大亞灣隱瞞控制棒失靈 一旦出事難降溫 隨時慘烈過福島 安全局, 香港

Lik

http://www1.hk.apple.nextmedia.c ... amp;art_id=15100273



大亞灣隱瞞控制棒失靈
一旦出事難降溫　隨時慘烈過福島

【本報訊】港人對福島核災的恐慌纏繞不散，毗鄰香港的大亞灣核電站一直沒有吸取歷史教訓，對公眾隱瞞多次故障。國家核安全局文件存有該核電廠多次故障紀錄，其中局方 08年曾派檢查組入廠視察，發現插進反應堆爐心的控制棒被卡住，未能暢順運作，公眾一直蒙在鼓裏。核專家指出，控制棒失靈意味反應堆溫度隨時失控，一旦遇上天災或事故，情況或比福島核災更慘烈。記者：白琳、黃偉駿

大亞灣核電廠去年承諾兩天內向本港通報 0至 2級事故，但多年來對機件故障隻字不提。本報從國家核安全局網頁查閱部份關於大亞灣的文件，發現局方曾多次特派專隊入廠例行檢查，找出甚多毛病。例如去年檢查蒸氣機時發現冲洗不當，機身留有橡膠圈和釘書釘等小異物； 08年局方展開「臨界點」測試時， 2號機組核燃料裝卸儲存系統與控制棒同時出現故障，控制棒運作不順被卡住。
局方報告沒有提及失靈控制棒數量及有何影響，只敦促廠方分析控制棒輻射腫脹的機理，須特別留意控制棒老化會加速腫脹，應更換過期控制棒。網站沒有顯示跟進報告。本報昨晚詢問保安局是否知悉上述故障，發言人表示稍後回覆。

有腐蝕風險悄換蓋



理工大學電子及資訊工程學系講座教授胡仲豪認為，上述大部份都是小問題，但控制棒故障則不能忽視。插進反應堆爐心的控制棒旨在控制溫度，插得越深，爐內溫度越低。控制棒一旦老化變形，嚴重者或被爐殼卡死。

若大亞灣因天災等因素停電，導致水壓冷卻系統失靈，屆時大亞灣或未能像福島核電廠般，利用控制棒停止反應運作，隨時比日本今次核災更嚴峻，「核電廠嘅冷卻部份一定係最脆弱，控制棒嘅問題可以好嚴重」。

昨日出版的《東周刊》也報道，法國早前有核電廠反應堆爐蓋受腐蝕，類型與大亞灣核電站相同。廠方確認 03及 04年曾經分別更換兩座反應堆的爐蓋，並強調過程之中絕無洩漏輻射。保安局副局長黎棟國昨日強調爐蓋正常運作，「係正常嘅維修，機件用到咁上下要換」。

黎棟國稱毋須通報


大亞灣核電站（左圖）被揭發曾有反應堆控制棒卡住無法暢順運作。右圖為福島第一核電廠出事前的反應堆內部情況，可見控制棒。

黎棟國指出，更換部件不涉及任何事故，毋須特別通報，「部件更換時時發生，大嘅例如核棒，細嘅好似監測儀器盞燈壞咗。唔係 0至 7級嗰回事」。廠房當時曾將更換零件事宜通知港核投董事局。

大亞灣核安全諮詢委員會主席何鍾泰確認廠方曾向委員會通報上述事件。他解釋，核電廠 03年展開十年大修， 08年展開五年小修。 03年廠方發現法國有案例，因此「順便換埋」爐蓋，以免數年後出事才更換。 08年小修時，廠方也發現控制棒「唔係好順」，「剛巧」國家核安全局派員檢查也發現問題，「核電廠有 4.1萬支燃料棒，每 18個月換三分一，嗰次都『順便』換埋」。

立法會議員余若薇認為，種種事件正正反映出，核能技術無論有多先進，亦都無可避免受到人為因素所害。她說：「專家次次都覺得冇嘢、好小事，最後都係出事，仲要唔覺得需要公眾知道。內地家最緊要放慢廣東省發展核能嘅速度。」國務院總理溫家寶早前叫停內地審批核電項目，余若薇昨日致函溫總，要求中央容許港人參與內地核能規劃。

近年大亞灣核電站未有公佈的工程或故障


大亞灣核電站多次對公眾隱瞞事故。圖內該廠內部機件。資料圖片

日期： 08年 10月
維修/故障：與嶺澳核電廠同時申請「安全注入系統隔離網」，防止鍋爐效應

日期： 08年 11月
維修/故障：申請「繼電器」支架改造

日期： 08年 12月
維修/故障：核安全局的檢查發現， 2號機組反應堆控制棒卡住；核燃料裝卸貯存系統亦有缺陷

日期： 09年 3月
維修/故障：申請改造應急柴油機系統射流管

日期： 10年 5月
維修/故障：核安全局發現 3台蒸氣機有膠圈及釘書釘等異物

資料來源：國家核安全局

Lik

You should immigrate to Japan; as you fit Japs culture, which
only talk about good things but ignore the rest.
fy789 發表於 2011-3-23 15:30

報喜不報憂、喪事當喜事辦呢家野，日本政府拍馬都追唔上共慘黨啦～

-力

lo_pak

回復 7# boss2007

I don't know too much about Murphy's Law.

Back to your assumption, if the core is totally meltdown like Chernobyl, the first impact will be the most nearby cities (within 10kms) as they are under direct nuclear explosure of the explosion. The rest will be affected by the dusts mostly. So, atmospheric condition plays a dominent role in this scenario.

Pollutants will travel in 3 forms, namely diffusion, dispersion and radiation. If you ask me what's the safety radius for evaculation if a total meltdown did happen (source is out of control), as far as I can recall, it's about 30kms. Does that mean after 30kms the exlusion zone is safe, it is certainly negative. It very well depends on how the wind blow (you can tell by the location of the US aircraft warrior)...

Within the 30kms inclusion zone, the time to evaculate will be as soon as possible.
Out of the 30kms exclusion zone, it depends on the wind speed.

Touch wood, if Dayawan is having a class 7 accident, the reaction time for HK needs to be very fast...

Some fellows in the forum complained that Fukushima is located in an earthquake zone and proclaimed it's an irresponsible decision by the Japs government to have a plant over there. I will say, hay, have you seen Dayawan? How can you justify the risk if on one day Taiwan is at war with China and a missile flying out from either the States/Taiwan aircraft mistakenly/accidentally hit on the plant...

boss2007

回復 6# lo_pak


    How about Fukushima reactor meltdown not an accident ?

http://femalefaust.blogspot.com/ ... ichi-questions.html

so how many minutes ppl can evacuate if it did meltdown ? You know - Murphy's law

lo_pak

After the Japan nuclear outbreak, people are more concern about the safety issue regarding to nuclear power. This is a positive development.
While Tokyo is 250km away from Fukushima, Dayawan is only 70-80km from HK. It's just like having a bomb, even if you don't utilize it and claim it is safe, there's still a chance that an accident will happen.
From the experience we learnt from Japan, an open and un-biased information exchange forum/report system should be setup between the plant and the public. The clearer the message/information being disclosed, the lesser the confusion to generate unnecessary discomfort.
Concurrently, there is a need to educate the general public some basics about nuclear power.
I trully don't want to see any more uncivilized behaviours carried out by the public that will disgrace our Chinese society.

mcjohnjohn

hahaha, at 大亞灣 these are all regular class 1 incidents( no need to report) and regular maintenanc ...
peter236 發表於 2011-3-23 14:54

呢d 細雞野, 我地呢d 平民百姓唔需要理會啦.

peter236

hahaha, at 大亞灣 these are all regular class 1 incidents( no need to report) and regular maintenance.

For real 隱瞞, just look at Japan.

快樂牛郎

遲早都要死
使咩擔心呢