Latest news with #ONR
The Herald Scotland
10 hours ago
- General
- The Herald Scotland
Why Torness nuclear power plant is not all it's cracked up to be
The risk of a nuclear accident is thought to be relatively high in new reactors as they are broken in. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl were both in their break-in phase when accidents occurred. Then the risk lowers in mid-life. But as reactors become older, as with any other sort of equipment, there is an increased risk of age-related failures. The Fukushima reactors began commercial operation between 1971 and 1975, so were over 40 years old when the meltdowns occurred. Torness and Hunterston B are both Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors (AGRs) which opened in 1976 and 1989 respectively. There were an estimated 586 cracks across the two Hunterston B reactors when it was eventually forced to close in January 2022. There are a similar number of cracks in just one of the two reactors at Torness, with cracks also starting to appear in the other reactor. Cracking in the graphite core of these reactors is a problem because graphite debris could build up in the fuel channels comprising the operator's ability to keep the fuel cool and misshapen bricks could make inserting the control rods difficult. In a worst-case either of these could lead to a meltdown. The late John Large, a nuclear engineering consultant, explained that cracks also cast doubt on the safety of these reactors in the event of an emergency like an earthquake. A cracked and deteriorating core has lost its residual strength. If the core is wobbled by a small earthquake the core could become misaligned, and the fuel modules could get stuck in the core. Then the fuel temperature would get raised and could undergo a melt. If the radioactivity gets into the gas stream and the reactor is venting because it's over pressurised then you have a release the radioactive gas into the atmosphere and you have dispersion and a contamination problem. Pete Roche (Image: NQ) Clearly, it's time for the ageing Torness reactors to be closed. Keeping them open any longer would be gambling with public safety. We also have to bear in mind that there is a significant design difference at Torness, compared with Hunterston, which could make the cracking problem worse. The Torness reactors have seal rings between the graphite bricks that make up the reactor core. The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) says there could be 'a systematic failure' of the seal rings after cracking. In January 2020, ONR brought forward the date when it expected to start seeing cracks appearing at Torness by six years but the closure date was only brought forward by two years from 2030 to 2028. Logically, we might have expected Torness to close in 2024. Then, in January 2024, in a bizarre switch, EDF changed its mind, and reverted to a 2030 closure date 'subject to plant inspections and regulatory approvals'. READ MORE on the Future of Torness series: Torness was only ever expected to operate for 30 or at most 35 years, so it is now past its sell by date. With cracks appearing in both reactors the precautionary principle dictates that it is time to shut up shop. Jobs at Torness won't disappear immediately when the station closes. It took over three years to empty Hunterston B of fuel. After that it will take almost a century to dismantle the buildings, decommission the reactors and eradicate the radiation from the land and buildings, in fact, when Hunterston B transfers its ownership from EDF to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) next April, the Scottish Parliament has been told the NDA will probably need to recruit more staff to help with the decommissioning work. As far as building new reactors at Torness, or anywhere else in Scotland, whether large or small, is concerned, that would be the last thing Scotland needs. It is perfectly feasible to supply 100% of Scotland's energy (not just electricity) from renewable sources. Future of Torness logo (Image: NQ) In fact, a recent study by renowned energy modelling academics at the LUT University in Finland, showed that not only is a 100% renewable energy mix feasible for the whole UK but it would save well over £100 billion in achieving net zero by 2050, compared to the UK Government's current strategy. What we need to balance variable renewables and reduce payments for turning off renewables is not always on 24/7 nuclear reactors, but more energy storage and flexibility in electricity demand. Nuclear power is too slow, too inflexible and too expensive to play a role in cutting carbon emissions.
Yahoo
25-05-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
Lost WWI submarine captured in never-before-seen images off the California coast
A World War I submarine wreck off the coast of Southern California has been captured for the first time in new video and images made possible using advanced deep-sea imaging technology. The sunken U.S. Navy vessel now resting on the San Diego seafloor is known as the USS F-1. F-class submarines were based in the Pacific, serving at Hawaii and off California. The F-1 was lost at sea following an accidental collision on December 17, 1917, resulting in the death of 19 crew members. While others were rescued, the submarine sank in just 10 seconds. It was found again nearly 60 years later, according to the Submarine Force Library and Museum Association. The high-definition images of the over a century-old submarine were taken in February and March, when researchers at the Massachusetts-based Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution used a human-occupied vehicle called 'Alvin' and the autonomous underwater vehicle named 'Sentry' to travel down 1,300 feet below the surface of the Pacific waters. 'Once we identified the wreck and determined it was safe to dive, we were able to capture never-before-seen perspectives of the sub,' WHOI's Bruce Strickrott, manager of the Alvin Group at WHOI and the sub's senior pilot, said in a statement. 'As a U.S. Navy veteran, it was a profound honor to visit the wreck of the F-1 with our ONR and NHHC colleagues aboard Alvin.' The mission also included team members from the Navy, the Naval History and Heritage Command, and the National Science Foundation. The National Science Foundation completed surveys of the submarine using video cameras, imaging systems on Alvin, as well as sonar systems on Sentry and the research vessel Atlantis. They also examined a Navy torpedo bomber training aircraft that crashed near the same location in 1950. The sonar on Atlantic and Sentry was used to produce maps of the wreck and seafloor, while Alvin's cameras captured images of the wreck that was stitched into models capable of measuring the sub and the marine life it now supports. Researchers were also able to reconstruct the F-1 and create a three-dimensional model. The dives were part of a previously planned training and engineering mission to give pilots-in-training time to hone their skills and to allow for the development of new technology. 'While these depths were well within the dive capability for Alvin and Sentry, they were technical dives requiring specialized expertise and equipment,' Anna Michel, the co-lead of the expedition, said. 'We were careful and methodical in surveying these historical sites so that we could share these stunning images, while also maintaining the reverence these sites deserve.' Following the dives, they held a remembrance ceremony on Atlantic, ringing a bell for each of the service members lost at sea. 'History and archaeology are all about people and we felt it was important to read their names aloud," said Naval History and Heritage Command Underwater Archaeologist Brad Krueger. It was his first in-person dive on a historical wreck site. "The Navy has a solemn responsibility to ensure the legacies of its lost Sailors are remembered.'
The Independent
23-05-2025
- Science
- The Independent
Lost WWI submarine captured in never-before-seen images off the California coast
A World War I submarine wreck off the coast of Southern California has been captured for the first time in new video and images made possible using advanced deep-sea imaging technology. The sunken U.S. Navy vessel now resting on the San Diego seafloor is known as the USS F-1. F-class submarines were based in the Pacific, serving at Hawaii and off California. The F-1 was lost at sea following an accidental collision on December 17, 1917, resulting in the death of 19 crew members. While others were rescued, the submarine sank in just 10 seconds. It was found again nearly 60 years later, according to the Submarine Force Library and Museum Association. The high-definition images of the over a century-old submarine were taken in February and March, when researchers at the Massachusetts-based Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution used a human-occupied vehicle called 'Alvin' and the autonomous underwater vehicle named 'Sentry' to travel down 1,300 feet below the surface of the Pacific waters. 'Once we identified the wreck and determined it was safe to dive, we were able to capture never-before-seen perspectives of the sub,' WHOI's Bruce Strickrott, manager of the Alvin Group at WHOI and the sub's senior pilot, said in a statement. 'As a U.S. Navy veteran, it was a profound honor to visit the wreck of the F-1 with our ONR and NHHC colleagues aboard Alvin.' The mission also included team members from the Navy, the Naval History and Heritage Command, and the National Science Foundation. The National Science Foundation completed surveys of the submarine using video cameras, imaging systems on Alvin, as well as sonar systems on Sentry and the research vessel Atlantis. They also examined a Navy torpedo bomber training aircraft that crashed near the same location in 1950. The sonar on Atlantic and Sentry was used to produce maps of the wreck and seafloor, while Alvin's cameras captured images of the wreck that was stitched into models capable of measuring the sub and the marine life it now supports. Researchers were also able to reconstruct the F-1 and create a three-dimensional model. The dives were part of a previously planned training and engineering mission to give pilots-in-training time to hone their skills and to allow for the development of new technology. 'While these depths were well within the dive capability for Alvin and Sentry, they were technical dives requiring specialized expertise and equipment,' Anna Michel, the co-lead of the expedition, said. 'We were careful and methodical in surveying these historical sites so that we could share these stunning images, while also maintaining the reverence these sites deserve.' Following the dives, they held a remembrance ceremony on Atlantic, ringing a bell for each of the service members lost at sea. 'History and archaeology are all about people and we felt it was important to read their names aloud," said Naval History and Heritage Command Underwater Archaeologist Brad Krueger. It was his first in-person dive on a historical wreck site. "The Navy has a solemn responsibility to ensure the legacies of its lost Sailors are remembered.'
BBC News
08-05-2025
- General
- BBC News
Dounreay told to improve safety after worker hurt
Dounreay's operators have been told to improve safety at the site after a piece of equipment toppled over and injured a accident happened at the nuclear power complex, near Thurso in Caithness, in watchdog the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) said the worker escaped with minor injuries, but added that it considered the incident as "significant" and "preventable".ONR has issued Nuclear Restoration Services (NRS) with an improvement notice. NRS said it took the protection of people and the environment "very seriously". ONR said the a radiological contamination monitor, weighing about two tonnes, toppled over while it was being inspector Tom Eagleton said: "This was a preventable incident that could have had serious consequences for those nearby."The improvement notice requires the Dounreay site to implement measures that will reduce the risk of similar occurrences in the future."Specifically, they must identify all operations involving the movement of heavy equipment and ensure comprehensive risk assessments and appropriate control measures are implemented before the work starts."NRS has until 25 July to comply with the notice.A spokesperson for NRS said: "We take the protection of people and the environment from harm very seriously. "We are taking action to strengthen our practices and management in this area, and will comply with the requirements of the notice received in April, having reported the incident to ONR and carried out an investigation." Corroded steelwork Dounreay was opened 70 years ago as an experimental nuclear power site and is now being decommissioned and the site shut year, ONR raised safety concerns about the state of some areas of the found corroded steelwork in a building being used to store drums of radioactive sodium, and leaks from low-level radioactive waste said it was carrying out urgent repairs and had an action plan to deal with other included ONR's warnings about old and degraded electric equipment and the site's stockpile of chemicals being over its set limit.
Business Mayor
06-05-2025
- Business
- Business Mayor
Starmer ignored nuclear watchdog when he blamed regulations for delays
Keir Starmer ignored warnings from his nuclear safety watchdog that it was wrong to blame regulations for delays building new reactors when he launched a plan to revive the nuclear power industry. The prime minister unveiled the nuclear renaissance strategy in February and said investment had slumped because the industry was 'suffocated by regulations'. However, a document released under freedom of information law reveals that the UK's Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) told the government in the run-up to the launch that claims about delays to nuclear power in a draft press release were 'not true'. Despite this, the claims were repeated in the final release. ONR was asked to comment on a draft government announcement of a taskforce to speed up the regulation of nuclear power. It made four corrections to the draft, which was passed to the investigative journalism cooperative The Ferret, and shared with the Guardian. But none of ONR's corrections were implemented when Starmer made the announcement on 6 February, under the headline 'Government rips up rules to fire up nuclear power'. The attack on nuclear regulations was part of Labour's attempt to prove its growth credentials and coincided with it clipping the wings of the competition watchdog and hauling in regulators to demand they do more to boost the economy. The draft release stated that three European regulatory regimes had reached different assessments of the design of the reactors being built at Hinkley Point C in Somerset, 'leading to delays and increased costs'. ONR said this was 'not accurate' and that it had refuted such claims before. 'Our feeling is that linking regulatory factors into the increasing Hinkley Point C costs and timeframes isn't true and the sentence doesn't stand up,' it said. ONR also suggested that the new taskforce should look at not the 'approval' but the 'deployment' of new reactor designs. 'The reactor approval process has no bearing on the overall speed of delivery, but rather construction,' it said. Neither amendment was made in Starmer's announcement, which reiterated the disputed wording in the draft. Two other changes suggested by ONR were also rejected. The energy company EDF predicted in 2007 that electricity from Hinkley Point C would be cooking Christmas turkeys in 2017. EDF said in January 2024 that the station might not be finished until 2031. The estimated total cost of building the plant has risen from £18bn in 2016 to £35bn in 2024. This could increase to £46bn when inflation is taken into account. According to ONR, its assessment of the reactor design was completed in 2012 but construction did not start until 2017. Its regulation had not delayed building since then, it said. Dave Cullen, who co-chairs a forum for ONR and campaign groups, described Starmer's announcement as misleading. skip past newsletter promotion Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. after newsletter promotion 'I'm shocked by the cynical and unprofessional approach of the government to this announcement,' said Cullen, who is independent of ONR. 'It seems as though it would rather attack an imaginary problem than seriously consider how to approach energy security.' Andrew Blowers, an anti-nuclear campaigner and emeritus professor of social sciences at the Open University, accused Starmer of 'ignorant prejudice' in blaming regulators for delays. ONR said the draft press release was 'shared under a strict embargo just a few days before release, with an opportunity for ONR to make representations on accuracy.' It added: 'Dialogue about specific sections of the press release, and in some cases, representations made about the accuracy of sentences/sections is standard practice discussion between communications teams.' The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero did not address the rejection of ONR's corrections. 'ONR has been informed of the review and will provide an important source of expertise as it progresses,' a spokesperson said. An ONR spokesperson said: 'We were fully briefed by the government on its intentions to set up the nuclear regulatory taskforce but would not expect to be consulted on its formation and membership. We did however provide comments on a government press release for their consideration. 'Nuclear safety and the protection of workers and the public will always be our priority, but we are committed to regulating in a way that supports cost-effective, efficient nuclear deployment and technological advancements. 'We have welcomed the creation of the taskforce and look forward to discussing all aspects of our regulation with the review team, understanding how our regulation can be improved further and considering ways to speed up the safe delivery of new nuclear projects.'
