the other way around and they are doomed to be neighbors anyway.

CRUD Bursts are a big deal. So big a deal that many plants do soft shutdowns and push control rods all the way into avoid shocking CRUD off the fuel. Previously, after the turbine was offline, plants would trip RPS and scram the reactor. I don't see why a CRUD burst would result in a large release of radioactivity. Generally its a big problem for on-site dose rates and reactor coolant chemistry. It also affects hydraulic control rods at BWRs and can affect valve sealing/seating at all plants.

 

[nikkkom]

I read about Westinghouse fuel a bit more.

Westinghouse fuel was tested in Ukraine since 2005. At first, there were problems with fuel bundles having more difficulty inserting and removing from reactors than the "native ones" - there was some deformation during it. Apparently (from what I read), even Russian fuel bundles are occasionally having these problems, looks like VVER reactor core is quite tightly packed.

Westinghouse has been working at remedying these problems (I take it they iwere nspecting removed test fuel assemblies and doing some changes based on those observations). Russians say WH fuel is still bad. Ukrainians and Westinghouse say latest batch of it performs on par with Russian fuel in regards to insertion/removal difficulty.

At present, only South Ukraine Nuclear Power Plant runs with this fuel, but experiments with it progressed far enough that today it runs a reactor with complete fuel load only from Westinghouse. The station has three reactors, I did not yet find information whether WH fuel load is in one reactor or in all three.

 

[a.ua.]

Hello everyone.
Russian lies goes beyond all limits.
here's what happened.
-------------------------------------
03.12.2014
INFORMATION REGARDING DISCONNECTION OF ZAPORIZHZHYA UNIT 3 FROM THE GRID
In relation to misinformation distributed by media as to disconnection of Zaporizhzhya Unit 3 the following information is provided: Unit №3 of Zaporizhzhya NPP was disconnected from the grid by means of protections against inner generator damages. The incident occurred at 19:24 on November 28, 2014 and was caused bydamage of the house load voltage transformer coil that led to disconnection of the house load transformer and unit transformer breakers.No radioactive consequences were recorded.

The unit protection automatics worked out according to the design procedures. Now it has been rendered to cold state with no objections.The provisional INES Level "0" rating is assigned for Unit 3.

The works on restoring house load power supplyare already underway. As per schedule, unit №3 will be connected to the grid on 5 December.

The specified event does not refer either to nuclear or other type of accident and is classified as “failure in NPP unit operation” according to the regulatory documents. The works to restore power supply of the unit are well underway according to the emergency work order.
http://www.energoatom.kiev.ua/en/pr...nnection_of_zaporizhzhya_unit__from_the_grid/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 28 December 2014 at 05:59 unit №6 ofZaporizhzhya NPP was disconnected from power grid due to actuated house load transformer protections*. The automation and personnel lowered the reactor capacity to 10% of rated power.

The investigations revealed the false actuation of transformer protection system.

On the same date, 28 December 2014 at 22:35, unit № 6 ofZaporizhzhya NPP was reconnected to the power grid.

The radiation situation at Zaporizhzhya NPP site and beyond it hasn’t changed and remains within the set limits. The physical protection is maintained in normal mode.

Daily information on the status of Ukrainian NPPs and on-site radiation conditions is provided on the site of the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine via the following link.* For reference. House load transformer is designed in particular to provide power supply of reactor unit in case of http://www.babla.ru/%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9-%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9/turbogeneratorfailure.
http://www.snrc.gov.ua/nuclear/en/publish/article/266172

 

[etudiant]

Thank you, a.ua, for providing this sober statement of fact.
It would be great if TPTB in the Ukraine could learn from your example, that the best way to deflate rumors is to tell the truth.
Afaik, no mention was made of the reconnect of Unit 6 by any of the news media here in the US.
Do you know whether Unit 3 got reconnected as well as planned?

 

[Hiddencamper]

Thank you, a.ua, for providing this sober statement of fact.
It would be great if TPTB in the Ukraine could learn from your example, that the best way to deflate rumors is to tell the truth.
Afaik, no mention was made of the reconnect of Unit 6 by any of the news media here in the US.
Do you know whether Unit 3 got reconnected as well as planned?

Both units went back online. Unit 6 was back on the grid the same day.

 

[a.ua.]

Russians have become very common say lies
We are tired of refuting.
However, you are right.
Information Service in our nuclear limping on both legs.:(
and for his country and for foreign countries

 

[a.ua.]

All plants in ex-USSR are Soviet-era designs.

This saga seem to be coming to an end - despite Russian assurances that they will not cut supplies of nuclear fuel, Ukraine is going to buy most, or even all, future fuel from Westinghouse. (It would look stupid to ask West to sanction Russia but continue to trade with them yourself, right?).

it is a bit wrong.
Fuel Westinghouse will (in the future) 3 units

South Ukraine Nuclear Power Plant , units №2,№3
Zaporizhzhya NPP unit №5

Here is a direct quote:
it is the goal of diversification. TVEL as a major - but with a strong by backwater from Westinghouse.
http://forum.atominfo.ru/index.php?showtopic=916&st=700&p=65702&#entry65702

moreover, the two units
Rivne NPP. №4 (Getting Started in 2004)
Khmelnitsky №2 (Getting Started in 2004)
under the contract are required to work only on Russian fuel.

 

[jim hardy]

Information Service in our nuclear limping on both legs.:(
and for his country and for foreign countries

In the US we nuclear workers have a saying "We get worse press than the President"

 

[nikkkom]

moreover, the two units
Rivne NPP. №4 (Getting Started in 2004)
Khmelnitsky №2 (Getting Started in 2004)
under the contract are required to work only on Russian fuel.

Why would Ukraine give a F about past contracts with Russia? Russia isn't honoring its numerous treaty obligations to Ukraine.

 

[a.ua.]

difficult question.
it is not in my competence.
Some conclusions can get here
http://forum.pripyat.com/showthread.php?p=227145#post227145

and here

http://forum.atominfo.ru/index.php?showtopic=447&st=1260
if you have not forgotten the Russian language.My opinion (private, there is no official confirmation of this), but
Zaporizhzhya NPP stopped the Russian offensive in 2014. (in August).
"Freedom or Death" for many people (not those that are in politics) ----

not "empty" words.

 

[etudiant]

Apparently the Zaporizhzhya NPP is becoming an object of military contention, reportedly struck by Ukraine missiles aimed at Russian military gear on the site, which has also now been mined apparently.
Is there any report or evaluation on the vulnerability of this installation, not in terms of operating, but in terms of potentially disastrous combat damage?

 

[anorlunda]

Is there any report or evaluation on the vulnerability of this installation, not in terms of operating, but in terms of potentially disastrous combat damage?

I haven't seen one, but to look for it I would start at iaea.org. Why don't you look there, and tell us what you find.

 

[etudiant]

I haven't seen one, but to look for it I would start at iaea.org. Why don't you look there, and tell us what you find.

I looked, but did not find much beyond the plant status reports.
There is nothing that I could find that actually deals with the issues created by a strike from an errant artillery shell or misguided missile.

 

[anorlunda]

I looked, but did not find much beyond the plant status reports.
There is nothing that I could find that actually deals with the issues created by a strike from an errant artillery shell or misguided missile.

Too bad the IAEA is not more forthcoming. So here are my personal opinions. Opinions weigh much less than actual studies.

Zaporizhzhya includes a dry spent fuel storage area. Spent fuel can be used to make "dirty bombs". Dirty bombs can spread radiation across a wide area. An artillery shell hitting spent fuel is like a dirty bomb, but not as effective as a bomb which wraps radioactive material around a core explosive. An artillery shell may not even be capable to making a hole in a dry storage cask. So if you are thinking of a parallel to Chernobyl, no.

Russia has plenty of spent fuel available within Russia's own borders. If they want to make dirty bombs, they can do that without Zaporizhzhya. They could then send those bombs all over Ukraine or even all over Europe with cruise missiles. If they want to blow up an operating nuclear plant, they can do that without Zaporizhzhya. Most significant of all, Russia has thousands of nuclear warheads plus the means to deliver them.

So in terms of risks associated with Zaporizhzhya, I see nothing new, and nothing comparable with nuclear weapons.