Live data from Hacker News

When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

practical.engineering

31–40 of 92 posts

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#31

I did a sort of internship at Los Alamos which involved building some drones. A year or two later I got a call from my advisor there, out of the blue asking me if I had anything immediately available that could do recon underground effectively. I didn't really, so I declined. I asked what they needed it for and he said it would be easier if I got the info from the news. That was kinda terrifying ... turned out to be…

I still find it terrifying that even robots couldn’t survive the Chernobyl hot zone.

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#32

"Wrong Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe" As an owner of a particularly opinionated Orange Cat, I can relate.

Why is it always the oranges? My orange is also very picky!

Orange boys are outspoken, sometimes to their own detriment.

Orange is overrepresented in house cats and underrepresented in feral cats. The interpretation of this is that what selects for a kitten at a shelter is an evolutionary disadvantage when in the wild.

I have owned a yellow girl (dilute orange) who was too clever by half, an orange boy who was very sweet but dumb as a post, and an orange boy with 3 brain cells most days, except he loans them out occasionally and without notice.

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#33

I'm submitting this based on the current top item "North Dakota law lists fake critical minerals based on coal lawyers' names" [0]. This accident was traced to a manager transcribing "inorganic absorbent" as "an organic absorbent". A more serious example of the need to have competent people with domain knowledge in the room and empowered when documents are written. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46492161

I'm surprised they made critical material purchasing decisions based on what some guy thinks he heard in a meeting, rather than official written documents written by and cross-checked by multiple engineers.

> I'm surprised they made critical material purchasing decisions based on what some guy thinks he heard in a meeting

Right? We don't store nuclear waste where I work ... BUT one time we needed to buy a bunch of ethernet cables, basically the same thing. We wrote down our requirements, came up with some options. The engineers evaluated the options before purchasing and checked what we received before installing it. There wasn't even a formal process, it's just ... how you do your job?

Obviously organizational dysfunction is a real thing, particularly at LANL, so I can definitely imagine how this sort of thing can fall through the cracks for various processes. But I feel like but requirements verification should be a rigorously enforced formal procedure before storing nuclear waste in perpetuity.

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#34

I keep asking this question: "Hot" nuclear waste means theres still a lot of energy left to capture. Why are we disposing of materials that still have a lot of energy to capture? Seems like the closer we get to lead, in terms of capture, the better. It would be like taking my half-full of gas car to the pump, dumping the existing gas, and getting fresh. Its a waste of energy, waste of resources, and generates worse n…

The materials are still full of potential energy, but it's much more expensive to reprocess them than to mine fresh uranium. It's even more expensive to reprocess them without incidentally releasing more radioactive contamination into the environment. (Several countries reprocess nuclear fuel now or did so in the past, but the facilities have always released more radioactive material into the environment than simple storage.)

It's kind of like why old and broken polyvinyl chloride pipes go to landfills instead of being burned as fuel in power plants. Even though PVC is flammable, the cost of burning PVC and capturing its carcinogenic combustion byproducts is a lot greater than burying waste PVC and burning fossil hydrocarbons.

In the far future, uranium mining costs might rise enough that it makes economic sense to reprocess old spent nuclear fuel. In the early days of the atomic age people thought that reprocessing and breeder reactors would be necessary because uranium was believed to be very rare on Earth. Vigorous exploration programs and new mining techniques proved this belief to be false by the end of the 1960s, and the situation hasn't changed since then. It's safer and cheaper to mine fresh fuel and just store the old fuel without any sort of reprocessing.

See e.g.

Bunn, Matthew G., Steve Fetter, John P. Holdren, and Bob van der Zwaan. 2003. The Economics of Reprocessing vs. Direct Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel (PDF):

https://dash.harvard.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/7312037d...

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#35
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just when documents are written, but also when the practices they describe are implemented. You don't need to know a lot of chemistry to realize that mixing organics with nitric acid is a bad idea. Why did none of the technicians doing the work say "hold on, this doesn't seem right"?

My guess, they were afraid to ruffle the feathers of their higher-ups. Yes, that's moronic, but this is the world we can find ourselves in IF the bosses are egotistical kingdom makers.

Or maybe just do as you are told and second guessing the procedure would lead to imposter syndrome

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like grape nuts

That is the most horrible and accurate comment I've read so far today lol

I tried my dad’s grape nuts once and I never felt the gulf between us wide as I did in that moment. WTF, man.

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#37

I keep asking this question: "Hot" nuclear waste means theres still a lot of energy left to capture. Why are we disposing of materials that still have a lot of energy to capture? Seems like the closer we get to lead, in terms of capture, the better. It would be like taking my half-full of gas car to the pump, dumping the existing gas, and getting fresh. Its a waste of energy, waste of resources, and generates worse n…

There’s a lot of nuance to the answer and I’m not a nuclear engineer, just an EE and occasional nuclear enthusiast. The biggest issue is the cost-effectiveness of reprocessing the “waste”, which you are completely correct about still having a ton of residual energy available, back into a useable fuel for a sustained nuclear chain reaction.

Some of the fission products that are produced in reactors are actively harmful for sustaining a chain reaction (neutron poisons), Xenon-135 being a prime example. Xenon-135 only has a half-life of about 9 hours (which means it’s pretty spicy) but it also has a massive neutron capture cross-section. If it doesn’t capture a neutron, it emits a beta particle (electron/positron), which doesn’t contribute to sustaining the reaction; if it does capture a neutron it becomes Xenon-136 which is pretty stable. In both cases, it’s sitting in the fuel but either useless (yay) or actively hurting the neutron economy (boo).

At some point in the future it might be economically advantageous to reprocess “used once” nuclear waste and use it in a second cycle but for now it’s way cheaper to get more fresh uranium and process that into fuel instead.

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#38
post #31

I did a sort of internship at Los Alamos which involved building some drones. A year or two later I got a call from my advisor there, out of the blue asking me if I had anything immediately available that could do recon underground effectively. I didn't really, so I declined. I asked what they needed it for and he said it would be easier if I got the info from the news. That was kinda terrifying ... turned out to be…

I still find it terrifying that even robots couldn’t survive the Chernobyl hot zone.

They could, if they were specced correctly. Wasn't the story that they intentionally requested robots hardened against lower radiation level than required to not disclose the true extent of the catastrophe? So the German company that built them underspecced the shielding and so they died quickly.

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#39
post #20

I'm submitting this based on the current top item "North Dakota law lists fake critical minerals based on coal lawyers' names" [0]. This accident was traced to a manager transcribing "inorganic absorbent" as "an organic absorbent". A more serious example of the need to have competent people with domain knowledge in the room and empowered when documents are written. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46492161

Thanks for highlighting that, I missed that in the video and was wondering why "anorganic" should be something different than "inorganic" (in my native German it's "anorganisch"). But still, I'm a bit alarmed that a trained nuclear technician would simply follow these instructions and mix organic material with acid without having any second thoughts about it...

I think it's worth remembering that this was a storage procedure that was also already abnormal/odd because of the specifics of the existing shielding. I think it's somewhat understandable for a technician to trust that the chemists know what they're doing in that kind of circumstance. If they had concerns, they may have even voiced them, but as is often the case, if the authority confirms that even though it's strange it's correct, it's not surprising that a technician would follow the directive. Even the authority figure may have verbally confirmed, "you said an organic absorbent??" "Yes, that's right, inorganic absorbent." Maybe even in a meeting that was meant to clarify written procedures.

Re: When Kitty Litter Caused a Nuclear Catastrophe

#40
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the most horrible and accurate comment I've read so far today lol

I tried my dad’s grape nuts once and I never felt the gulf between us wide as I did in that moment. WTF, man.

Lots, and lots, of sugar helps.
Post reply on HN