STORM SPARKS MAJOR NUCLEAR ALERT AT PLANT

A FULL-SCALE emergency was declared at a Scots nuclear station when fierce winds knocked out the power to cool its reactors.

Last night, the plant remained shut after bosses pressed the alarm button on Sunday.

They couldn't restart the back-up generators, vital to keep the reactors' two cores from overheating.

Frightened staff were called from their homes and battled for five hours to manually try to reset the safety systems before the cores went "critical".

A boss was also rushed under police escort to Hunterston B, in Ayrshire, it was claimed.

The astonishing situation - sparking fears of a Chernobyl-type reactor meltdown - happened after storms took out the national grid twice in the space of 12 hours.

The first time - at 11pm on Saturday - the emergency back-up generators in the nuclear plant switched on automatically.

But there were not enough staff on duty to manually reset them before the grid went down a second time at 11am on Sunday - leaving plant bosses helpless.

An investigation is being carried out by the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate.

A spokeswoman said last night: "Two of our inspectors were called in as soon as the alarm was raised on Sunday and our investigations continue.

"There was no power to the system that cools the reactor for a number of hours and we do consider this a serious incident."

It's a major embarrassment for Scottish Nuclear, who claim their safety systems cover all eventualities.

Roseanna Cunningham, the SNP's environment spokeswoman, said: "Holiday period or not, you can't afford to take risks with nuclear energy.
"Questions must be answered on why Hunterston B was understaffed."

Earlier this year, the back-up at Dounreay, in Caithness, failed when a digger cut power cables.

That disaster was one of the reasons Scots Secretary Donald Dewar ordered the plant be closed.

A Hunterston worker, who asked not to be named, said the situation had been terrifying.

He said: "The sirens were sounding all over the plant and there were police, fire and ambulance crew arriving. We didn't know what was going on.

"It is the most serious incident I have ever seen."

Kevin Dunion, director of Friends of the Earth Scotland, called for a full inquiry into the role of the management.

He said people would be "astounded" to find fail safe procedures hadn't been worked out for the holiday.

A spokeswoman for Scottish Nuclear said at no time was any member of the public or staff at risk.

Meanwhile, after days of bad weather, Hogmanay revellers have been warned to wrap up to avoid tragedy at this year's huge outdoor parties.

The alert comes after Perth teenager Sally Greig froze to death walking home from a festive party.

Ambulance services are on standby amid fears that temperatures could plunge to as low as 2C (34F).

Police urged party-goers to make sure they wear layers of warm clothes on Edinburgh's streets.

Around 150,000 people are expected to crowd the city-centre party, which is ticket-only.

Weather experts say Edinburgh will be colder than Glasgow, where temperatures will reach around 3C (36F).

Last night, north Scotland was battered by more storms, with the islands, Aberdeen and Dundee being worst hit with winds of up to 65mph.

And more than 4000 families were still without electricity yesterday as power bosses faced calls to quit.

Today, the weather will be dull across Scotland, with strong winds, particularly in the north-east. It will be mild everywhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------
xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), December 29, 1998

Answers

The risk-benefit ratio of these nuclear plants can never justify their continued operation. Murphy's law applies to all of man's technology, no matter how carefully engineered. I feel all of these plants should be shut down and replaced with passive solar and wind plants.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 30, 1998.

Nikoli, perhaps you are right. Now nuclear plants supply what % of energy? What shocked me about this article was that it's more proof that the back-ups don't always work, and that contingency plans are not tested and updated enough. Scotland just bought the Pacific Northwest's energy company. Aaaagggghhhhhh. Nuke toast. Hope some of the Forum's nuclear engineers comment on the above article.

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), December 30, 1998.

I'm a nuclear power plant operator, not an engineer, but I'll throw in some comments. First off, read the same news at www.scotsman.com and note the decidedly different journalistic bias. Now that it doesn't sound quite so bad... Take all this with a grain of salt, since my experience has nothing to do with Scotland's reactor program. Anytime backup power is lost it is a big deal. Design criteria assume 1/2 of the emergency batteries and diesel generators function as planned. The comments from the unnamed worker about being terrified and not knowing what was going on tell me that this person is a janitor or security guard. 'Chernobyl-type meltdown' is a scare phrase. The U.S. licensed nuclear plants do not use that design. Scottish plants? Doubt it. Do some research and post it, someone. Nuke plants contribute ~20 % of the U.S. electrical output, Leska, which leads to a scary question. Since the US grid has slightly less than a 20% excess capacity during normal operation, how could all the nuke plants be shut down at once if it is found that it is unsafe to operate them, post y2k? Just a thought, since I think my plant will hum right through the new year. If we do shut down, it will be from an outside source, NOT Y2K related equipment failure. Having said that, I'm stocking for 60 days and already bought an SKS. 99% sure won't feed my kids .

-- nucpwr (nucpwr@hotmail.com), December 30, 1998.

Thank you so much, Nucpwr! So many times we'll post articles hoping someone with expertise will address the issue/s the reporter brings out. This Forum is valuable because of its diversity of skill-sets, and the ability of posters to back-up/debunk the articles with facts from their own experience. Thank you! Nuclear issues go up three spaces on our "List of Considerations."

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxx

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), December 30, 1998.

A little bit of hype spin or not on the part of the reporter, still that plant had problems.

Overall here in the US, the engineers who actually talk on the net seem to be in consensus that the actual controlling mechanics are analog. Hence, less of a problem.

But a nuke powerplant is way more than just a reactor and generator system. Those external factors are the ones which I'm more worried about. Telephones, saftey of workers and families in times of widespread civil disorder, payrolls, getting spare parts as needed, safe storage of spent fuel on site, transportation, water, sewage are just a few of the externals.

-- Mitchell Barnes (spanda@inreach.com), December 30, 1998.

Chernobyl was built in the 50's with Commie slave labor. How many people have died from nuke power in the free world? 10?20? How many have died in the USA from coal mining? 100,000? 200,000?

-- Joe O (jowczar@comp.uark.edu), December 30, 1998.

Mitchell Barnes: 1. True 2. True 3. My plant makes its own water and processes its own sewage. Don't confuse phones with communication. Communications are required by the operating license, phones are not and I cannot believe we would shut down for want of a 2-way radio. Safe storage of fuel? See: I now GET IT thank you Bob Mangus. Now; spare parts? Widespread panic? I'm wondering about those also.

-- nucpwr (nucpwr@hotmail.com), December 30, 1998.

Nikoli: Although I disagree with your risk/benefit conclusion, I can certainly say that the day a solar cell is invented to run an aluminum smelting plant is the day I'm out of a job.

-- nucpwr (nucpwr@hotmail.com), December 30, 1998.