From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) is a mode of
failure for a nuclear reactor; if not managed
effectively, the results of a LOCA could result in reactor core
damage. Each nuclear plant's Emergency
Core Cooling System (ECCS) exists specifically to deal with a
LOCA.
Nuclear reactors generate heat internally; to remove this heat
and convert it into useful electrical power, a coolant system is used. If this coolant flow is
reduced, or lost altogether, the nuclear reactor's emergency shutdown system is
designed to stop the fission chain reaction. However, due to
radioactive
decay the nuclear fuel will continue to generate a significant
amount of heat. The decay
heat produced by a reactor shutdown from full power is
initially equivalent to about 5 to 6% of the thermal rating of the
reactor.[1] If all
of the independent cooling trains of the ECCS fail to operate as
designed, this heat can increase the fuel temperature to the point
of damaging the reactor.
- If water is present, it may boil, bursting out of its pipes.
(For this reason, nuclear power
plants are equipped with pressure-operated relief valves and
backup supplies of cooling water.)
- If graphite and air
are present, the graphite may catch fire, spreading radioactive contamination.
This situation exists only in AGRs, RBMKs, Magnox
and weapons-production reactors, which use graphite as a neutron
moderator. (see Chernobyl disaster.)
- The fuel and reactor internals may melt; if the melted
configuration remains critical, the molten mass will continue to
generate heat, possibly melting its way down through the bottom of
the reactor. Such an event is called a nuclear meltdown and can have severe
consequences. The so-called "China syndrome"
would be this process taken to an extreme: the molten mass working
its way down through the soil to the water table (and below) - however, current
understanding and experience of nuclear fission reactions suggests
that the molten mass would become too disrupted to carry on heat
generation before descending very far; for example, in the Chernobyl accident the reactor core melted
and core material was found in the basement, too widely dispersed
to carry on a chain reaction (but still dangerously
radioactive).
- Some reactor designs have passive safety features that
prevent meltdowns from occurring in these extreme circumstances.
The Pebble Bed Reactor, for instance, can
withstand extreme temperature transients in its fuel. Another
example is the CANDU reactor, which has two large masses
of relatively cool, low-pressure water (first is the heavy-water
moderator; second is the light-water-filled shield tank) that act
as heat sinks.
Under operating conditions, a reactor may passively (that is, in
the absence of any control systems) increase or decrease its power
output in the event of a LOCA or of voids appearing in its coolant
system (by water boiling, for example). This is measured by the coolant void
coefficient. Most modern nuclear power
plants have a negative void coefficient, indicating that as
water turns to steam, power instantly decreases. Two exceptions are
the Russian RBMK and the Canadian
CANDU (in the
latter case, for reasons outlined at the site Nuclearfaq, which also
describes the safety systems designed to reliably handle this
feature of the design). Boiling water reactors, on the
other hand, are designed to have steam voids inside the reactor
vessel.
Modern reactors are designed to prevent and withstand loss of
coolant, regardless of their void coefficient, using various
techniques. Some, such as the pebble bed reactor, passively slow
down the chain reaction when coolant is lost; others have extensive
safety systems
to rapidly shut down the chain reaction, and may have extensive passive safety systems (such as
a large thermal heat sink around the reactor core,
passively-activated backup cooling/condensing systems, or a
passively cooled containment structure) that mitigate the risk of
further damage.
The
Three Final Defenses
A great deal of work goes into the prevention of a serious core
event. If such an event was to occur, three different physical
processes are expected to increase the time between the start of
the accident and the time when a large release of radioactivity
could occur. These three factors would provide additional time to
the plant operators in order to mitigate the result of the
event:
- The time required for the water to boil away (coolant,
moderator). Assuming that at the moment that the accident
occurs the reactor will be SCRAMed (immediate and full insertion of
all control rods), so reducing the thermal power input and further
delaying the boiling.
- The time required for the fuel to melt. After
the water has boiled, then the time required for the fuel to reach
its melting point will be dictated by the heat input due to decay
of fission products, the heat capacity of the fuel and the melting
point of the fuel.
- The time required for the molten fuel to breach the
primary pressure boundary. The time required for the
molten metal of the core to breach the primary pressure boundary
(in light water reactors this is the pressure
vessel; in CANDU and RBMK reactors this is the array of pressurized
fuel channels; in PHWR reactors like Atucha I, it will be a double
barrier of channels and the pressure vessel) will depend on
temperatures and boundary materials. Whether or not the fuel
remains critical in the conditions inside the damaged core or
beyond will play a significant role.
See also
References