Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

nrc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 545 posts

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#131

Post by arthurcolle »

malfist wrote: post #122
arthurcolle wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned a few things from my father along the way. I can share my notes if you'd like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Coll%C3%A9?wprov=sfti1

I'm sure your father is a very accomplished gentleman. But I was asking why your armchair analysis is better than the experts who actually know what happened here?

I maintain the complete archive of every publication my father did from 1969 to 2019 and continue to update the archive based on new publications. I use the data to train Nuclear Radiochemistry AI Agents and while I do not have my father's credentials, I actively use this dataset to learn about his field, and from my limited knowledge here I felt the need to comment. After all, what is skepticism if we can't share and teach each other what we know, right?

https://github.com/arthurcolle/Ronald-Colle-Papers

I love how punchy you are! And the astronomy photos. Take care :)

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#132

Post by [deleted] »

Animats wrote: post #45

Palisades MI reactor. Currently shut down and de-fueled but a restart of this reactor is apparently underway, with new fuel assemblies being delivered.[1] Worker was wearing a life vest.[2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palisades_Nuclear_Generating_S... [2] https://www.mlive.com/news/2025/10/michigan-nuclear-plant-wo...

[deleted]

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#133

Post by fekxpurrrt »

arthurcolle wrote: post #131
malfist wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure your father is a very accomplished gentleman. But I was asking why your armchair analysis is better than the experts who actually know what happened here?

I maintain the complete archive of every publication my father did from 1969 to 2019 and continue to update the archive based on new publications. I use the data to train Nuclear Radiochemistry AI Agents and while I do not have my father's credentials, I actively use this dataset to learn about his field, and from my limited knowledge here I felt the need to comment. After all, what is skepticism if we can't share an…

[flagged]

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#134

Post by [deleted] »

PaulHoule wrote: post #22
kibwen wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was just swimming in it that would be one thing. Ingesting the water could be very bad, depending on what's in it.

They keep the water in an LWR pretty clean to avoid corrosion problems. Thing is the slightest almost of tritium in the water will light up a portal detector like a pinball machine on tilt.

[deleted]

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#135

Post by grogenaut »

simoncion wrote: post #79
grogenaut wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

numbers matter. A human naturally gives off 0.2mSv/year. so basically you are emitting radiation right now, just very slowly. They had 300 counts per minute which would e around 6200 mSv year. But how much is that? the limit in a year for some body parts goes up to 500mSv year for workers. But that's if their body are getting that much radiation for the whole year. TL;DR you're always getting some ionizing radiation,…

> They had 300 counts per minute which would e around 6200 mSv year Are you sure about that? 6200 mSv is 6.2 Sv, which I understand to be near-universally deadly. That dosage would be profoundly incompatible with the news that the worker was being sent offsite to seek non-emergency medical attention. Poking around, it looks like "counts per minute" have to get converted to a dosage using an instrument-specific formul…

no not sure. yeah I used the an average instrument specific rate. The point is a) everything emits, b) we have no idea on severity from the info, could be a little, could be a lot. Could also be short term (haircut) or longer term (ingested) exposures.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#137

Post by LeoPanthera »

arthurcolle wrote: post #108

300 CPM in hair after decontamination is a massive red flag. If this is from systemic circulation, could be GBq-level total body activity. The non-emergency classification is bureaucratic nonsense. This is an internal contamination event with unknown but potentially severe consequences.

A CPM value means nothing without additional context. Counts vary based on detector type and size, radiation type, energy, distance and geometry, all sorts of things. They're not comparable except in identical contexts.

This is why the Sievert exists as a unit.

As a general rule, falling into a reactor pool is probably fine, as long as you don't reach the bottom. (But please don't try it.)

There's even an XKCD "What if" about it. https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#138

Post by arthurcolle »

fekxpurrrt wrote: post #133
arthurcolle wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I maintain the complete archive of every publication my father did from 1969 to 2019 and continue to update the archive based on new publications. I use the data to train Nuclear Radiochemistry AI Agents and while I do not have my father's credentials, I actively use this dataset to learn about his field, and from my limited knowledge here I felt the need to comment. After all, what is skepticism if we can't share an…

[flagged]

I'm sorry you feel that way, but I actually feel like I shared fairly demure commentary and then presented my background with full transparency. I care mostly about the health of this worker, and less about the opinions of a 1 minute old account.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#139

Post by C6JEsQeQa5fCjE »

arthurcolle wrote: post #131
malfist wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure your father is a very accomplished gentleman. But I was asking why your armchair analysis is better than the experts who actually know what happened here?

I maintain the complete archive of every publication my father did from 1969 to 2019 and continue to update the archive based on new publications. I use the data to train Nuclear Radiochemistry AI Agents and while I do not have my father's credentials, I actively use this dataset to learn about his field, and from my limited knowledge here I felt the need to comment. After all, what is skepticism if we can't share an…

> I use the data to train Nuclear Radiochemistry AI Agents and [...]

As someone who is not involved in this ongoing discussion, I have to just say that invoking LLM agents when asked for credentials is not going to go in your favor.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#140

Post by not_kurt_godel »

arthurcolle wrote: post #131
malfist wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure your father is a very accomplished gentleman. But I was asking why your armchair analysis is better than the experts who actually know what happened here?

I maintain the complete archive of every publication my father did from 1969 to 2019 and continue to update the archive based on new publications. I use the data to train Nuclear Radiochemistry AI Agents and while I do not have my father's credentials, I actively use this dataset to learn about his field, and from my limited knowledge here I felt the need to comment. After all, what is skepticism if we can't share an…

So you don't have the necessary credentials, and you still wouldn't be qualified to comment even if you did have them unless you had access to the internal data. But no worries, I'm sure you'd be OK getting surgery from a surgeon's son who never went to medical school nor read your chart.
Post reply on HN