GE defends nuclear plant design

Mar 18, 2011

General Electric defended its 40 year old Mark 1 reactors at the center of Japan's nuclear crisis Friday, saying that early questions about reactor's safety had long been addressed.

GE rejected recent reports of possible design weaknesses in the Mark 1, which accounts for five of the six reactors at the Fukushima plant, threatened with meltdowns after failed.

"The Mark I meets all regulatory requirements and has performed well for over 40 years," it said in a statement.

"The Mark I containment designs were modified in the 1980s to address improvements in the technology and changing regulatory requirements. All these changes required by regulatory authorities have been implemented," it said.

GE did not address whether the Mark 1 was designed sufficiently to withstand the specific chain of events that damaged the Fukushima Daiichi (No. 1) plant -- the 9.0-grade earthquake and massive tsunami that shut down the plants and their crucial cooling systems last Friday.

"We believe it is too early to know specifically what has happened in each of the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi," it said.

Blasts attributed to buildup have occurred at four of the Fukushima units, and the containment vessels at the reactors two and three have reportedly been damaged but not apparently ruptured.

On Friday the Japanese nuclear safety agency raised the Fukushima crisis level to five from four on the international scale of gravity for atomic accidents, which goes to as high as seven.

"The cooling function was lost and the reactor cores were damaged" at three of the reactors, according to a spokesman of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency.

" continue to be released in the environment," he said.

Reactors one, two and three were operating at the time of the and halted automatically.

But the cores are believed to have partially melted because the quake and tsunami knocked out the plant's reactor cooling systems, sparking a series of explosions and fires.

The Mark 1 was one of the most popular reactor models in the 1960s and 1970s, with 23 installed in US power plants and 32 elsewhere in the world.

But when it was new in the 1960s and 1970s, critics from the nuclear industry said it did not have the strength to handle massive pressure buildups in the reactor housing if the reactor overheated.

GE, though, said the reactor design had been kept up to standard, and that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission had studied criticisms, especially from one of its own officials, Stephen Hanauer, and finally rejected them in 1980.

It cited a 1980 NRC report saying that "the staff, including Dr. Hanauer, has concluded that the pressure suppression concept for containment design is safe."

GE said its units were built "to withstand predicted peak containment pressures based upon their design under accident guidelines."

"Safety remained our top priority, and the Mark I design met all NRC design criteria.

Explore further: Planned cut to renewable energy target 'a free kick' for fossil fuels

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

IAEA warned Japan over nuclear quake risk: WikiLeaks

Mar 17, 2011

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned Japan two years ago that a strong earthquake could pose a "serious problem" for its nuclear power stations, Britain's Daily Telegraph reported.

How does a nuclear meltdown work? (w/ Video)

Mar 17, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- When working properly, nuclear reactors produce large amounts of heat via nuclear fission reactions. The heat converts the surrounding water into steam, which turns turbines and generates ...

California 'closely monitoring' Japan nuclear leak

Mar 13, 2011

California is closely monitoring efforts to contain leaks from a quake-damaged Japanese nuclear plant, a spokesman said Saturday, as experts said radiation could be blown out across the Pacific.

Germany shuts down seven reactors

Mar 15, 2011

Germany announced Tuesday the temporary shutdown of the oldest seven of its 17 nuclear reactors pending a safety review in light of Japan's atomic emergency.

Recommended for you

Cheaper silicon means cheaper solar cells

Oct 22, 2014

Researchers at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology have pioneered a new approach to manufacturing solar cells that requires less silicon and can accommodate silicon with more impurities than ...

User comments : 3

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rwinners
not rated yet Mar 19, 2011
Is GE liable because Japan decided to build their power plants within spitting distance of one of the largest active fault lines in the world? Is Japan to be blamed, 40 years later, for that decision based upon current, but not former knowledge?
It appears that the reactors all survived the quake in good condition. It appears that the tsunami was the culprit in that it damaged the cooling systems of these plants, thus causing the overheating problems.
Who knew?
rgwalther
not rated yet Mar 19, 2011
I think nuclear is a sound idea, and I hate to be a cynic; but...I believe that at least a partial reason for elevating the Sendai Earthquake classification from 8.9 to 9.0 will have some positive, financial affect on the warranty and insurance guarantors for the reactors. This quake upgrade will also have a major, negative, financial affect on the people of Japan.
I hope that I am wrong, and that the Japanese quake victims can recover quickly.
COCO
not rated yet Mar 19, 2011
GE is above reproach - just ask NBC - the media makes the message.