[ RadSafe ] More on San Onofre - Engineer's input needed

[ROY HERREN]

Sandy,

    I was surprised to read your e-mail about the Steam Generators being 
"relatively new".  I had initially assumed that they had merely replaced the old 
tubing in the old generator with new tubes; I didn't know that they had 
completely replaced the Steam Generators.  Given that these are "relatively new" 
generators it is all the more disconcerting that some of the tubes are already 
leaking.  Hopefully the root cause of the leak(s) will be determined and a 
timely solution can be applied to get the units up and operating. 

   We are in a quandary of sorts regarding electrical energy production!  Some 
folks don't want coal fired electrical generating plants, some folks don't want 
oil or gas fired electrical generating plants, some folks don't want Solar 
thermal plants, some folks don't want windmills, and some folks don't want 
Nuclear Power plants (hell, here in northern California some folks want to tear 
down some old dams and do away with water reservoirs and the hydroelectric 
energy produced by those systems).   Clearly there doesn't appear to be any 
practical solutions that will please all of the parties.   What are we to do to 
produce electricity for a (post) industrial society?  Solar voltaic, Fusion?  At 
least Solar voltaic is a proven technology, but we can't possible produce enough 
panels in a short enough time frame to replace the loss of San Onofre, much less 
all of the other Nuclear Power plants.  What are we to do?
Roy Herren 




________________________________
From: "Perle, Sandy" <sperle at mirion.com>
To: "SAFarber at optonline.net" <SAFarber at optonline.net>; TheInternational 
Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Cc: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List 
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Sun, April 8, 2012 2:27:17 PM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] More on San Onofre - Engineer's input needed

Stu,

Correct. Only a couple of tubes have had issues. The question is will others 
fail and at what rate. This could be an isolated random issue since the SG is 
relatively new. I drive by the plant frequently. The NRC may over-react due to 
public concerns, and the media is giving into the anti-hype, as expected. Count 
p. this being the scenario whenever any issue arises.

Regards,

Sandy Perle
Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 8, 2012, at 3:22 PM, "Stewart Farber" <SAFarber at optonline.net> wrote:

> The two SG at San Onofre have about 10,000 individual tubes in total.
> Depending on whether all tubes have a manufacturing defect and are likely to
> keep failing regularly, I know in the past it was a routine procedure for a
> plant to weld defective  SG tubes shut so that nothing from the primary side
> can get carried over to the secondary loop. Back some time, Prairie Island
> for example had to plug about 600 SG tubes and continued operations. It's a
> question of how many tubes get welded shut and how much efficiency lost is
> acceptable as a fraction of the approx. 5000 tubes in each SG.
> 
> I would think it all comes down to how many plugs are defective or are
> likely to fail soon and can be repaired before the plant goes back on-line.
> The grid operators, and regulatory agencies involved,  are likely to give
> alternatives like welding defective tubes closed serious consideration when
> they think about the consequences of a shortage of generating capacity by
> taking San Onofre offline. 
> 
> Of course the NRC, may just torpedo the whole idea of SG repair and keep the
> plant offline in their pursuit of what they state is the need for zero risk.
> I guess operating old coal and gas plants with the significant environmental
> and health effects to be realized with certainty is OK with zealous forces
> against nuclear electric generation.
> 
> Stewart Farber
> SAFarber at optonline.net
> ==============
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Joel C.
> Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2012 1:35 PM
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] More on San Onofre - Engineer's input needed
> 
> It sounds like SCE spent $670 million on defective steam gennies.  I'd like
> to hear from a knowledgable engineer about that.
> 
> 
> Joel Cehn
> joelc at alum.wpi.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
> RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu
> 
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> 
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the 
>RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
>http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> 
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: 
>http://health.phys.iit.edu
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the 
RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: 
http://health.phys.iit.edu