Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Airspace Over Flooded Nebraska Nuclear Power Plant Still Closed

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:07 PM
Original message
Airspace Over Flooded Nebraska Nuclear Power Plant Still Closed
http://www.businessinsider.com/faa-closes-airspace-over-flooded-nebraska-nuclear-power-plant-2011-6

A fire in Nebraska's Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant briefly knocked out the cooling process for spent nuclear fuel rods, ProPublica reports. The fire occurred on June 7th.

On June 6th, the Federal Administration Aviation (FAA) issued a directive banning aircraft from entering the airspace within a two-mile radius of the plant.

<snip>

WOWT, the local NBC affiliate, reports on its website: "The Ft. Calhoun Nuclear Facility is an island right now but it is one that authorities say is going to stay dry. They say they have a number of redundant features to protect the facility from flood waters that include the aqua dam, earthen berms and sandbags."

OPPD spokesman Jeff Hanson told Business Insider that the nuclear plant is in a "stable situation." He said the Missouri River is currently at 1005.6" above sea level, and that no radioactive fuel had yet been released or was expected to be released in the future.

<more>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. sandbags. fucking sandbags. Our high tech
protection against any danger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eagle Mall Donating Member (199 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. why close the airspace?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. Its only a matter of time until we have a major catastrophe here
in the good old USA concerning nuclear power plants. They're all getting old and metal fatigues with age, combined with vibrations and heat and cool cycles. That fact is not rocket science either. We've already had a couple near misses and no telling at the numbers that we don't know about. The only constant with the nuclear power industry is they all lie.

rec
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harvey007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. Clean, safe, penny-cheap
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 05:40 PM by harvey007
Let's send these fools off to Fukushima for a taste of their own medicine.

http://casenergy.org/nuclear-energy/energy-in-your-state/nuclear-energy-in-nebraska/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. The times don't make sense...
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 05:48 PM by kristopher
Initially I thought it was just the use of zulu time in the NOTAM which had made its way into the story, but when I refreshed my memory of the conversion it still didn't work out.

If Nebraska is CDT, and the NOTAM was issued at 2232 UTC(zulu) then it would have been issued 5 hours before the fire reportedly broke out.
NOAA time conversion chart: http://hurricanes.noaa.gov/zulu-utc.html

From the original quoted by OP article:
Officials at Fort Calhoun said the situation at their plant came nowhere near to Fukushima's. They said it would have taken 88 hours for the heat produced by the fuel to boil away the cooling water.

Workers restored cooling in about 90 minutes, and plant officials said the temperature in the pool only increased by two degrees.

The fire, reported at 9:30 a.m., led to the loss of electrical power for the system that circulates cooling water through the spent fuel pool, according to a report from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A chemical fire suppression system discharged, and the plant's fire brigade cleared smoke from the room and reported that the fire was out at 10:20 a.m., the NRC said.

http://www.truth-out.org/electrical-fire-knocks-out-spent-fuel-cooling-nebraska-nuke-plant/1308155673

The fact that the minute part of the time hack on the NOTAM is :32 and the fire was reported at :30 would be consistent with the timing related to emergency procedures (about two minutes from time the checklist was run in the NPP control room).

Three years ago I would have assumed poor reporting and let it go, but after becoming more familiar with the NRC penchant for secrecy I'm interested in resolving the anomaly.

Anyone see an explantion I've missed that is embedded in the facts as known?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpoonFed Donating Member (801 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I'm not following you...
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 03:10 PM by SpoonFed
NRC report states fire noted at about 9:30am CDT (2:30pm UTC),
Fire is out by 10:20am CDT (3:20pm UTC)
NOTAM is 5:32pm CDT (22:32 UTC)

I don't follow the NOTAM to emergency procedure checklist linkage.
Question is, then, why a NOTAM issued 7 hours after the fire is out?

Wait there is something fishy...

I just double checked the sources:

FAA NOTAM is 06/06
http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_1_6523.html

NRC Fire report is 06/07
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/event/2011/20110608en.html

In that case, the NOTAM was issued at 5:32pm the day before the fire,
17 hours before in fact.

Coincidence? I mean it is flooded out and all?

Also NOTAM says 2231UTC not 2232UTC so the 2 minute checklist thing seems unlikely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kristopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. I can't follow that at all.
The only thing I can do is to tell you that my experience with command center operations leads me to believe that the nuclear plant control room has a "hot line" that automatically connects them to a set group of emergency responders and sends out a mass message with one action on the part of those in the control room. A response like the NOTAM is probably canned, and triggered almost automatically by the nature of the initial notification. So a one or two minute response is what you would expect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpoonFed Donating Member (801 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. To be clear...
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 07:40 PM by SpoonFed
the timeline (from the reports) is as follows:

06/06 at 22h31 UTC a NOTAM was issued by the FAA
06/07 at 14h30 UTC the fire was detected, and out by 15h20 UTC according to the NRC

14h30 + 1h29 ~= 15h59 difference

That's a 16 to 17 hour gap between NOTAM being issued and the fire.
The NOTAM was issued the day before the fire.

Hotline or no, the reports state this was the timeline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fledermaus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
6. A photo, nuclear power unsafe at any speed.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 05:51 PM by Fledermaus
How's the fire department going to get there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Good point. In the event of an emergency, assistance would be difficult
If not impossible, to bring to bear quickly. They'd be pretty much cut off and on their own to deal with a major event until the floodwaters receded.

What a clusterfuck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC