Scuba Diver Survives Being Sucked Into Nuclear Plant (nydailynews.com)

mdsolar writes: A man scuba diving in Florida somehow survived being sucked into a nuclear power plant in a terrifying log flume ride. Christopher Le Cun was boating off the coast of Hutchinson Island when he and his friend went under to check out three large shadows beneath the waves that looked like buildings. After diving down, he felt a current that quickly pulled him toward one of three intake pipes, got sucked in and was immersed in darkness for five minutes in the water being taken to cool the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant. Le Cun told WPTV that he thought he was going to be chopped into tiny bits when he hit a turbine at the end of the 16-foot-wide, quarter-mile tube. However, the turbine never came, and the pipe eventually spat him out into a reservoir at the plant holding water used to cool the nuclear reactor. After finding a passing worker, Le Cun was able to call wife Brittany, who thought her husband was dead after seeing the shocked face of his diving partner.

Comments

From mdsolar?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, I didn't see that coming...

Re:From mdsolar?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not the usual source of info about how safe nuclear plants are ... ;0

i washed my hands in heavy water...

[Anonymous Coward]

i washed my hands but they didn't come clean...

Re:i washed my hands in heavy water...

[Applehu Akbar]

i washed my hands but they didn't come clean...

Wow, I can hear the mournful sax and clarinet backup behind you...

Re:i washed my hands in heavy water...

[Aighearach]

Usually it is just strings and percussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... was the biggest hit. There is also a country version that is a year older that was 4 guitars and a drummer.

Re:i washed my hands in heavy water...

[Kelsen]

Yep; that's the one I remember. Stonewall Jackson.


RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
Maybe it's the booze talking, but I want you to know I love booze.

Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

First bird shit disables nuclear reactors, and now nuclear plants are sucking in divers.
The hell is wrong with Nuclear tech in USA?

Re:Wut

[sumdumass]

It wasn't a nuclear plant that sucked in the diver. It was a current created by an artificial lagoon being drained below sea level and the sea via gravity refilling it. That is why there was no impeller or turbine to chew him up.

Re:Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say this isn't a problem with a reactor. In this case it is a problem of Florida. I was going to write up a list of things Florida is known for, but I realized after about a dozen, the list didn't seem to stop. This is just a case of self-absorbed youths. You can find them all over South Florida. They seem to be attracted to beach areas, and wealth.

Re:Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

That, and the fact that there are no water turbines in a nuclear plant.

Re:Wut

[beelsebob]

What makes you think that? How do you think they drive cooling water into the reactor?

Re:Wut

[Deadstick]

How do you think they drive cooling water into the reactor?

With a pump.

A turbine converts flow energy to mechanical energy by driving a shaft. A compressor/pump (whether it has rotating blades or not) does the reverse.

If the fluid is a gas, it's called a compressor; if liquid, it's called a pump.

Re: Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

So what about them things that convert the steam from the reactor to mechanical energy to then drive the generators ?

Re: Wut

[Dunbal]

That's on a completely separate circuit, and that water does not leave the plant unless there's some critical emergency. It's radioactive, see.

Re: Wut

[friedmud]

Just a bit of clarification:

In a pressurized water reactor there are typically 3 loops: primary, secondary and "feedwater".

Both the primary and secondary loops are closed... but can hardly be considered "radioactive". The water in the primary system will develop a small (very small) amount of tritium that will build up. Tritrium does have a medium length half-life (about 12 years) so you wouldn't want to drink a bunch of it... but it also won't be radioactive for long. However, the amount in the primary system is really small.

Other reactor types (like CANDU) that use heavy water (deuterium) are much more likely to develop tritium... but even then it is a tiny amount (a few kilograms a year in thousands of tons of water).

The primary and secondary are really closed because they're at high pressure and have carefully controlled chemistry (to keep down corrosion and, in the case of the primary system, to help control the nuclear reaction using boron (dissolved boric acid).

The feedwater (which is what comes from rivers/lakes/oceans typically) is simply there to condense the steam generated in the secondary system back into water after it flows through the turbine.

Re:Wut

[penguinoid]

Do the turbines in a hydroelectric plant magically become pumps and non-turbines when run in reverse?

Re:Wut

[KGIII]

I have a house in PCB, Florida. I am at it right now. I've even got my own private beach and live rather close to a few gated communities and things like that.

I'm not going to nitpick but I will take a minute to point out that this behavior you describe does not, in fact, appear to be limited by age.

Re: Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not magic, it's just the definition of words.

Re:Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

Do the turbines in a hydroelectric plant magically become pumps and non-turbines when run in reverse?

Not magically, but by changinge their function. Duh.

Just like an electric motor becomes a generator if you use it to convert motion to electrical current.

Re:Wut

[someone1234]

It isn't the diver's safety that's the worst with this story. Imagine hostile divers sabotaging the cooling system.
The diver should never have reached the inside of the plant.

Re:Wut

[thegarbz]

Yes but no one does that because the design of pumps and turbines except in special rare cases which are not efficient does not take into account operation in both directions.

I assume you're talking about hydrostorage plants? You'll find they have a different device pumping water up than they do extracting energy from water coming down.

On the other hand on the electrical world a motor and a generator are indeed the same thing.

Re:Wut

[Mr D from 63]

It isn't the diver's safety that's the worst with this story. Imagine hostile divers sabotaging the cooling system. The diver should never have reached the inside of the plant.

You can imagine such a thing, but actually pulling it off would be quite difficult, and even if you did the plant would remain perfectly safe as this cooling system is for the electrical turbine generator steam cycle, just like in a fossil plant, not the safety related heat removal systems.

Re: Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean the STEAM turbines?

Re:Wut

[AnnaZed]

It wasn't a nuclear plant that sucked in the diver. It was a current created by an artificial lagoon being drained below sea level and the sea via gravity refilling it. That is why there was no impeller or turbine to chew him up.

This what I love about this site, someone here is intelligent enough to explain this. (thanks)

Re:Wut

[Jahoda]

You should watch fewer movies, and read the article more often.

Re: Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

There are this thing called "fuel damage" it will send radioactive stuff into the water. The water in itself will not become radioactive (since the contaminants from the fuel does not dissolve into H2O) but there will be radioactive particles in the water. No plant has ever (as far as I know) run for any extent of time without fuel damage.

Re: Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

Printed circuit board??? Wtf?

Re:Wut

[RockDoctor]

In a "pumped storage" system (e.g. Dinorwyg, Cruachan), yes they do. But it's not magic, its engineering.

Re: Wut

[Anonymous Coward]

Feedwater is part of the secondary system. The water used to condense steam exiting the turbine generators and transporting the energy to the ultimate heat sink is typically called Circulating Water.

from the not-so-bright department

[geoskd]

So, apparently these guys moored to the warning buoy being interested in what was beneath it. Upon entering the water, they see a gigantic pipe, with some hardware that was clearly intended to prevent marine stuff from accidentally entering the pipe, so they thought: "What a great idea! lets bypass these things intended to keep big stuff out and enter this here pipe!"

Darwin just missed on this one...

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey Mr. Safety Pants
Ur a fag. The best part of humanity takes risks. I hope you live a long boring life, never having done anything. You can proudly boast that yea I took no stupid risks, and left no footprints on the planet. Species who take risks and are willing to cross land bridges are the ones that survive and procreate.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a picture of the location of the buoy and a diagram of the intakes:

http://imgur.com/a/Ve4to

The buoy is close enough to the plant that there is no doubt that it is part of the nuclear power plant.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

I can act like a 3 year old too! Your a racist douche that never made it out of the lower class.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Dantoo]

Dumb Cun

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

TFA doesn't say anything about a warning buoy, do you have a better source?

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a link to Google Maps showing the buoy. Yeah, you'd have to be pretty dumb not to be suspicious it might have something to do with the adjacent nuclear power plant (zoom out to see how close it is to the buoy).

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[WarJolt]

Umm....maybe this isn't obvious to everyone, but to me it's clearly a bad idea to publish publicly on the internet a perfect covert entrance to a nuclear power plant.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[FlyHelicopters]

Are you under the impression that Nuclear power plants have great security?

More like rent-a-cop security from the guy off the night job at the mall.

The only thing of any real value there is the uranium in the tanks and it isn't something that could be moved by anyone without really special equipment.

I suppose you could drive a truck in with explosives and blow it up, but you could do that at the Mall of America as well and frankly scare far more people.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[haruchai]

Perhaps but knocking a nuke plant offline would probably cause a cascade of power outages that could affect millions even if the body count is low.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe somebody misspelled 'Le Con'

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Deadstick]

By all means, follow your heart. But please warn the bystanders first.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[MightyYar]

Nuke plants go down once in a while without such catastrophic consequences. Indian Point was just in the news for exactly this.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MightyYar]

They show the buoy in the accompanying video. They even tied up to it, though they claim that the warnings were not readable anymore.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

I consider him a Darwin Award nominee.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh you're absolutely right, the only reason humanity reached the level of intelligence it has today, is because of retards like you and this guy doing stupid shit to make themselves more likely to be removed from the gene pool. It's great. :D I hope you, too, one day make your contribution. :)

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[delt0r]

Any diver worth his salt knows that there is no such thing as a random buoy in the ocean. And you always check up to date charts. They are there for a reason, its your job to know the bloody reason.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Heh. I like how this guy telling him to be risk taker drew the line at logging in to make his remark.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

population genetics disagrees

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Known Nutter]

Umm....maybe this isn't obvious to everyone, but to me it's clearly a bad idea to publish publicly on the internet a perfect covert entrance to a nuclear power plant.

The reservoir where the man surfaced does not appear to be within the secure area of the facility. One could jump into the water from a low bridge crossing on S Ocean Dr.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Swave An deBwoner]

TFA (I just had to read TFA, sorry, I couldn't resist) references a previous incident exactly like this one, at the same nuclear power plant, that was reported in 1989:

http://www.upi.com/Archives/1989/06/08/Diver-sucked-into-nuclear-power-plant/1273613281600/

So maybe it's not quite so clear cut as the power plant representative(s) make it out to be.

Power company spokesman Gary Mehalik said the 16-foot pipe has a concrete cap suspended near the ocean opening to cut down on the suction and prevent fish from being sucked in as well as divers, but Lamm said it obviously does not work.

and

Mehalik said there also is a buoy nearby marking the pipe. Lamm said he saw it but didn't know what it meant.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

And you got a 3 score... *facepalm*

I hope you're a 10-year old. If so, OK.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Harlequin80]

You could just drive along Ocean Drive and get out of your car. You would be closer to the plant than where this guy popped up. He is not inside the plant at this stage.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MonkeyBob]

Looking at the map, it looks like they made a pretty effective moat (except for that pesky road).

All they need to repel invaders is some catapults!

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[MarkRose]

Depends on the nuclear plant. Bruce Power regularly wins SWAT championships.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[mysidia]

The reservoir where the man surfaced does not appear to be within the secure area of the facility. One could jump into the water from a low bridge crossing on S Ocean Dr.

I would suspect that if the diver chose to continue ignoring warning buoys, dove, and walked the bottom of the reservoir he wound up in, he would eventually find yet another intake that would suck him in, and this one would likely be an impeller/pump-driven intake......

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

>mammoth grouper
i bet this was their real goal, not to investigate strange buildings at a warning buoy.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[mysidia]

said he saw it but didn't know what it meant.

Boaters MUST know how to identify Buoys, Otherwise, they should not have a license to drive a boat or be part of a boating crew, and should not be navigating....

YELLOW BUOYS INDICATE VARIOUS HAZARDS.

The boater must identify what the Buoy is instructing before approaching, let alone mooring to it.

Information and Regulatory Marks These orange-and-white Aids are used to alert vessel operators to various warnings and regulations. ....

Exclusion:
A diamond shape
with a cross means
boats are prohibited
from the area

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Aighearach]

I guess you can just run right up to the outer wall and touch it, too. "haha, tag you're it"

I doubt the water storage lagoon has anything worth blowing up. You could try to damage the water, but good luck...

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[mt2mb4me]

I had a friend who works as a boilermaker. As far as inside the plant, the security is well beyond average. Everyone who was working had to be accountable for even the path they walked within the building, they were given one path, if they deviated at all, security was there to usher them to the correct area. The whole place is well monitored. I would bet that security was laughing as they watched the dumb-ass get sucked in.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose you could drive a truck in with explosives and blow it up,

The reactor containment buildings and the dry storage casks where they store the spent fuel are built out of steel reinforced concrete which is also a common choice in bomb shelters and bunkers. In fact, the reactor containment building can sometimes have walls several meters thick. I remember a conversation I once had with a civil engineer on a plane flight where he claimed that a reactor containment building on a plant he helped design was intended to survive intact after a collision with a fully loaded F-111 traveling at the speed of sound. It's unlikely that a truck bomb is going to cause enough damage to release radioactivity.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose you could drive a truck in with explosives and blow it up, but you could do that at the Mall of America as well and frankly scare far more people.

Nope. A pizza delivery to a nuclear plant could scare more people, it's just that frightening.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[FlyHelicopters]

Power plants go down for all sorts of reasons all the time, the grid can handle a plant going offline without warning, it happens.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[FlyHelicopters]

Unless those officers are physically at the nuke plant, they are probably not of much use against suicide terrorists who are not planning on leaving anyway.

A single gunman might not be all that effective, but don't underestimate the effectiveness of a team of people who have a plan and part of that plan is NOT leaving the location alive.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[FlyHelicopters]

As far as inside the plant, the security is well beyond average. Everyone who was working had to be accountable for even the path they walked within the building, they were given one path, if they deviated at all, security was there to usher them to the correct area. The whole place is well monitored.

I understand that, but you also have to consider what that security was designed to protect against, and what it wasn't.

Is the security room in a secure area that is not easy to access quickly from the outside?

Is the front door/front drive physically secured against forced entry?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINIO...

That is an interesting read...

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Having been diving in Florida a few years back, a couple of things don't add up.

1) Florida diver
2) 16" diameter pipe.

Nah.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MichaelSmith]

The article doesn't say they used oxy cutters to get past the "protective cover", so how did he manage to swim past it? Surely a simple grating over the entrance would prevent divers getting in at all.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Much scarier to me: what if someone attaches a fairly large bomb and allow it to be 'sucked in' by the power plant and have it detonate on the inside? Sounds like these water inlets need much better security.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Nuclear power plants are designed to switch off as quickly as possible, and do this when even a slight anomaly is detected. It makes no sense that a sudden shut off would cause a cascade of issues on the grid.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Guillermito]

Reports indicate that they even admitted having moored to the buoy, which is illegal. So it is clear these guys are complete idiots with absolutely no clue about navigation rules.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[serviscope_minor]

If that were the case (it's not), it would be the case for a large coal, gas or combined cycle plant too.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, which is why if terrorists were wanting to target the electricity grid, they would be aiming to take down multiple plants at once. If each plant has a lax security as this one does, it presents more a challenge of manpower, than it does a technical challenge.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[thegarbz]

I think you've read too many Tom Clancy novels.

Personally I prefer to covertly gain access to nuclear facilities through the front door, typically via a guided tour or an open day.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Rob Lister]

I agree. One might 'fit' in the pipe, even with scuba gear, but it would be tight. No sane diver would enter that pipe.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[stealth_finger]

Umm....maybe this isn't obvious to everyone, but to me it's clearly a bad idea to publish publicly on the internet a perfect covert entrance to a nuclear power plant.

Where do you think he got those images from? Drew them himself?

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[bradley13]

For what it's worth, the Daily Mail article has a picture of the buoy. Referencing the USCG guide that you mentioned, this is a "special aid" buoy that indicates "special areas or features"; in general, they mark dangers and should not be approached.

In the picture, there are no visible markings on the buoy. The power plant claims that there is a sign "stay back 100 feet" - if that were true, it would have to be readable from 100 feet, and would definitely be visible in the pic. Still, you aren't supposed to approach these buoys, much less moor your boat to them.

Then diving down and entering an unknown pipe? Especially when you are just offshore from a huge power plant? This absolutely is deserving of a Darwin award. This guy is lucky to be alive. He's now trying to be lucky twice: suing the plant for his own idiocy, hoping to win a million or two. I hope he has to pay attorney's fees.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny, I was going to respond to the "rent-a-cop" BS by mentioning what I've seen from security at Bruce Power... yeah, those guys (and girls) at Bruce know their shit. I didn't even know about their SWAT championship winning ways - just go do some work at the plant & interact with them (or just watch them).

Definitely not rent-a-cop security.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Burma Shave?

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[haruchai]

Don't be so sure - http://neinuclearnotes.blogspo...

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[haruchai]

Things don't always go according to plan, especially with aging infrastructure - http://neinuclearnotes.blogspo...

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Darwin just missed on this one...

Darwin isn't going to starve in his grave when there's an entire generation thinking it's wrong and immoral to procreate due to overpopulation.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Ambient Sheep]

It said 16' diameter, not 16"...

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[bad-badtz-maru]

It had a grate originally but there were problems with it getting clogged by jellyfish.

-E

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Culture20]

And better off with no grate than letting it get clogged with divers.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Trax3001BBS]

Here's a picture of the location of the buoy and a diagram of the intakes:

http://imgur.com/a/Ve4to

The buoy is close enough to the plant that there is no doubt that it is part of the nuclear power plant.

From that diagram it says: "The intake pipes are protected by "velocity caps" which do not screen the intake, but cause the volume of water to pull in from all directions, which greatly reduces the velocity entering the structure. This prevents marine life from unintentionally getting sucked in, but does not make it impossible. Note that the diver would have to enter under the cap structure, which has a gap of between 6 and 9 feet and plenty of room between support columns. The velocity would not have pulled him in to the intake pipe until he got close to the center of the cap structure."

He swam into the structure.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[b0bby]

Except it's actually just a tube leading to a canal which provides the cooling water for the plant.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[tburkhol]

Boaters MUST know how to identify Buoys, Otherwise, they should not have a license to drive a boat or be part of a boating crew, and should not be navigating....

In most of the US, private citizens do not require any kind license to operate a boat. The boat itself has to be licensed, but the operators only require licensing if they take paying passengers or cargo. The operator is required to follow all the laws, but he's not required to demonstrate previous knowledge of them.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Zak3056]

Unless those officers are physically at the nuke plant

They are, as required by law--every facility handing nuclear fuel (be it reactor, reprocessing, etc) is required to have a response team. That response team is well armed (they get access to fully automatic weapons) and required to train regularly.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you...but you aren't required to have a license to drive a boat. It's not like a car.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[bongey]

Except the buoy is yellow, which is special aids.
"These Aids indicate special areas or features such as anchoring, traffic separation, fishnet area, cables or pipelines, military exercise areas, and jetties. "
The buoy also has no markings at all from the video.
Guy still isn't that bright.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

As males, anytime we encounter a hole, we enter it. It's just our nature.

It's like a cat chasing mice. Instinct.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL, I thought the same thing. Reminds me of my stronghold kingdoms territory.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[solidraven]

It's fairly normal that faults on the high voltage distribution grid lead to this. Generators and high voltage transformers (of any type of plant) take months to replace. And stop assuming that a plant just stops working immediately if there is an issue at the power generation side, the inertia of the turbine and generator gives you some response time. This is enough for the gas plant(s) on load balancing duty to go up to full power, and you can always inject steam in the gas turbines to squeeze out some extra power if you need it. This might cause a voltage drop from 230 to 220 volt during peak load moments, but gives you enough power to fire up the hydroelectric pumping stations. (Yes, you need a push from the grid to start those.) A far more important factor in grid reliability is putting cables underground. Heavily reduces the risk of downtime due to weather conditions.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh. I like how this guy telling him to be risk taker drew the line at logging in to make his remark.

Says the guy hiding behind a pseudonym.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[FUD fighter]

You would think the houses out there would be cheaper.

Also, "Itchy itchy Ichabod. I i I"

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[MightyYar]

Maybe they are.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MightyYar]

Especially a strange yellow buoy within 1/4 mile of the very obvious nuke plant. I used to spend a month each summer on Hutchinson Island - there is no missing the nuclear plant! In the video he even said he knew he was in the nuke plant pipes once he got sucked in, so he was well aware of it. Total dumbass. Just amazing.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

The accumulation of everything I've said over the years can be used against me, chicken.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[firewrought]

If your goal is to cause large-scale power disruptions, there are more practical options than assaulting the most protected structures in the utility industry.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[sethrosen]

He's lucky he didn't get stuck in John Malcovich's head.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Krishnoid]

I have my new go-to quote of profound wisdom. If it's ok to reuse, I promise to cite you when I pass it on.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Then, it if makes you happy, I will take sole responsibility for every single AC comment ever made on this site, dickhead.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless those previous comments were part of this discussion thread, then they have absolutely nothing to do with anything.

I'm not going to look up your posting history to get an idea of who you are. Why would I give a fuck about you?

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, same AC here. I thought about what I said and have come to the conclusion that I was completely wrong. I can't edit my post so I'll just reply to it in the hopes you see it before you reply to my last lame post. I'm sorry, MobileTatsu-NJG, I'll never behave like that again. Also, I like to smell farts.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Also, I like to smell farts.

That is very brave of you to openly admit! I humbly retract my assertion that you are a chicken and, also, I accept your apology. Thank you and have a good week!

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Unless those previous comments were part of this discussion thread, then they have absolutely nothing to do with anything.

People have dug up comments I've made before and used them as part of the discussion. Often they remember me because of my 'lick butts' sig. On a side note: the detail they usually remember is that I use an iPhone. I'm starting to wonder if those to things have a more casual relationship than I had previously thought.

I'm not going to look up your posting history to get an idea of who you are. Why would I give a fuck about you?

The main thing is that you'd know for sure that it was the same person that responded to a post. It's also worth mentioning that, no, you wouldn't need to run around reading anybody's posting history. You really didn't think that one through before you hit 'reply'... which is a trait AC's often have because they don't want to risk their reputation. You get to know people you see posting around here.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. You always have the option to post anonymously. You can hide your trolling any time you wish.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

No, I cannot retroactively make my posts anonymous. Not sure where you got that idea.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Why doesn't every AC flame war end this way??

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Marginally.

There have been several cascade failures.

Which is why certain places have their own power backup.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't care about life stories. I don't see sigs.

Why should it matter if it is the same person, or not? Does it make the point any less valid? An insightful comment is an insightful comment, regardless of who posted it.

You seem pretty adept at picking out the comment I didn't post.

Anyway, getting back on topic, why didn't you use your real name for your Slashdot ID? Why are you hiding behind a pseudonym?

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

An insightful comment is an insightful comment, regardless of who posted it.

You know what's funny about debating with ACs? I've often run into circumstances where they post multiple times posing as more than one person. I've also spotted occasions where ACs take over the debate for someone else and burn up their credibility.

Anyway, getting back on topic, why didn't you use your real name for your Slashdot ID? Why are you hiding behind a pseudonym?

Because, like you, I'd like to remain anonymous. I also like it to be clear who is talking to who and I don't want anybody speaking for me.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[GrumpySteen]

So... are you suggesting that Darwin's undead wraith is getting fat from eating the unused souls that would have gone into babies if people had just procreated more?

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Deadstick]

With my blessing.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[mysidia]

Except the buoy is yellow, which is special aids.

Which probably makes sense come to think of it, after seeing more info... Because of the velocity cap; this shouldn't really be a hazard to boats, And the major consideration would be: don't drop an anchor onto the structure....... Not a hazard unless you dive down to the bottom and get pretty darn close to the inlet

Diving is inherently dangerous.... not approaching random pipes or unlatching gates around structures you do not know about; ought to have been covered in safety training.

Also, I think mooring to someone's buoy, and proceeding without researching it, should be seen as a waiver of all right to pursue any damages in court.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[haruchai]

If your grid is designed well, I suppose you can withstand quite a bit of issues but I've been hearing for the better part of 3 decades that the US grid is not particularly resilient and that outage of Feb 26, 2008 affected close to 4 MILLION Floridians.

Let's hope they've learned a lesson from that; I and most of my friends & relatives were affected by the Aug 2003 outage and my gf at the time got stuck in a traffic jam 30 miles long and it took her 10 hours to get home. We were living on the 22nd floor back then and the younger, fitter body I wore didn't have too much trouble helping others cart their emerg supplies up the stairs - but I wouldn't be able to do that again, or perhaps a LOT more slowly.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[haruchai]

You don't have to attack the plant; it's useless without transformers, substations & high-voltage power lines, all of which can NOT be protected except at RIDICULOUSLY high cost.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[solidraven]

Ah yes, but that's because you live in the US... If you let power companies decide it'll be less redundant, since redundancy costs money. That's privatisation for you, it still amazes me that such a large population consistently chooses what's worst for themselves.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MichaelSmith]

You'd think that at low tide the divers would get blown off the grate.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Maritz]

I doubt the water storage lagoon has anything worth blowing up. You could try to damage the water, but good luck...

Terrorist homeopathy. Put a tiny drop of explosive/muhammad extract in water. Allow principle of homeopathic wonkytonk to amplify the bomb-ness. Stand back and watch the nuclear plant/planet detonate in righteous fury.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

I never used the word "retroactive". Not sure where you got that idea. Are you trying to twist my argument to fit your needs?

Way back when I used to bother signing in (+13 years ago), there was a checkbox next to the "Submit" button, that allowed a signed in user to post anonymously. I would have to believe it is still there. Even if it isn't, you can always open another window/browser and post anonymously. But, of course, you were smart enough to figure that out, weren't you?

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

You have no idea what you are talking about! Everyone else, please do not encourage this bullshitter.

Uranium in what tanks? Drive a truck in and blow it up? Really? You couldn't get a truck with explosives anywhere near a plant without getting shot.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

You know what's funny about debating with ACs? I've often run into circumstances where they post multiple times posing as more than one person. I've also spotted occasions where ACs take over the debate for someone else and burn up their credibility.

Once I submit a reply, I may think of other arguments that support my point of view. To me, it seems logical to reply to you with those additional arguments, rather than to reply to myself. For the life of me, I can't figure out why it should matter to you whether I posted them, or whether someone else brought up those additional points, in my defense. Based on your UID (which is only slightly lower than mine was), I'm sure you've seen this happen all the time, so why the double standard when somebody posts AC?

Regardless, as it stands, I must repeat, you seem to be pretty adept at identifying which posts are mine, and which are not. This is further evidenced by your statement, "I've often run into circumstances where they post multiple times posing as more than one person". So you run into these circumstances often, do you? It seems you have no problem identifying who you are talking to.

Because, like you, I'd like to remain anonymous.

Well, hiding behind a pseudonym is certainly one way to do that, which, if I recall correctly, is all I pointed out in the first place.

Now that you are in full agreement with me, I guess this discussion is over . . . unless, of course, you wanted another turn on the roudabout.

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

I hardly think that pointing out use of a pseudonym as a means of hiding constitutes a flame.

And why the fuck am I talking to myself?!?!?

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

No, I didn't twist your argument, I just assumed, wrongly, that you didn't mean something as useless in this discussion as 'you can post as AC too.' I apologize for giving you too much credit.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[Anonymous Coward]

Just curious - as a counterpoint to your statement "The accumulation of everything I've said over the years can be used against me", how is that useless?

I'm betting it would be redundant for you to indicate "IANAL" at the end of any of your posts.

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Just curious - as a counterpoint to your statement "The accumulation of everything I've said over the years can be used against me", how is that useless?

Are you under the impression that I think I am unable to post anonymously or register another account?

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Regardless, as it stands, I must repeat, you seem to be pretty adept at identifying which posts are mine, and which are not. This is further evidenced by your statement, "I've often run into circumstances where they post multiple times posing as more than one person". So you run into these circumstances often, do you? It seems you have no problem identifying who you are talking to.

This is easy enough to test. If you are correct that posting as anything but AC serves no functional purpose, then you shouldn't be able to find posts on Slashdot with phrases like "I'm not the same AC". There also shouldn't be a higher level of AC shitposts than normal logged-in accounts. I invite you to look into that, it'll help you answer your question.

Well, hiding behind a pseudonym is certainly one way to do that, which, if I recall correctly, is all I pointed out in the first place. Now that you are in full agreement with me...

Not so fast. I really shouldn't have to explain this, but I guess I do since this is actually a debate instead of a discussion. Okay, fine, we can make these posts unnecessarily longer. I am interested in keeping the conversation clear, for example I'm one of those jerks that doesn't think you should start writing your post in the subject line. For that reason I wish for my appearance to be unique from others on this site. It's one of the reasons I have my sig. The risk* I take is that with the pseudonym comes a reputation. That reputation is a factor in my credibility. My credibility affects the tone people interpret from my posts. You may or may not find value in this, but it doesn't really matter, because it is clearly of value to lots of other people around here. It also matters because people can come in in the middle of a conversation because they only wish to discuss a tiny subset under the scope of the topic. For example: Someone might wander into a discussion about the virtues of anonymous posting and be completely unaware that it was originally a discussion about hypocrisy, but the only way for everyone else involved to be sure is to get clarification on who said what.

As for anonymity, I don't want you to know my real name. I don't want you to know where I live. I don't want you to know where I work. I also don't want my employer to fire me because of a remark I made here. I wish to remain anonymous. I am just as anonymous to you as I would be as AC. The only difference is you have a clearer idea of which posts are mine, by choice that I have made. There is no contradiction, here.

* This whole conversation is actually about logging in being riskier than not. Since I do not know if you're the same person in each AC post here, you get to waste time reading this clarification because you're either the really dumb AC that I zinged and you're hoping to 'win' somewhere else, or you're an entirely new person who came in in the middle of the conversation who doesn't realize that the context still matters.
 

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[slashdotwannabe]

So, apparently these guys moored to the warning buoy being interested in what was beneath it.

Perhaps you failed to see/read the rest of the quote:

"I am 100% positive that there were no signs on the buoy," he said. "I know that because my boat was tied to that buoy."

How interesting! A warning buoy without any warnings! I guess it's intended for the telepathic SCUBA divers?

"What a great idea! lets bypass these things intended to keep big stuff out and enter this here pipe!"

Uhhh, if the point of "these things intended to keep big stuff out" is to keep big stuff out, don't you think maybe the holes in the grating should be small enough so that a big thing, like, say, a SCUBA diver, cannot pass through it? That seems like a bit of a design failure. Kind of like using a colander to carry water around...

Re: from the not-so-bright department

[jwhitener]

More like rent-a-cop security from the guy off the night job at the mall.

I can't speak for all nuclear plants, but I know people that work at one plant, and their security is closer to swat than mall cops for sure. They have regular exercises where they defend the area from attackers (big complicated game of laser tag basically:)) in the middle of the night, drills about stopping a van full of explosives, etc..

Re:from the not-so-bright department

[mysidia]

the Daily Mail article has a picture of the buoy.

Are you sure this is the actual Buoy?

I have learned, that when it comes to the media in the post-dot-com social-media era (past 10 years or so).... the pictures, and often portions of the video clips contain stock imagery.

So they mention a buoy, and then they might locate a stock image, or a short clip of stock video featuring a buoy to edit into their report for visual purposes.

Use of stock media makes it really hard to say anything definitive by looking at pictures from a news report, but the technical reports did say the buoy is a warning buoy.

He intentially swam into it they claim

[Anonymous Coward]

I imagine there should be some type of grill or bars guarding these intake tunnels. So either there isn't adequate protections in place, the protections are missing or deteriorated. Or this guy brought a torch under water, cut through the protective bars and then got sucked in. I find that last scenario highly unlikely.

Re:He intentially swam into it they claim

[geoskd]

Or this guy brought a torch under water, cut through the protective bars and then got sucked in.

I saw one of these rigs being repaired near Niagara falls. If its a similar setup, then the grills are not intended to be tamper proof, just keep out accidental intrusions. A diver would be easily able to bypass the protection, as it was similar to a latched gate for a metal fence. The whole thing was painted bright orange though, so there was no way anyone was going to mistake that for something friendly. Sounds like this intake could've used a coat of paint...

Re: He intentially swam into it they claim

[Anonymous Coward]

And if there were bars he'd just be pinned against the intake until he ran out of air? I don't think that is a good solution

Re:He intentially swam into it they claim

[HouseOfMisterE]

They might not be able to put a grill over the pipe. It could get clogged and cut off the flow of coolant to the nuclear plant.

Re:He intentially swam into it they claim

[geoskd]

They might not be able to put a grill over the pipe. It could get clogged and cut off the flow of coolant to the nuclear plant.

The typical solution to that problem is burst suction. There is a holding pond that is used to source water for the cooling system. This pond is periodically refilled by opening a giant valve and letting seawater refill the cooling pond. By doing it that way, nothing gets permanently stuck against the protective bars, and thus nothing can clog it up permanently. It does however mean that when pulling water, the pipe has many times the suction that would otherwise be required.

Re:He intentially swam into it they claim

[Harlequin80]

It will also have an effect on the water quality of the lagoon. Depending on the size of the lagoon I expect most water movement comes from the tidal movement of the sea. Remove that and you will have problems of it just getting nasty.

Re: He intentially swam into it they claim

[Anonymous Coward]

There apparently was a gate that he would have had to bypass. You might slowly drift towards the intake at that point, but you wouldn't get stuck against it. At worst he'd just have to kick off away from it. If fish and debris got stuck against them it'd just jam the whole thing up and ruin it, no?

Re: He intentially swam into it they claim

[Anonymous Coward]

The bars are where there is no pressure, kind of a catch though, he probably went through them thinking there was no pressure.

From TFA

[Anonymous Coward]

From TFA: "The company claims that there was a sign telling potential visitors to “stay back 100 feet” to avoid getting sucked into an unwelcome James Bond-style thrill ride. It also said that Le Cun intentionally swam into the intake pipe and got past equipment meant to prevent anything foreign from getting into the pipe."

Re:From TFA

[Master Moose]

James Bond-style thrill ride."

Anyone else read that line and think that may motivate a few copycats? Perhaps the powerplant could charge for it.

Re:From TFA

[kwoff]

Perhaps the powerplant could charge for it.

I see what you did there.

Re:From TFA

[RockDoctor]

"got past equipment meant to prevent anything foreign from getting into the pipe."

And the Darwin award aspirant said to himself "I'm an American, not 'anything foreign', so clearly this does not apply to me."

The rest is history.

Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Nuclear power needs lots of cooling because the reactor and fuel arrangement is so complex and heat sensitive. Thus, these powerful intakes are needed to handle the waste heat.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Nemyst]

I'd recommend you go inspect them for possible safety violations. We'll even make sure the turbines are running at full capacity before you go in, just to make sure you see everything!

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[thegarbz]

Oh fuck me you've been smoking some good shit this week.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

Nuclear power needs lots of cooling because it's just a giant steam engine, and like all heat engines on the planet, requires cooling. Any power plant with the same capacity in such a small area would require the same thing.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Not so. Nuke are about 30% efficient, coal plants around 45% and gas plants around 60%. Other forms of generation need less cooling. Gas can get away with air cooling.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

Rubbish. For a start there was no powerful intake. This was a pipe leading to a pond that as a result of being connected to the ocean was tidal. Exactly the same setup would exist for any other heat based power station.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

And the energy density of uranium versus methane is how many million, again?

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[saigon_from_europe]

Low efficiency of nuclear plants is due to their lower operational temperature, not due to fuel density. Radioactive core heats the water to lower temperature comparing to other types of thermal plants.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Gas plants can be air cooled. The are twice as efficient.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[CanadianMacFan]

Might be just me but you probably don't want to generate the steam that directly runs the turbines from the fission reaction and instead transfer that heat through another medium. And this would lower the efficiency. But if you want a more efficient power plant by all means leave out this step. I'm sure that it's not important.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

There is nothing unique to gas systems being air cooled. Pebble bed reactors are also gas cooled. However because of nuclear fears they have not been developed to the degree she could have been. HTR-10, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..., is an air cooled research reactor in China for example.

As for efficiency, how are you measuring it? Sure the % of heat produced converted to steam is higher in a gas plant but that isn't really a relevant way to compare the two designs. I would have gone with cost per Mwh which seems a reasonable comparison, in which case some gas systems and cheaper than nuclear and some are more expensive.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

No, that would degrade the fuel and warp the control rods. There are engineering imparatives that keep the efficency so pitiful.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Gas cooled and air cooled are two completely different things. You get that, right?

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

Not quite. Simple cycle gas plants are only about 30 to 45% efficient. They only become 60% efficient when you add a steam turbine and turn them into a combined cycle plant. Combined cycle most definitely uses water for cooling.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Deadstick]

Trump will do away with that Second Law shit.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

Yes I do. However as I said there is nothing unique to gas generation that allows you to air cooling it. All it is is steam is taken from the generator and put into a large water / air condenser system, then the water is fed back into the reservoir before going through the heater again. It is just a sealed water system and could be applied to any thermal generation system.

For example the Guangdong Zhongshan power station is an air cooled coal plant.

All it would take for that system to be applied to a nuclear plant is for the cooling system to be able to handle the thermal load generated. The Loviisa plant in Finland is air cooled, though it has redundant water cooling towers as part of its emergency systems. That plant was built in the 70s.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Thermal efficency is a pretty standard concept that you should review. As an example, the Magnox reactor, a commercial gas cooled design, ran at about 19% efficiency. It's working fluid was steam and it had to be cooled with water. A combined cycle gas turbine runs at 60% efficiency. It also has to be cooled, but less so, and some are set up for air cooling.

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Not all. It does cost something to run the fans but air cooling is a selling point for combined cycle where cooling water is scarce.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[DahGhostfacedFiddlah]

Trump will do away with that Second Law shit.

God, like I needed another reason not to vote for that asshole.

Sure, I'll continue living my life without fearing robots, but apparently Trump doesn't want me ordering them to jump into volcanoes for my own amusement.

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

Not all nuclear plants use water cooling either, genius.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

That for when the plant is shut down. (Plants face in hands...)

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Which ones?

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

Thermal efficiency is lower on a nuclear reactor than other types of generation. But that is a totally biased way of measuring their efficiency because they naturally suck at it, but it is NOT relevant to the cost of the electricity produced.

Cost per MWh is a much fairer measure. And is a measure that can be applied to all types of power generation equally and easily. If I really wanted to pick a measure which favours nuclear I would say how much fuel per year does your plant use.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

Sorry you are correct. It doesn't change the fact though that there is no engineering factor that prevents the use of air cooling. Not that air cooling is particularly important unless you have no access to water. In which case then yeah use a gas system.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

The economics really don't work out for nuclear power. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa...

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

Uh huh.... http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/a...

The levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) is a measure of a power source which attempts to compare different methods of electricity generation on a comparable basis. It is an economic assessment of the average total cost to build and operate a power-generating asset over its lifetime divided by the total energy output of the asset over that lifetime. The LCOE can also be regarded as the minimum cost at which electricity must be sold in order to break-even over the lifetime of the project.

Projected LCOE in the U.S. by 2020 (as of 2015)
Power generating technology Minimum Average Maximum
NG: Advanced CC with CCS 93.3 100.2 110.8
Advanced Nuclear 91.8 95.2 101

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

Gah white space filter killed that comment - just visit the page to see the comparisons between the energy sources.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd recommend you go inspect them for possible safety violations. We'll even make sure the turbines are running at full capacity before you go in, just to make sure you see everything!

A hater has got to hate.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[SvnLyrBrto]

This was Florida. It's surrounded on three sides by ocean and has no small number of lakes and rivers. Pretty much all of the power plants... nuclear, gas, oil, whatever... are built adjacent to some source of water so they can use it for cooling. If there's a problem here, it's with the intake design and the stupidity of the diver, not the source of heat.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Best to work with the more recent data....

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

The intake is big because the plant is inefficient.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

Right, so you want to ignore something written in April, 2015 by multiple people and a huge organisation as being too out of date in exchange for a paper written by one person with a particular focus on moving to solar and wind?

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

EIA is known to have trouble with change.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

Note carefully:

The LCOE values for dispatchable and nondispatchable technologies are listed separately in the tables, because caution should be used when comparing them to one another.

For meaningful comparisons, the levelized avoided costs of electricity (LACE) must also be considered. Furthermore, the "advanced nuclear" mentioned is conventional technology being deployed now. Next generation molten salt reactors have tremendous potential for reducing costs while also increasing safety.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Wonko the Sane]

Lower operational temperature is a result of still using solid fuel/water cooled designs. We're stuck cladding the fuel with zirconium, which become flammable/produces hydrogen at embarrassingly low temperatures. MSR/LFTR doesn't have that problem...

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Firethorn]

To be perfectly honest, all nuclear plants I'm aware of use single-pass water cooling. Palo Verde, for example, uses purified sewage for this.

The closest I remember to an air cooled plant was a planned expansion to Palo Verde that never happened. They were going to put in 2-4 additional reactors, where insufficient water for the cooling would be available. Ergo, they would have had to be purely air cooled*. This would have actually been slightly more energy efficient, but would have required a much more extensive, and therefore more expensive cooling system.

*Not counting the closed circuit inner loop, of course.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[friedmud]

That's exactly what's done in Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... . They make up about 1/3 of the nuclear power plants in the U.S. in fact.

They have their own plusses and minuses vs Pressurized Water Reactors. Chiefly: they don't need complex heat exchangers between the primary and secondary systems that a PWR has... because there is only one system! But: they have a lower power density... mainly due to running at lower pressures and lower water densities (which actually reduces the fission reaction through a loss of moderation).

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[friedmud]

I'm not sure what side you're arguing here. There are two main types of Light-Water Reactors (LWRs): Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs) which run at ~15 MPa and keep liquid water in the core and Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs) that run at a lower pressure (~7 MPa) and boil the water straight to steam in the reactor core.

In the US about 2/3 of our reactors are PWRs and about 1/3 BWRs.

Both types of reactors have engineering challenges... but the efficiency really comes down to the laws of thermodynamics.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[friedmud]

Inefficient? In what sense? Thermodynamically?

You do realize that nuclear reactors are only refueled every _year and a half_... right? I would call that WAY more "efficient" than the line of coal cars that needs to flow through a coal plant every day....

Thermodynamic efficiency means nothing when your fuel source has _millions_ of times more energy in it...

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[friedmud]

If you're going to continue to post FUD about nuclear power... you should at least educate yourself. Go take a "101" style coarse in nuclear engineering at your nearest university...

In the meantime, here are some reactor designs that don't use water for cooling or moderation:

Lead Cooled Fast Reactor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Gas Cooled Fast Reactor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Sodium Cooled Fast Reactor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Advanced Gas-cooled Reactor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Pebble-bed reactors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably you can just open the grate on the intake. It is designed to keep accidental debris out, not someone opening it on purpose. I saw one being worked on at a hydroelectric plant and the shield on it looked basically like a locked gate.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

It impacts how much cooling water you need or if you need it at all. The plant in Florida suck a lot of water and should be engineer to avoid catching divers.

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

Those are all illegal.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[solidraven]

The economics for wind don't work out either once you include operational and (de)commisioning costs. And those for solar panels are based on some miss understandings. (e.g. unless we boost their efficiency CdTe will get displaced, and CdTe demand won't stay high forever). In the case of a well designed nuclear plant one could remove the reactor at the expected end-of-life and throw in a new one. But paranoid idiots such as yourself prevent us (the engineers who build these sort of things) from letting these plants reach their full potential. And then you go off shouting *zomgr inefficient!!!!!!!!!! Dangerous!!!!!111!!!1111"* (Yes, you do sound like that.) It's a sad reflection on reality that uninformed know-it-alls have so much influence.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[solidraven]

No, the intake is big to lower the velocity of the water.

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[friedmud]

Illegal where? No design is "illegal" in the US... provided you fully qualify its safety to the satisfaction of the NRC.

Many of those types of reactors have been built and are operating in other parts of the world.

So far, in the US, there hasn't been enough economic insentive to drive the adoption of anything beyond light-water reactors... but that doesn't mean the other designs are "illegal".

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[serviscope_minor]

Not so. Nuke are about 30% efficient, coal plants around 45% and gas plants around 60%. Other forms of generation need less cooling. Gas can get away with air cooling.

Nope. 60% efficient gas plants do not get away with air cooling. Gas turbine only ones do but they're not 60% efficient. Combined cycle plants reach 60%, but they rely on a Rankine cycle at the low end and of course low temperature heat rejection, for which the requirements are precisely the same as coal. It's possible but really bloody hard to air cool them, so they're almost always water cooled.

Also, you can build nukes with a thermal efficiency of 41% commercially. I know this because the UK has a number of them operating. The reason we don't build any more is more to do with the political establishment than anything else. Basically the government hates home grown industry and would always rather buy from someone else, ANYONE else than build up an industry here. So they decided to abandon all the home grown tech and buy American in the early 70s. Now of course we've lost the industry and can't buy locally any more.

This pattern has been repeated many times. Been done with rockets and trains too. The trains was one of the worst. Spend taxpayer money to develop the tech locally. Can it for political reasons. Sell it cheap. Then buy back trains made with that tech at great expense that still don't perform as well.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[serviscope_minor]

It was. It wasn't engineered to avoid catching divers who moored to the warning buoy, dived against instructions and defeated the grille. I'm OK with that. It didn't impact the plant and it only is a risk to people to go out of their way to fuck with it.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[danbert8]

Wow, solar thermal is so bad... Also, not to discount nuclear power (I totally support it), but something tells me the cleanup costs aren't included. Then again, the cleanup costs are a clusterfuck thanks to the government. Killing Yucca Mountain and having made little progress on cleaning up the worst contamination sites (like Hanford for example) are entirely to blame on Congress. But by all means, let's make college education "free" instead of using money to clean up the environmental disasters our parents and grandparents left for us.

How about we clear off the list of superfund cleanup sites before we start working on global warming?

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

We don't do breeders. They are one of the chief caused of weapons proliferation.

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[friedmud]

Breeders are not a weapons proliferation problem... in fact, breeders are often cited as being "proliferation resistant"... especially thorium breeders.

But what does that have to do with what we were talking about?

Re: Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

You are way out of your depth. http://science.slashdot.org/co...

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[mdsolar]

They are pretty common. Here is one from my neck of the woods. http://www.power-technology.co...

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

> "average total cost to build and operate a power-generating asset over its lifetime divided by the total energy output of the asset over that lifetime. "

ctrl-f disposal, shutdown, cleanup

nada

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Harlequin80]

I have no idea. But in the US nuclear licensees are required to hold decommissioning funds which average $300-$400 million. Given these are part of the operational cost of the plant I expect they are counted. Whether that is enough for cleanup is a different question of course.

Re:Nuclear power intentionally inefficient

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump will do away with that Second Law shit.

Yeah, it's not like it's an amendment. Those are laws of nature, you know. At least the second one.

#FloridaMan

[GenieGenieGenie]

"#FloridaMan arrested for attempted impersonation of reactor coolant in order to penetrate nuclear facility"

Re: #FloridaMan

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, gotta admit. This one made me laugh.

Re:#FloridaMan

[Anonymous Coward]

"OMG! Nuclear reactors suck!!" #FloridaMan

Re: #FloridaMan

[crashexl2000]

Meanwhile, back at the hall of justice! Aquaman devises an ingenious idea on how to finally get some attention.

Re:#FloridaMan

[93 Escort Wagon]

Q: What's the difference between the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant and my wife?

Re:#FloridaMan

[Anonymous Coward]

Only one of them sucks ~THAT~ hard!

Re:#FloridaMan

[Anonymous Coward]

IDK but they both suck seamen into their holding ponds!

Re:#FloridaMan

[Anonymous Coward]

St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant is easily penetrated?

Re:#FloridaMan

[Psicopatico]

Q: What's the difference between the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant and my wife?

A: St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant sucked one man only.

Re:#FloridaMan

[Anonymous Coward]

Next in news: #FloridaKids discover new James Bond-style underwater thrill ride and it's free!
Followed by #FloridaBusinessman sets up a floating scuba gear rental next to unofficial Bond-style underwater thrill ride.

and so on, until some asshole from Hollywood demands payment for brand-name or trade mark violation.

Re:#FloridaMan

[Anonymous Coward]

Q: What's the difference between the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant and my wife?

With your own wife, there's no need to impersonate. You can just directly penetrate.

Re:#FloridaMan

[Anonymous Coward]

Q: What's the difference between the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant and my wife?

One is massive, costs a lot to maintain, and if not treated correctly is capable of emitting vast clouds of noxious gases.

The other ...

That sucks but

[Anonymous Coward]

If that was a wind turbine instead, the diver would have certainly been reduced to meaty bits. So nuclear ftw...suck it greenies.

captcha: triumphs

Does this happen often?

[Okian Warrior]

A long long long time ago I heard exactly the same story.

Here's a blog discussion among scuba divers claiming the exact same event, at the exact same nuclear power plant, that was posted in 2013 (referring to a past, previous event).

So, either this is a hoax, or this happens occasionally at the nuclear power plant in question.

(I *do* have to wonder how something gets sucked into a reservoir without encountering propulsive blades.)

When I first heard the story, it mentioned that there was no warning of any kind to deter scuba divers from that location. The current news story says the same thing.

I mean, it is *exactly* the same story!

Does this happen often?

Re:Does this happen often?

[mdsolar]

Yup. http://www.upi.com/Archives/19...

Re:Does this happen often?

[Zocalo]

From the bottom of TFA:

While Le Cun’s terrifying experience may seem one-of-a-kind, a similar event actually happened at the same power plant in 1989, according to UPI

Hardly "often", but judging by the description of the buoy and foreign matter filter in the older UPI article, probably something that Florida Power and Light needs to beef up a bit more - it's clearly insufficiently tamper/idiot proof.

Re:Does this happen often?

[PolygamousRanchKid]

probably something that Florida Power and Light needs to beef up a bit more - it's clearly insufficiently tamper/idiot proof.

Nothing can be made idiot proof, because idiots are so ingenious. You can put up a sign at a zoo, stating that the lions are wild animals, and you should at all means never enter their enclosure.

Some idiot will still crawl over the fence to pet the "Kitty-Kats".

And then sue the zoo. See cats in the microwave and hot coffee for examples.

Re:Does this happen often?

[sumdumass]

The reservoir works by gravity and water pressure. That is how there was no blades. It is basically a man made lagoon except the opening connecting it to the ocean is a series of pipes run underground and out to sea a bit to get deeper and cooler water.

The power plant will take water from the lagoon lowering its level slightly which water from the ocean will flood back in creating a current.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Okian Warrior]

The reservoir works by gravity and water pressure. That is how there was no blades. It is basically a man made lagoon except the opening connecting it to the ocean is a series of pipes run underground and out to sea a bit to get deeper and cooler water.

The power plant will take water from the lagoon lowering its level slightly which water from the ocean will flood back in creating a current.

Thank you - that makes sense now.

Would this make a new and interesting X-games thing?

Pay money to get sucked into a nuclear power plant, have your picture taken at the end, get bragging rights at poker night?

Just a thought...

Re:Does this happen often?

[Harlequin80]

The reservoir is tidal as a result of being connected by the pipe to the ocean. In this case the tide must have been coming in for the moron to be pushed through the pipe. This reservoir could have been connected by an open channel, but for what ever reasons it was obviously decided a pipe was better.

And I know it's pedantic but he wasn't sucked into the pipe, he was pushed. The force was coming from behind him as the tide came in.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

Neat. Efficient and very low maintenance.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Joviex]

So its up to 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999% to make even more warnings for the 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000001% who cant read or comprehend language?

As you said, 2 instances across nearly 30 years? is not even remotely cause for speculation in this instance, given the idiots refusal to read or pay attention while scuba diving.

Re:Does this happen often?

[plover]

I think it was a defective idiot trap. Anyone ignoring the warning buoys right next to a nuclear plant, and then deliberately bypassing the safety grates is by definition an idiot, and the mechanism was designed to chop the idiot up into fish bait. Score another failure for nuclear plant engineers.

Re:Does this happen often?

[NotInHere]

I just hope its not the exact same scuba diver...

Re:Does this happen often?

[SpankiMonki]

Wow. That one really is a #FloridaMan.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

Were*. That is how there were no blades.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it's up to one (1) company to install one (1) preventative measure to prevent further occurrences of an event that has happened 3 times now. Assuming it is an undesirable event. In this case, there seems to be no danger and thus no reason to do anything about it.

But it may be up to YOU to learn a bit about math. Your figures there are WAY off.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Jeremi]

Nothing can be made idiot proof, because idiots are so ingenious.

True, but in this case wouldn't a $30 sign on the buoy, saying something like "underwater intake pipes -- SEVERE HAZARD -- NO SCUBA DIVING WITHIN 500 feet" have avoided the whole incident? (Assuming the divers are telling the truth about not realizing what the buoy represented, of course -- if they did know and wanted to investigate anyway, then there's not a whole lot that can be done about that)

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

And I know it's pedantic but he wasn't sucked into the pipe, he was pushed. The force was coming from behind him as the tide came in.

To be even more pedantic, that's how all sucking works, not just in this particular case. So are you calling for abolishing the word "suck"?

Re:Does this happen often?

[RivenAleem]

It's a 5 minute, 1/4 mile, long slip'n'slide. There's probably a queue of scuba divers at the mouth of the tube.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

No sign needed. The yellow buoy should have been more than enough. If you are operating a boat you are supposed to know what it means. This is the equivalent of a driver crashing after running a red light and suing the city because there was no sign explaining what the different light colors meant. To show how clueless these guys are, they even admit having moored to the signaling buoy, which is illegal. When you have people as reckless as these operating a boat an accident is bound to happen one way or another. A $30 sign won't change that.

Re:Does this happen often?

[thegarbz]

That's how it works in this case but there are plenty of other ways to do this in the engineering world too.

If you can't have blades in contact with the process stream but you can mix different streams then a venturi is quite common to use. They are used to extensively in industry and are sized from anything the size of your computer mouse up to the size of a bus. e.g. Google "vacuum ejector".

I now of a refinery which gets in seawater for cooling which uses this principle to cycle water to the heat exchangers. Apparently sandblasting large pump impellers isn't good for them :-)

Re:Does this happen often?

[shawn2772]

the 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000001%

I somehow missed that there were ten tredecillion (10 billion trillion trillion trillion) people on the Earth[1]. That's 20 nonillion people per square meter of land area, and at the average human mass of 62 kg, means the human population of Earth masses 530 times as much as the galaxy! Damn. Population growth is really out of control.

I get that you were exaggerating for effect, but learn something about large/small numbers, will you? Exaggerating by a couple orders of magnitude is fine, but 35 orders of magnitude is just ridiculous.

[1] Note that this figure assumes that there is only one person in existence who would do this, which would be wildly optimistic even if this incident were unique, which it isn't.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

> (I *do* have to wonder how something gets sucked into a reservoir without encountering propulsive blades.)

If the elevation of the reservoir is below sea level it can flow naturally. In the case of a nuclear plant, this is nice so that you can cool the core if power goes out (*cough* Daiichi *cough*). Whether there is a pump from the reservoir to the heat exchanger with the core I am unsure. My guess would be to put the exchanger before the pump to return the heated water to the cooling tower / pond / sea. If the plant lost power the primary would boil off the secondary (the water the diver rode in with) and more water could come in via gravity (until the exchanger cruds up with salts)

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

That particular reservoir is slightly below sea level, as maintained by a small dam at the northwest corner of the facility.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah it didn't work properly, the idiot is still alive.

Re:Does this happen often?

[Anonymous Coward]

Meet Binky, the famous polar bear of the Anchorage Zoo, who (tried to) eat an Australian tourist and a local High School student in the same month. Never happened before, never happened again. But both of them scaled a 10' fence to get closer to a live polar bear. Poor Binky got a terrible stomach ache from it.

Video here

Re:Does this happen often?

[thisisauniqueid]

If you watch the video on the linked site, they say it happened at least once before, in 1989.

The water is sucked in by gravity, and the outlet is a canal inside the plant, supporting a population of fish and other things that have been sucked in in the past. The water goes through several stages of filtration before it's mechanically pumped, so the diver was pretty safe. I wonder if he knew it was safe, and decided to take a risk to see if he could get some money out of the power company...

Harold Holt

[johnsnails]

He was just trying to do the Harold Holt.

Guy is a moron

[PhrostyMcByte]

It's not like you just come across pipes like this in open water, but no SCUBA diver worth their salt would get near an unknown pipe like that.

Differential pressure makes it terrifyingly easy to get pulled into something you can't get out of. This guy is incredibly lucky.

Re:Guy is a moron

[PolygamousRanchKid]

It's not like you just come across pipes like this in open water, but no SCUBA diver worth their salt would get near an unknown pipe like that.

Exactly! Someone please mod this up! I have some friends who dive, and they tell me, "Before you go down . . . look around!" Local diving clubs have maps of places with potential dangers, and are more than welcome to give you advice, free of charge!

These guys are a couple of idiots with too much money to spend on gear, and obviously have no training whatsoever.

Re:Guy is a moron

[bloodhawk]

This guy is incredibly lucky.

I would say incredibly stupid. This is someone the human gene pool can do without. No diver with half a brain would go anywhere near something like this.

Re:Guy is a moron

[pipingguy]

The pump(s) containing the impellers would be located onshore.

Re:Guy is a moron

[R3d M3rcury]

These guys are a couple of idiots [...]

What part of "Florida" didn't you understand?

Re:Guy is a moron

[worf_mo]

From TFA:

The family is now suing Florida Power and Light for allegedly failing to put up any warning.

If this is true, then speculation should be allowed whether finding himself in this situation was the plan from the beginning.

- Go diving in front of a power pant after mooring to the warning buoy, "check[ing] out three large shadows beneath the waves that looked like buildings".
- Get "sucked" into a pipe after avoiding any safety measures.
- Sue the plant.

Re:Guy is a moron

[wildstoo]

"Before you go down . . . look around!"

Good advice in all situations.

Re: Guy is a moron

[Anonymous Coward]

Wish I would have followed this advice. Now I keep getting these sores on my lips.

Some say they are open sores :P

In Belgium ISIS is casing nuclear facilities

[mdsolar]

Here, they could just ride in on the tide. Seems to lack physical security there.

This is Florida what did you expect common sense ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Human stupidity and Florida go hand in hand. I think even the Spanish wouldn't want asshole country back.

thats a big pipe

[Anonymous Coward]

16 feet wide? That's wide enough for two cars side by side. One doesn't get spit out of a 16 foot wide pipe. Something's not right here. My BS detector is in full ah-ooga mode.

Re: thats a big pipe

[Anonymous Coward]

It's okay, you're just crazy that's all.

Re:thats a big pipe

[petermgreen]

Lets run some rough numbers to see how plausible it is for someone to be forced down a 16 foot wide pipe and spat out the other end.

16 feet is about 5 meters. Lets assume it's a circular pipe with diameter 5m (radius 2.5m) 2.5 squared is about 6 times pi gives us a cross sectional area of about 20 square meters.

An olypic swimmer apparently does about 1.5 meters per second. A diver has flippers which will help make them go faster but they also have a load of gear on their back and they probablly aren't an olympic level swimmer. Lets assume our diver can swim at 1 meter per second (pretty sure this will be an overestimate). If the water flows faster than the diver can swim then the diver will be dragged along with the water flow and spart out the end of the pipe.

! meter per second in out pipe would mean 20 cubic meters of water per second or 72000 cubic meters per hour.

Lete assume the tidal range is 3m (number plucked from averaging the top and bottom of the middle category in the wikipedia article) and assume the tide flows in and out twice per day so it takes 6 hours to completely flow in one direction. To keep the maths simple lets assume that the tide flows in/out at a constant rate. to get 72000 cubic meters per hour would require a surface area of 144000 square meters.

That's a decent sized lake for sure but it doesn't seem implausible to me.

Re:thats a big pipe

[mcswell]

The tidal range at this location is two feet (http://tides.willyweather.com/fl/st-lucie-county/hutchinson-island-south.html), a long ways from 3 meters. OTOH, I think your estimate of top swimming speed for a diver is probably pretty good--that would be about 2 mph; I don't think an average diver could keep that up for long.

There's an aerial photo of the power plant, including the cooling lagoons, so you could estimate their surface area.

If he really got sucked in, and didn't intentionally swim in, then something more than tide is making the water flow that fast. I suppose there could be a pump pumping water out of the lagoon.

mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[thegarbz]

Title says it all. Everyone's favourite anti-nuke troll is running out of things to troll about.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[mdsolar]

No, the nuclear follies are very rich these days. It is just that the editors like stuff with potty humor possibilities. 'Remember how you used to say "do it again, flush me J."'

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[phantomfive]

Even so, it's a pretty entertaining story. For compensation, here's another entertaining story about a death-ray solar power plant.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps it's time someone posts this:

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2011/05/green-deaths-the-forgotten-dangers-of-solar-panels/

What do you think, mdsolar? Sound like an interesting article to you? I bet more people have died from solar power than nuclear power. Ever.

Just because of douche-bags such as yourself, I've avoided buying solar panels. I will continue to do so until you and the rest of your nutcases leave solar power for the adults to use.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[mdsolar]

About 45,000 excess cancer deaths from Chernobyl alone http://www.chernobylreport.org... All those evacuation related deaths in Fukushima. That guy killed in France recently working on nuclear waste....

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Anonymous Coward]

Good job. Linking to an anti-nuke article with no referenced sources whatsoever.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[aevan]

What are the numbers for damage to humans and environment from the rare-earth manufacturing from china? One can hardly tout numbers resultant from accidents from stupidity without equally making accounting for cost-cutting malfeasance.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[mdsolar]

Rare-earths?

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Sir Holo]

Perhaps it's time someone posts this:

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2011/05/green-deaths-the-forgotten-dangers-of-solar-panels/

What do you think, mdsolar? Sound like an interesting article to you? I bet more people have died from solar power than nuclear power. Ever.

DO NOT CLICK! The (very stupid) linked article is about people falling off the roof while installing solar panels.

NEWS FLASH: People sometimes fall off when doing roof-work.

Heavens! We should ban people from re-roofing! Or installing Christmas lights! Or cleaning out their gutters!

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Sir Holo]

What are the numbers for damage to humans and environment from the rare-earth manufacturing from china? One can hardly tout numbers resultant from accidents from stupidity without equally making accounting for cost-cutting malfeasance.

The "Rare Earths", or more properly, the "Lanthanide Elements", are not manufactured. They are elements of the periodic table.

Mining of mineral ores and reducing them to metals is generally a nasty business. Copper, gold, tantalum...

Humans run mines and processing operations, which are often in remote locations and difficult to inspect for safety and environmental compliance. Some companies cut corners. Accidents, sloppiness, or general "I don't give a fuck about humans" types of environmental damage happen with anything mined.

Last, the rare earths aren't rare.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Anonymous Coward]

What are the numbers for damage to humans and environment from the rare-earth manufacturing from china?

Of course, if you're going to start going that far back in the process, you need to look at the uranium mining numbers as well. I can tell you that uranium mining is not a clean business by any stretch of the imagination.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[solidraven]

In a funny coincidence those deaths are included already, in an attempt of greenies to make nuclear look bad the forced the industry to include those numbers...

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[lars_stefan_axelsson]

Yes, but it missed the mark this time. The title could as well have been:

Nuclear power plants perfectly safe, even if you get sucked into the cooling water intake!

Now, try to fly through the wings of a wind turbine and see how far you get! :-)

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[serviscope_minor]

Numbers are useless without context. The number that matters if you're talking about deaths is "deaths per TWh", for which nuclear comes out as the safest form of power. The other thing with nuclear power is people obsess over unny things like one block of large deaths as opposed to the much larger number of deaths scattered more thinly for other power industries.

A good fraction of that is because mining raw materials and construction is dangerous. Nuclear plants have high power density and nuclear fuel has high energy density, so the amount of mining for both the construction materials and the fuel is relatively low, and the amount of construction is realtively small. Fossil fuel plants have similar construction scales, but much more fuel mining. Renewables have much much more constructing but obviously no fuel mining during operation.

Finally, if you're advocating for solar power in first wirld countries, then it's meaningless to bring up Chernobyl. That was a Russian design of the sort that has always been illegal in the west. No western country would ever have built it, because we all knew it was a really really stupid design. Nothing like Chernobyl is going to happen with non Soviet style power plants (and no, Fukishima is not nearly as bad).

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Megol]

Death and suffering caused by nuclear power is dwarfed by that of conventional power plants and most renewable power. Extra cancer deaths from the Chernobyl disaster? Sure if you include the firefighters and military that was trying to contain the graphite fire, most of the early deaths was caused by radiation damage rather than cancer but the effects of intense ionizing radiation in the long term is known to increase chances of cancer. The population of Pripyat who would breath particles of radioactive graphite is also expected to have a higher chance of lung cancer (+stomach cancer etc. due to swallowing the radioactive particles).

Northern Sweden received much of the fallout from the disaster due to the weather (intense rain + wind patterns) and the increased radioactivity from mainly cesium is still monitored. The population in those parts also was more exposed to the dangers as many eat wild meat, berries and mushrooms picked in the wild. Still there are _no_ indication that the fallout caused any additional cancer case!

You didn't list one of the real problems with nuclear power: uranium mining which in common with many types of mining causes spreading of heavy metals, poisons used for extraction and highly hazardous waste products (sludge) that is difficult to contain.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[mdsolar]

I mentioned the last fatality because they are going deeper than diamond mines for waste disposal so those deaths are just starting.

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Trailer Trash]

Title says it all. Everyone's favourite anti-nuke troll is running out of things to troll about.

When I read the story and saw that the guy was suing the power plant operator for his own mistake I immediately assumed that we have positive ID on mdsolar....

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Anonymous Coward]

Rare-earths?

Nickel, Cadmium, Various other Heavy/Dangerous Rare Earth Metals...

Re:mdsolar scraping the bottom of the barrel

[Anonymous Coward]

Neither of those is rare or a rare-earth.... You seem confused.

Sea level rise does a double wammy in FL

[mdsolar]

Caostal nuclear power is very vulnerable to sea level rise. But, in Floral it is doubly so. Their customers all have too move away as well. http://news.nationalgeographic...

Re: Sea level rise does a double wammy in FL

[Anonymous Coward]

Caostal? Floral? Too? You complete fuckwit.

Re: Sea level rise does a double wammy in FL

[mdsolar]

Let me blame the AS (artificial stupidity) built into this device. It autocorrects perfectly creative spelling terribly.

Re: Sea level rise does a double wammy in FL

[solidraven]

Are you certain it's not built into the author?

STOP IT!!!

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

For those of you making up your own "atomic/nukular blow job" jokes:

STOP IT!!!

Re:STOP IT!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your atomic mama sucked so hard she could suck a diver through an intake pipe.

FloridaIdiotCount+=1

[dsmatthews9379]

I think that an unsigned long int should hold that data without much risk of overflow.

He found a new game level...

[fahrbot-bot]

I've played that game before, but never in SCUBA gear.

[ Happy to hear he's okay. ]

I don't always ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Get sucked into a nuclear power plant cooling water intake, but if I do, what ICD code do I use?

Jonathan Osterman

[PopeRatzo]

This article sounds exactly like the origin story of a superhero.

A stupid, Florida superhero, but superhero nonetheless.

Re:Jonathan Osterman

[Anonymous Coward]

This already exists. His name is Florida man. He is already making many news headlines. "Florida man arrested for assault with deadly weapon when he threw an alligator through a drive thru window.". Not quite a hero or villian though. Kinda neutral.

di3k

[Anonymous Coward]

of *BSD asswipes another charnel Java IRC client wo0ld mar BSD's

sucked and dumped

[Anonymous Coward]

How can he be sucked in (this underpressure has to be pumped by some engine) and still come out in open air (no pressure)?
"the pipe spat him out" This is silly - probably a hoax.

Next To My Home

[JimSadler]

Getting sucked into pipes usually occurs near large passenger ships. They pay hell getting bodies out of their AC cooling systems. But that nuke is next to my home. Frankly, there is no easier way to send a reactor into an emergency than plugging up its cooling water intake. Imagine what a terrorist with a couple of self inflating life-boats could have done. Home- Land Security needs to be all over those intake pipes.

Re:Next To My Home

[wonkey_monkey]

Frankly, there is no easier way to send a reactor into an emergency than plugging up its cooling water intake.

When you said "frankly," is that "Frankly, as I know from my years of working as a nuclear scientist" or is it "Frankly, as I know from watching enough movies"?

Imagine what a terrorist with a couple of self inflating life-boats could have done.

At a guess, I'd say they could get a nuclear reactor shut down for a bit, and that's probably about it.

On the other hand, what they could do with a small waterproof bomb might be a little more sobering. Especially as it seems someone could get in there with it.

Re:Next To My Home

[Anonymous Coward]

They aren't intact pipes to the reactor, they were intake pipes to a tidal pond which is then used for cooling. If you think a couple of self inflating life-boats will be good enough to stop the tidal force of the ocean pushing through that pipe then I have a bridge to sell you.

Re:Next To My Home

[Anonymous Coward]

I would say they would be able to do almost nothing.

It's probably a decent amount of pressure, so I doubt that even a few small self inflatable rafts would have done much. Even if they did those pipes feed into a massive holding pond. So at worst it would probably have been somewhere between a few hours to a day or so before they registered that the pond wasn't refilling properly. The pond itself probably has a few days maybe weeks worth of water in it, which would have been plenty of time to figure out what was causing the issue.

Even if everything managed to go wrong and somehow the workers didn't notice the giant conspicuously empty pond, most plants are designed to fail gracefully. For example if it hadn't been for human error, the plant at Three Mile Island would have self corrected. Instead after having called the plants designer who told them that everything was fine and not to do anything, they decided to do a thing anyhow.

Do it again.

[AndyKron]

How cool would that be? Do it again!

Re:Do it again.

[Anonymous Coward]

My first thought was, wow this actually sounds like fun and then I read /. reaction that sounds like a old women yelling at kids.

Misreading/View to a Kill

[wonkey_monkey]

Le Cun told WPTV that he thought he was going to be chopped into tiny bits when he hit a turbine at the end of the 16-foot-wide, quarter-mile tube

...because he'd just been watching View to a Kill.

Christopher Le Cun was boating off

Well, if SCUBA diving turns you on that much... oh, wait. Boating. Sorry, I don't have my contact lenses in.

*WHOOP!* *WHOOP!* BULLSHIT METER PEGGED!

[Irate Engineer]

This never happened. There are so many layers of bullshit here that it is hard to get started shoveling through it.

Firstly, plant cooling water intakes are protected with screens to prevent any wildlife and debris entrainment, so the "quarter mile flume ride" is bullshit. The screens are designed so tiny fish fry that might impinge on them can swim away.

Even if the intakes weren't screened (impossible), the water goes into a condenser which is separate from the steam loop that drives the turbine. Said scuba diver would not be talking to anyone as his ass would plug up the condenser, which would force the plant to shut down, and he'd probably be long dead before they unplugged him. But he'd never be there, because there is a screen system just for this reason.

Source - did contract work in a lot of plants, including nuclear, and am familiar with CE plants like St. Lucie.

Re: *WHOOP!* *WHOOP!* BULLSHIT METER PEGGED!

[Anonymous Coward]

Try reading the article, then see what reading your BS detector registers.

Re:*WHOOP!* *WHOOP!* BULLSHIT METER PEGGED!

[Anonymous Coward]

This, the story, forum posts from divers, etc., suggest that he was pulled into a gravity-fed pipe into a holding reservoir, not the turbine feed.

It's also not like it is unknown

[Sycraft-fu]

Shit like this is marked on navigational charts, and there is a warning buoy. It isn't like this is some new feature either so if you happened not to have updated charts it wouldn't be there, the plant is decades old, your charts have it. Don't have charts? That's on you. Ocean navigation is serious business.

That aside, if you see something and you don't know what it is in the water, or see a buoy and don't know what it signifies, the right answer is to FIND OUT, not to go and look. Get on the radio and see what's up. In this case, even that wouldn't be necessary: This is right off the US coast, well within cellular range. He could have just pulled up maps on his smartphone.

Hopefully his lawsuit gets dismissed out of hand.

Re:It's also not like it is unknown

[houghi]

Reminds me af how to do traffic in a foreign country. If you see a sign and do not know what it means, slow down. If it is in a poor country and there is a sign, stop as they won't put up a sign without a reason.

Many years ago I was driving in Argentina and I saw a sign saying 'fado with a triangle and it was the first sign I saw in many, many kilometers. Probably driving 2 or 3 hours without seeing anybody.

So stopped and drove on very, very slowly. Good on me, because I later heard fado means a small stream. We had to drive through some water. That was only 10-15cm deep (3-4 inches) That was not the porblem, the problem was that the bridge was gone.

So if you do not know what signs mean, assume they are warnings preventing you to kill yourself.

Free material!

[ScentCone]

Cliver Cussler should be able to skip hiring at least two ghost writers this week.

Nuclear Power Plant to Scuba Diver: "Cool it."

[Anonymous Coward]

This sounds ultimately terrifying.

Nuclear Power Plant to Diver: "Cool It."

[climbtrees]

That's what I call terror.

"However, the turbine never came..."

[dpbsmith]

Jokes aside, what kind of reporting is this? "The turbine never came..." What on earth was happening, then? If there was no turbine, what was moving the water? If there was a turbine, why didn't it pull the water into itself?

It's sort of like saying "He fell off the roof, sixty floors up, and thought he was going to be killed when he hit the ground, but the ground never came."

Re:"However, the turbine never came..."

[BradleyUffner]

If there was no turbine, what was moving the water?"

Gravity.

Re:"However, the turbine never came..."

[MichaelSmith]

Meaning I suppose that the ponds were lower than sea level at high tide so water flowed in naturally.

Re:"However, the turbine never came..."

[serviscope_minor]

The plant draws water from the tidal ponds, the ponds are connected to the sea with some pipes. So the plant starts emptying out the pond, so gravity fills them back up again.

Lawsuit will end in stiffer penalty for others

[freedom_surfer]

The guy should be thankful to be alive given his actions. I suspect his lawsuit will end in stricter penalties being imposed on any future visitors to the area. Turn it into a full blow felony for even loitering in the area.

That said, doesn't this show a major security weakness at the plant? How far are these holding ponds from the reactors? Scary.

There are pumps, but he was still safe.

[dfenstrate]

There are pumps in that artificial lagoon that would tear a diver right up, but the pumps are protected by traveling screens and/or trash racks intended to keep out unwanted material- like a diver.

And now he will be known as...

[Anonymous Coward]

... The Atomic Scubaman!!!

Isnt that how...

[Izuzan]

Most super hero origin stories begin ?

Super powers

[Racerdude]

What super powers did he gain from the whole experience?

Lucky for him it was a nuclear power plant..

[formfeed]

.. A wind turbine would have probably chopped him to pieces.

Isotopes for sale

[Anonymous Coward]

I never understood why more reactors don't have a deuterium / tritium separation side business. I think a lot of the raw tritium for fusion research comes from research reactor pool separations, but I have never heard of the commercial plants doing this. Is there just too much water to get a reasonably high amount of elevated hydrogen isotopes in commercial reactors?

He was never in any danger.

[Anonymous Coward]

There are huge gratings in front of the intake to stop log, divers and other "trash" being sucked in. Depending on the design of the plant he might have been stuck at the grating due to the suction but I do not know of any plants the has that high of a flow at the "filters" though.

oblig aliens quote

[SiggyRadiation]

RIPLEY
They're right under the primary heat exchangers. ......
GORMAN
Shit! (into mike)
Apone, collect magazines from everybody. We can't have any firing in there.

Re:oblig aliens quote

[FlyHelicopters]

Yea, but in fairness, if the reactor can't take small arms fire, it is poorly designed. :)

Re:oblig aliens quote

[CrimsonAvenger]

Hmm, the last nuclear power plant I spent any time at had "primary heat exchangers" that were better than an inch thick. Somehow I don't think an M4 is going to be an issue with an inch of armour to punch through....

Total Hooey....

[MercTech]

Having done repair work at St. Lucie; I've been down to the intakes.
The actual plant intake is down a canal and has a mechanical fish screen over the intake so fish aren't sucked in to foul the pumps.

There is no way the diver was anywhere near the intake if his path was as he described. Did the bozo go into the sewage treatment plant down the road from the nuclear plant?

Eyesore

[Anonymous Coward]

That plant is ugly on the skyline.

No Coast Guard restrictions?

[Anonymous Coward]

The nuke plant I work at has an 1,800' exclusion zone around our plant out into the water. Looking at the NOAA chart for St. Lucie - I see no such zone... kinda surprising. But in any event - we have screenhouses for each of our units with mechanical screens that keeps stuff like fish, seaweed, etc... from getting sucked into our cooling / condensing system. If someone does make it past the screens - his demise will be fairly quick as the impellers used to pump water into the plant are pretty unforgiving.

uh... duh!

[Anonymous Coward]

"...he thought he was going to be chopped into tiny bits when he hit a turbine..."

wow... I guess this idiot doesn't know the difference between a NUCLEAR power plant and a HYDROELECTRIC power plant???

this guy is a POS

[Anonymous Coward]

He did it so he could sue the plant. He knew full well what would happen and he would survive because of his background And , yes , he is suing the plant. This pussy needs to thrown in jail