It was a phased shutdown. I think unit 3 was the last in 2000. The other two were done earlier. One, as I recall due to a secondary system fire.paperburn1 wrote:Did not Chernobyl continue to produce power from the other reactors on site until they were decommissioned in 2000?
Really what did them in was that the Soviet Operators were/are not trained to a sufficient depth in core physics and mechanics. THey really did not understand the plant they were operating. Any boiling water core has an inherent limitation in reactivity margins due to excessive boiling. As a result, ofr example, if I remember correctly, Cherynobl Four (the casualty plant) was operating at about half the safety margin when things went south. Ironically, the attempt to get it under control pushed it over the edge. These guys really did not understand things we train/educate here like poisons, and reactivity excursions. They thought two things, more cooling, more rods. By trying to do it all at the wrong times, (they thought they could still save the core), they flashed it out and that was that. Overpressure accident on the core structure followed quickly by a Hydrogen pop. End result, flaming chunks of core and what-not winging through the air, and complete strutural failure of the core and core structure. Bad ju-ju all around.
What happened here was way worse than Fukishima. The issue with Fukishima was that early on, no one wanted to think that the secondary bucket had cracked. Once they figured it out, it was too late. The puddle had drained. I was asked about this the day of the first pop. My comment was, "Containment has failed. You cannot suffer a Hydrogen pop like what I just saw and not crack the concrete." I then went on to recommend unmanned overhead video & IR, as well as test drills around the bucket to look for a plume. The plant operators chose to do manned visual overhead at first, then swithced to un-manned. Cores were not done until well after it mattered.
Beh.
Now we have Fukishima Memorial Beach Park. Which I also pointed out when asked about core recoverability. It made me laugh out loud. I told the parties asking, "That is slag. And you are probably going to lose more. That plant will never operate again."
Is what it is.
If you want to have a good read on C-4, read this:
NRC Study
or you can check out some of the work done (and ongoing) by IAEA, and the Scientific Commitee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCAER) has some stuff as well.