Have you read Bela Liptak's series of articles on preventing nuclear disasters? If you haven't here are direct links to them. Let us know what you think of them by posting your comments here or emailing us like Clarck Dodge did (see his comment below).
The Fukushima Nuclear Accident - Part 1
Preventing Nuclear Accidents by Automation -- Part 2
How Automation Can Prevent Nuclear Accidents-Part 3
Comment from a reader:
This is a good article about Nuclear Power Plants is true in many cases. There are many things that the guys on the floor have addressed only to be told just run the plant we will decide what is needed. In the case of the Fukushima Plants as I am sure others too. The stand-by power plant, is in no way the same as the Emergency Power plant. That would be located on the roof for example and provide power for everything needed in an Emergency. If the system was designed that way with a operational test say Quarterly or Monthly, then everyone in the plant would not only know what works, but how it works or don’t be allowed to work there.
Automation and systems are all great but many systems should have sight-glass type level systems like “Gem,” or equal to show levels with no electricity.
I agree you cannot have too much but must have what is needed for worst case scenario. That was not done as it cost money. Just think of the cleanup or lost revenue and weight the difference.
Clark Dodge.
Former senior Staff Chief Engineer.
