Become a part of the TranceAddict community!Frequently Asked Questions - Please read this if you haven'tSearch the forums
TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > Chernobyl, 26th April, 1986
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Share
Author
Thread    Post A Reply
ogvh5150
Formula 1 Addict



Registered: Aug 2003
Location: F1 2008 Red Bull Racing/BMW Sauber
Chernobyl, 26th April, 1986



Wikipedia:

quote:
On April 25, 1986, the Unit 4 reactor was scheduled to be shut down for a test. It had been decided to use this occasion as an opportunity to test the ability of the reactor's turbine generator to generate sufficient electricity to power the reactor's safety systems (in particular, the water pumps) in the event of a loss of external electric power. Reactors such as Chernobyl have a pair of diesel generators available as standby, but these do not activate instantaneously—the reactor was, therefore, to be used to spin up the turbine, at which point the turbine would be disconnected from the reactor and allowed to spin under the force of its own rotational inertia, and the aim of the test was to determine whether the turbines in the rundown phase could sufficiently power the pumps while the generators were starting up. The test was successfully carried out previously on another unit (with all safety provisions active) and the outcome was negative (that is, the turbines generated insufficient power in the rundown phase to power the pumps), but additional improvements were made to the turbines which prompted the need for another test.

The power output of the Chernobyl-4 reactor was to be reduced from its normal capacity of 3200 MW thermal to 1000 MW thermal in order to conduct the test at a safer, lower level of power. However, due to a delay in beginning the experiment the reactor operators reduced the power level too rapidly, and the actual power output fell to 30 MW thermal. As a result, the concentration of the nuclear poison product xenon-135 increased (this product is typically consumed in a reactor under higher power conditions). Though the scale of the power drop was close to the maximum allowed by safety regulations, the crew's management chose not to shut down the reactor and to continue the experiment. Further, it was decided to 'shortcut' the experiment and raise power output only to 200 MW. In order to overcome the neutron absorption of the excess xenon-135, the control rods were pulled out of the reactor somewhat farther than normally allowed under safety regulations. As part of the experiment, at 1:05 AM on April 26, the water pumps which were to be driven by the turbine generator were turned on; the water flow generated by this action exceeded that specified by safety regulations. The water flow increased at 1:19 A.M.—since water also absorbs neutrons, this further increase in the water flow necessitated the removal of the manual control rods, producing a very unstable and dangerous operating condition.

At 1:23:04 A.M., the experiment began. The unstable state of the reactor was not reflected in any way on the control panel, and it does not appear that anyone in the reactor crew was fully aware of danger. Electricity to the water pumps was shut off, and as they were driven by the inertia of the turbine generator the water flow rate decreased. The turbine was disconnected from the reactor, increasing the level of steam in the reactor core. As the coolant heated, pockets of steam formed in the coolant lines. The particular design of the RBMK graphite moderated reactor at Chernobyl has a large positive void coefficient, which means that the power of the reactor increases rapidly in the absence of the neutron-absorbing effect of water, and in this case, the reactor operation becomes progressively less stable and more dangerous. At 1:23:40 A.M. the operators pressed the AZ-5 ("Rapid Emergency Defense 5") button that ordered a "SCRAM" — a shutdown of the nuclear reactor, fully inserting all control rods, including the manual control rods that had been incautiously withdrawn earlier, into the reactor. It is unclear whether it was done as an emergency measure, or simply as a routine method of shutting down the reactor upon the completion of an experiment (the reactor was scheduled to be shut down for routine maintenance). It is usually suggested that the SCRAM was ordered as a response to the unexpected rapid power increase. On the other hand, Anatoly Dyatlov, chief engineer on Chernobyl nuclear station at the time of the accident, writes in his book:

"Prior to 01:23:40, systems of centralized control ... didn't register any parameter changes that could justify the SCRAM. Commission ... gathered and analyzed large amount of materials and, as stated in its report, failed to determine the reason why the SCRAM was ordered. There was no need to look for the reason. The reactor was simply being shut down upon the completion of the experiment." [6]

Due to the slow speed of the control rod insertion mechanism (18–20 seconds to complete), the hollow tips of the rods and the temporary displacement of coolant, the SCRAM caused the reaction rate to increase. Increased energy output caused the deformation of control rod channels. The rods became stuck after being inserted only one-third of the way, and were therefore unable to stop the reaction. By 1:23:47 the reactor jumped to around 30 GW, ten times the normal operational output. The fuel rods began to melt and the steam pressure rapidly increased causing a large steam explosion, displacing and destroying the reactor lid, rupturing the coolant tubes and then blowing a hole in the roof.

To reduce costs, and because of its large size, the reactor was constructed with only partial containment. This allowed the radioactive contaminants to escape into the atmosphere after the steam explosion burst the primary pressure vessel. After part of the roof blew off, the inrush of oxygen—combined with the extremely high temperature of the reactor fuel and graphite moderator—sparked a graphite fire. This fire greatly contributed to the spread of radioactive material and the ultimate contamination of outlying areas.

There is some controversy surrounding the exact sequence of events after 1:22:30 local time due to the inconsistencies between eyewitness accounts and station records. The version that is most commonly agreed upon is described above. According to this theory, the first explosion happened at approximately 1:23:47, seven seconds after the operators ordered the "SCRAM". It is sometimes claimed that the explosion happened 'before' or immediately following the SCRAM (this was the working version of the Soviet committee studying the accident). This distinction is important, because, if the reactor went critical several seconds after the SCRAM, its failure would have to be attributed to the design of the control rods, whereas the explosion at the time of the SCRAM would place the blame on the operators. Indeed, a weak seismic event, similar to a magnitude-2.5 earthquake, was registered at 1:23:39 in the Chernobyl area. The situation is complicated by the fact that the "SCRAM" button was pressed more than once, and the person who actually pressed it died two weeks after the accident from radiation poisoning.

In January 1993, the IAEA issued a revised analysis of the Chernobyl accident, attributing the main root cause to the reactor's design and not to operator error. The IAEA's 1986 analysis had cited the operators' actions as the principal cause of the accident.


___________________

Old Post Apr-27-2006 03:12 
Click Here to See the Profile for ogvh5150 Click here to Send ogvh5150 a Private Message Add ogvh5150 to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Q5echo
asymetrical scepticism



Registered: Feb 2004
Location: Dallas

this will break your heart

>>The Legacy<<

Last edited by Q5echo on Apr-27-2006 at 08:09

Old Post Apr-27-2006 05:24  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Q5echo Click here to Send Q5echo a Private Message Add Q5echo to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
tiesto14
Let The Music Play



Registered: Oct 2001
Location: The Palladium New York City

i'm waiting for one of you guys to blame this in George Bush.


___________________
Bring back 1994 NYC clubbing nights, cus the sh*t today is filled with junk parties and DJs that play sh*t House.....Zabiela, Sander, or Howells and all the rest suck and couldnt throw a night like it was in the early 90s in NYC!!!...Screw Twilo - give me Limelight circa 1993!!!

Old Post Apr-27-2006 05:35  Bahamas
Click Here to See the Profile for tiesto14 Click here to Send tiesto14 a Private Message Visit tiesto14's homepage! Add tiesto14 to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
stren
Strenowski



Registered: Jul 2004
Location: Warsaw, Earth, 1 AU

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
i'm waiting for one of you guys to blame this in George Bush.


well, can you rule that out ?


___________________

insignificant cor member alliance

Old Post Apr-27-2006 07:14  Poland
Click Here to See the Profile for stren Click here to Send stren a Private Message Visit stren's homepage! Add stren to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Marc Summers
I must behave



Registered: Jan 2005
Location: New York, USA

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
i'm waiting for one of you guys to blame this in George Bush.




If anyone is interested in a good documentary about the effects of the chernobyl disaster, check out Chernobyl Heart. It's very hard to get through, but if you can, it will certainly educate you.

Old Post Apr-27-2006 10:57 
Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Summers Click here to Send Marc Summers a Private Message Add Marc Summers to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
DrUg_Tit0
e^(i*pi)+1=0



Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

Well, yeah..safety regulations are there for a reason. When you save money on construction works, do an experiment that has already been known to have failed, turn off automatic safety regulations, and finally ignore all the system warnings, you might just as well expect something like this to happen. What really puzzles me is how the operators of the plant who should have been well versed in the plant operations didn't realize the risks of what they were doing.


___________________
1+1=10

Old Post Apr-27-2006 11:52  Croatia
Click Here to See the Profile for DrUg_Tit0 Click here to Send DrUg_Tit0 a Private Message Add DrUg_Tit0 to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
svens_bath
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Glasgow, UK

do you think govts should be focussing on renewable energy as opposed to nuclear? did i read that china is looking to open a few new ones soon. seems like there might be better ways around the energy question that nuclear...but i dont know an awful lot about it.

Old Post Apr-27-2006 12:44  United Kingdom
Click Here to See the Profile for svens_bath Click here to Send svens_bath a Private Message Add svens_bath to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
ali92
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Dec 2001
Location: Fishtown, Philadelphia

quote:
Originally posted by svens_bath
do you think govts should be focussing on renewable energy as opposed to nuclear? did i read that china is looking to open a few new ones soon. seems like there might be better ways around the energy question that nuclear...but i dont know an awful lot about it.
Definitely. Renewable energy is the direction we should be headed in. I looked at the Wikipedia article and noticed that we're at the 20th anniversary since the catastophe, though it will be centuries or millennia until that area can safe for humans to go to again.

Old Post Apr-27-2006 16:00  United Nations
Click Here to See the Profile for ali92 Click here to Send ali92 a Private Message Add ali92 to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
occrider
Traveladdict



Registered: Oct 2000
Location: New York

quote:
Originally posted by svens_bath
do you think govts should be focussing on renewable energy as opposed to nuclear? did i read that china is looking to open a few new ones soon. seems like there might be better ways around the energy question that nuclear...but i dont know an awful lot about it.


The problem is cost. Most renewable energy sources are not very cost efficient costing as much as two to three times more than nuclear power. Nuclear power is slightly cheaper than most coal and gas plants. Significantly cheaper if you factor in the cost of C02 emissions.

Click on linky and go to figure 1.1 on page 4


___________________
Retro ...

Old Post Apr-27-2006 16:59  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for occrider Click here to Send occrider a Private Message Add occrider to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Kapedano
Forza Inter!



Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Virginia Beach

quote:
Originally posted by tiesto14
i'm waiting for one of you guys to blame this in George Bush.


Defently, Bush is to blaim for all of worlds problems

Old Post Apr-27-2006 18:37  Albania
Click Here to See the Profile for Kapedano Click here to Send Kapedano a Private Message Add Kapedano to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Dervish
Your opinion matters.



Registered: Dec 2003
Location:

quote:
Originally posted by ali92
Definitely. Renewable energy is the direction we should be headed in. I looked at the Wikipedia article and noticed that we're at the 20th anniversary since the catastophe, though it will be centuries or millennia until that area can safe for humans to go to again.


It was a gash (that means bad) design too. 20 second SCRAM lol!!!!

And renewable is a good asperation but as yet out of reach.

Old Post Apr-27-2006 21:35 
Click Here to See the Profile for Dervish Click here to Send Dervish a Private Message Add Dervish to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
InterMilan31
*



Registered: May 2004
Location: Around

ive visted chernobyl. Very wierd place quiet and dreary and most is still marked off. And no i dont have a 3rd arm or my balls fell off

Old Post Apr-28-2006 06:51 
Click Here to See the Profile for InterMilan31 Click here to Send InterMilan31 a Private Message Add InterMilan31 to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message

TranceAddict Forums > Other > Political Discussion / Debate > Chernobyl, 26th April, 1986
Post New Thread    Post A Reply

Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »  
Last Thread   Next Thread
Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackUnknown track from Sasha @ Sensation White Belgium 2005 [2005] [1]

Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackDMB - "The Space Between Us" (Tiesto Mix) [2004]

Show Printable Version | Subscribe to this Thread
Forum Jump:

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:12.

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
 
Search this Thread:

 
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict

Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
Support TA!