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

281–290 of 545 posts

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#281

Post by hexfish »

feminintendo wrote: post #150
slicktux wrote: post #67

I’ve heard of people falling into the spent fuel pool but never the reactor pool. Usually there are strict FME barriers in place and one cannot even look over into the pool without violating the FME. I wonder what led to the event? Definitely an OSHA recordable!

This is not true at all. I have personally looked into a reactor pool. I remember thinking how easy it would be to literally just jump in. I mean, I'd trip about a thousand alarms and probably end up in prison, but....

I second this. We went to one on a school trip and the intrusive thoughts were very strong that day.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#282

Post by adastra22 »

stavros wrote: post #269
afiori wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that reactor and waste pools are some of the least radioactive environments as they are constantly monitored for leakage.

Possibly, but I wouldn't think "least radioactive environments in a nuclear reactor" is a low bar. I don't know, though.

No you misread. One of the least radioactive areas, full stop. It is less radioactive than your house.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#283

Post by orwin »

hunterpayne wrote: post #232
ern wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get a feeling that there are a lot of people trying to minimize this incident for some reason.

I get the feeling that you don't know how complicated calculating radiation exposure is. There are plenty of interest in fear mongering against nuclear. Almost all the people talking about how much radiation 300 CPM is have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Some confuse total measurement units for rates; others are using just the wrong units; still others are talking about levels that are 1000x or 10000…

CPM doesn't mean anything, it's useless to compare it to anything without more information.

For his job, depends on the dose he took. In my country he would have been on benefits until the dose was calculated, then if possible, reintegrated in the team, or directed towards a new job if not (paid formation and everything). I've studied with a diver who couldn't work with radioactive trash anymore, he wasn't meant to be a SWE in the end, he now dive for unexploded WW2 stuff in the north sea/Baltic I think

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#284

Post by jkhdigital »

stavros wrote: post #269
afiori wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that reactor and waste pools are some of the least radioactive environments as they are constantly monitored for leakage.

Possibly, but I wouldn't think "least radioactive environments in a nuclear reactor" is a low bar. I don't know, though.

You’re right, you don’t know! When I worked on a nuclear aircraft carrier, I learned that the people working down in the reactor spaces got significantly less radiation exposure than the people working on the flight deck. My ship was ported in Japan when the Fukushima disaster happened, and we had to abruptly go out to sea because we couldn’t let the (minimal) fallout contaminate the reactor spaces and make it impossible to monitor the reactor itself properly.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#285

Post by pseudalopex »

arthurcolle wrote: post #149
not_kurt_godel wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep you know better than the people who have the credentials you don't and the access to internal data you don't. I don't see what's holding you back from doing surgery, qualifications and context are no barrier to the application of your self-imagined expertise.

I don't claim to know better. But restarting a $1.5B plant after 2 years of inactivity and having a worker fall into a vat of radioactive water and still being at 300 CPM after a decontamination procedure is not normal.

Phrases such as massive red flag and bureaucratic nonsense were claims you knew better.

Who claimed the event was normal? A worker falling in non contaminated water would not be normal. Many things are bot normal and not emergencies. False dichotomy and straw man are logical fallacies.

Were the plant cost and status meant to support your claim 300 counts per minute was a red flag? They appeared irrelevant.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#287

Post by jacquesm »

godelski wrote: post #178
mananaysiempre wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [Y]ou are getting over 100bn CPM right now. The reason it doesn't matter is that this is neutrinos and they're not interacting with you. I mean, if you actually had a neutrino detector that produced 10e10 CPM over your cross-section, then it would matter for you, because particle physicists would kidnap you to learn the secret :)

Honestly, the military would probably come after you first. Or maybe an oil company? Frankly because if you could detect neutrinos at that resolution you would be able to produce a really good mapping of... just about anything. From the inside of the Earth to the inside of a secret military facility on the opposite side of the planet. Not to mention you've also invented a communication device that is essentially unja…

It would be a very up-close-and-personal variation of the resource curse.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#288

Post by pembrook »

antonvs wrote: post #141
pembrook wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aaaand it’s this alarmist attitude which is why we don’t have abundant cheap nuclear energy. Sea-drilling rigs (oil) have far more potential for environmental damage than modern nuclear plants Yet they have no federal public register for when a worker falls overboard (an incident far more likely to result in death).

> Sea-drilling rigs (oil) have far more potential for environmental damage than modern nuclear plants Key word: "modern". A key aspect of a modern nuclear plant, that supports its high level of safety, is the required incident reporting and followup. The relevant issue is not really about a single worker being injured or dying. It's about detecting safety issues which could lead to a catastrophe far beyond what a sea…

> It's about detecting safety issues which could lead to a catastrophe far beyond what a sea oil drilling rig can

A worker falling into a reactor pool (which is just room temp water with very little risk) is not a catastrophe, yet due to the absurd safetyism surrounding nuclear it requires a federal report.

We don’t require this level of cost insanity for far more deadly worker events at oil, gas, solar or wind facilities.

There is no systemic risk from worker falls. MAYBE the plant in question should address hand railing heights from pre-ADA construction. It certainly shouldn’t require multiple federal government employees to create a report on it and be publicly listed in federal register and reported on by hundreds of news outlets.

You’re making my point.

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#289

Post by orwin »

cma wrote: post #253
hunterpayne wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He will be fine. He might not still have his job in a few months but other that, he will be fine. 300 CPM isn't even close to dangerous. You get a higher dose every time you fly in an airplane, or go to La Paz, Bolivia.

> They ingested some amount of cavity water Isn't it much worse internally than hitting your outer skin?

Yes, but: depends on what he ingested. Deuterium/tritium cannot emit Alpha particles, the ones blocked by your outer/dead skin (also they're an order of magnitude more dangerous than the other at equivalent grey), so he's fine in that way (unless there is more in the pool, but that would be a bigger issue).

The issue with ingesting deuterium/tritium is that the dose will now have to be calculated/estimated per organ, and while I don't remember exactly how it's done, it's more complex than calculating the mSv he took (I can't give you more details, I'm not competent, I've observed a radiologist a week my bachelor year to decide which master I would do, I'm now working in software which should tell you everything)

Re: A worker fell into a nuclear reactor pool

#290

Post by Applejinx »

afiori wrote: post #246
wiz21c wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dunno if the life vest bit comment of yours was sarcastic, but it is a funny remark for sure :-) it sounds like "guy felt down in a volcano, but fortunately, he had a life vest"

My understanding is that reactor and waste pools are some of the least radioactive environments as they are constantly monitored for leakage.

It's because water blocks radioactivity. It's like the opposite of the Fallout games and their radioactive water: you would have to swim right down to the radioactive material and wrap yourself around it at which point you'd basically melt.
Post reply on HN