[NukeNet] Blaze At German Nuclear Reactor

[Bill Smirnow]

 ----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bernard Blanc

July 16, 2007




POLITICAL MELTDOWN
German Mishaps Put Nuclear Power under Scrutiny

The company at first said it was just a small fire. But the blaze at
Vattenfall's Kr?reactor has since become a political wildfire. Now,
Germany's pro-nuclear energy politicians have gone into hiding.












AP
The Kr?nuclear power plant has highlighted the potential dangers of nuclear
power.

The event featured finger sandwiches with liverwurst and salami, a Dixieland
band and Chancellor Angela Merkel telling marginally funny jokes, like the
one about her not being too concerned about the southern state of
Baden-W?berg's future because its residents are capable of doing just about
anything, except, of course, speak German properly. When the state's
environment ministry celebrated its 20th anniversary last Wednesday in
Ludwigsburg, the mood was so relaxed that the governor of Baden-W?berg, G?
Oettinger, decided to take advantage of his guests' high spirits to deliver
an important message.


According to Oettinger, who belongs to Merkel's conservative Christian
Democrats, nuclear energy should be part of Germany's energy mix in the
future as a climate-friendly energy source. The reactors, he said, should be
kept in operation longer than current plans call for -- and he is certain
that the policy of shutting down Germany's nuclear power plants by 2021,
passed under former Chancellor Gerhard Schr? during his coalition government
with the Greens, will eventually be reversed.
It was an important issue for Oettinger, whose state derives more than half
of its electricity from nuclear power plants -- a rate almost twice as high
as in Germany as a whole. But his audience was not convinced. Indeed,
Oettinger's comments received no applause, nor even a few nods of approval.
The Baden-W?berg governor, it seemed, was giving his speech in the wrong
place and at the wrong time.
'Occasional Explosion or Fire'

Nuclear power has received a tremendous boost since climate change has made
Germans suddenly fearful about the future. Regional politicians like
Oettinger, Roland Koch of Hesse and Edmund Stoiber of Bavaria, as well as
CDU General Secretary Ronald Pofalla, have become increasingly vocal
proponents of extending the shelf life of nuclear power plants. But during
the last two weeks or so, amid thick clouds of smoke enveloping a nuclear
power plant in Kr?and reports of technical failures, human error and
corporate incompetence, opponents of nuclear power see their arguments
gaining credence once again. Suddenly the Social Democrats, especially
Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel, see themselves justified in taking the
position that nuclear energy is a "risky technology." "German nuclear power
plants are the safest worldwide," Gabriel said acerbically last week, "aside
from the occasional explosion or fire."



Not only has Gabriel recognized an opportunity to shift public opinion away
from nuclear power, he is also clearly aware of the issue's symbolic
importance. By defending the movement to phase out the technology in
Germany, Gabriel has assumed the role of the protector of the Schr?
government's legacy. Of course, the issue also revolves around emotions,
history and the right to interpret history. Was the battle against nuclear
power wrong? Was the decision to phase out the technology a historical
mistake, as the conservatives claim? Was it in fact an environmental
mistake? Or was the decision to abandon the dangerous technology the right
one, because it is in fact so difficult to control, as the Greens and Social
Democrats argue?


Since the two most recent incidents-- at the reactors in Kr?and Brunsb?-- 
became public at the beginning of the month, Gabriel has positioned himself
as a leading critic of Vattenfall, the company that operates the two
stricken reactors. And he has been demanding answers.
Gabriel's posturing is the type that even a few short weeks ago would have
triggered automatic retorts from conservatives. But last week there was
hardly a whimper from even the staunchest proponents of nuclear power.
Economics Minister Michael Glos (CDU) told a small group: "One hardly even
dares take a position anymore." Dietrich Austermann (CDU), the minister of
economics for the northern state of Schleswig-Holstein, an advocate of
extending plant operating licenses, admitted that the incident at Kr?has
weighed heavily on the debate.
Proved to Be a Lie

The reason for the change in thinking is clear. Whereas most of the some 130
reactor incidents reported annually in Germany are minor and go unnoticed,
smoke pouring out of a transformer as happened in Kr?tends to attract
attention. It took the fire department hours to extinguish the blaze. Even
worse, the plant operator's claim that a fire in the transformer had no
effect on the reactor itself proved to be a lie.












DER SPIEGEL
Germany's aging nuclear power plants.

In short, the incident has made it clear that nuclear energy is by no means
the modern, well-organized high-tech sector portrayed until recently by
politicians and industry advocates. Indeed, the frequency of problems
occurring at Germany's aging reactors is on the rise. Just as old cars will
eventually succumb to rust, the country's nuclear power plants, built in the
1970s and 80s, are undergoing a natural aging process.


The problems are complicated by maintenance and supervision issues among
aging and unmotivated employees. A dangerously lackadaisical attitude has
taken hold that is making Germany's nuclear power plants increasingly
unsafe. Most incidents to date have proven to be relatively minor, and yet
each new incident becomes yet another link in a chain of problems with the
potential to end in a serious accident.
As if the nuclear industry weren't facing enough problems with the recent
incidents, representatives of the district attorney's office in the northern
city of L?took matters into their own hands last Friday when they appeared
at Kr?plant to get a clear answer on who exactly is responsible for
operations at the plant. Vattenfall, the plant's owner, had refused to
promptly provide the district attorney with the relevant information. Uwe
D?g, the justice minister in the state of Schleswig-Holstein, said that he
was "speechless" over Vattenfall's response, "especially coming from a
company fighting to preserve its credibility."
Ignited Several Tons of Transformer Oil

With Vattenfall coming under growing pressure, company executives last week
were even considering a plan to transfer the operating licenses for its two
nuclear reactors to E.on, which is both a partner and a competitor. The
executives reason that because the D?orf-based energy giant, which owns 50
percent of the Kr?reactor and 33 percent of the Brunsb?plant, has a better
reputation when it comes to operating nuclear reactors, an E.on takeover
would help prevent the plants from being shut down. The two companies have
already entered into serious talks over the plan, but E.on plans to wait
until the incidents at Kr?have been fully investigated before reaching a
decision.

According to the initial report issued by Vattenfall Europe, Germany's
third-largest energy utility, a phenomenon known as arcing caused a fire at
3:02 p.m. on June 29. The fire ignited several tons of transformer oil,
which normally circles around the voltage transformer in sealed metal pipes,
cooling the transformer. According to a statement issued the same day by the
head of the nuclear division of Vattenfall's German subsidiary, Bruno
Thomauske, the problem was under control and the safety of the local
population was not endangered "at any time."

German Mishaps Put Nuclear Power under Scrutiny

Part 2: Blatant Efforts to Downplay Major Problems

But the public learned more and more about further deficiencies at the plant
in the ensuing days. "One has the feeling," Minister of the Environment
Gabriel said derisively, "that someone from Greenpeace is doing their PR."

Vattenfall has now come under increased scrutiny. "We are taking a careful
look at what's happening in Germany," says Peter Rickwood, a spokesman of
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). After an incident at the
Forsmark nuclear power plant in Sweden last year, in which two backup
generators broke down and the reactor had to be operated "flying blind" for
20 minutes, Vattenfall submitted a report to the IAEA that clearly glossed
over the seriousness of the situation. The same pattern seems to have
emerged in the Kr?incident, as well as at the Brunsb?plant, where the
reactor was temporarily shut down because of a "network problem." In both
cases Vattenfall's report assigns the lowest problem classification -- "N"
for normal -- to the incidents.


This blatant effort to downplay problems at the reactors has even led to ill
will against Vattenfall management among employees. "Our people working in
the nuclear power plant are not permitted to say anything, but they are
furious," says Uwe Martens, the managing director of the Hamburg branch of
the services union Ver.di. Indeed, Thomauske chose to blame others at the
lower end of the hierarchy for the Kr?incident. According to Thomauske, a
"misunderstanding" between the reactor manager and the shift manager led to
the inadvertent opening of valves. Another unanswered question is why up to
25 people were congregated in the reactor's operating room at the time of
the accident.
Over the weekend, Vattenfall management finally began taking responsibility
for the management meltdown. And on Monday, Thomauske was fired along with
company spokesman Johannes Altmeppen. The decision was made at the
headquarters of Vattenfall's German subsidiary in Berlin in conjunction with
the mothership back in Stockholm.
Acting Irresponsibly

But the move might have come too late. Gitta Trauernicht, the
Schleswig-Holstein minister for social affairs, has clearly distanced
herself from Vattenfall. "What happened here is a first in the history of
the nuclear industry," said Trauernicht, whose agency is investigating
Vattenfall and the reliability of its operations. Trauernicht has said she
would not hesitate to withdraw Vattenfall's license to operate nuclear power
plants if it became clear that the company was acting at all irresponsibly.

Even Vattenfall's competitors say that they are concerned about the way the
Kr?incident was handled. Officially the utilities have complained to
government officials in Berlin that the mishaps could discredit the entire
nuclear industry. But unofficially they have reproached Vattenfall for
serious deficiencies in its ability to manage a crisis like the one that
happened at Kr?












DER SPIEGEL
Germans remain sceptical of nuclear energy.

Public relations officials in the nuclear industry traditionally meet once a
year to discuss strategy. In the mid-1990s, this group agreed on a plan to
deal with crisis situations. It called for being upfront with the public and
responding clearly and quickly, mainly to prevent rumors from developing,
but also to demonstrate the industry's proactive approach to such problems.
Apparently only a few German companies -- and Vattenfall -- have failed to
implement the plan. When the Kr?incident occurred, Vattenfall reacted as it
would have in the 1980s: provide as little information as possible, admit
only what can no longer be denied and downplay the facts.


Just why the company chose cover-up over clearing up is unclear. Vattenfall
cannot exactly claim that its PR policies are based on a lack of experience.
Safety issues have become an all-too-common occurrence in plants run by the
company. An internal report by Forsmark, a Swedish power plant operator and
subsidiary of Vattenfall, reveals why this is the case. According to the
report, which is unsparing in its criticism of Vattenfall, there has been a
"decline in the safety culture" at the company. Vattenfall's "focus on
increasing production" and its "too rapid renovation of plants" have led to
many "unacceptable quality defects." In addition, when Forsmark
alcohol-tested 25 people who were involved in its audit at the plant, which
is located about 200 kilometers north of Stockholm, three had to be sent
home.
Problems the Rule Rather than the Exception

Some of these problems are attributable to constant repairs at the plants,
repairs that are also long overdue at German nuclear power plants. In a
55-page report, Germany's Reactor Safety Commission (RSC), which advises
Gabriel's environment ministry, writes about "containing the aging
processes" and that some age-related problems are only being discovered by
chance. According to the RSC, these problems are difficult to correct,
partly because "suppliers and manufacturers are no longer in business."

The 31-year-old Neckarwestheim I reactor -- along with the Biblis A reactor,
Germany's oldest reactor still in operation -- is one of a group of nuclear
dinosaurs where problems have become the rule rather than the exception.
When a fire broke out in a major incident in October 2005, the reactor had
to be shut down manually. The state environment ministry in Stuttgart had
imposed a ?25,000 fine on the plant's operator shortly before the incident.
It had taken the operator, EnBW, about 20 days to discover a leak of
radioactively contaminated water into the Neckar River, and another nine
days to report the problem.

For years the Philippsburg 2 nuclear power plant, which went online in 1984,
was repeatedly started up again after maintenance work and shutdowns without
the emergency cooling system being correctly filled. Nevertheless, a court
in the state of Baden-W?berg, where Philippsburg is located, turned down a
request by the state government for tightened safety regulations as being
"too vague."












DPA
The fire at Kr?at the end of June may have been the result of attempts to up
the reactor's output.

Problems at the Biblis A power plant reveal how inadequate work has been on
aging reactors. The plant's operator, utility giant RWE, insists that it has
invested about ?1.2 billion in refurbishing the plant's A and B units in the
past eight years. Nevertheless, Biblis A retains the dubious reputation of
being a "junkyard reactor." For decades inspectors have failed to notice
serious maintenance deficiencies. It wasn't until 2003 that an inspection
engineer hit upon the idea of measuring the opening size of one of the
reactor's backup cooling systems. As a result of the test, the reactor was
shut down for eight months and authorities demanded a complete overhaul of
the approval process.


But even when it came to the many improvements to the reactor, both the
operator and supervisory authorities revealed a lack of the necessary
attention to detail. During a walk-through last September, inspectors
discovered small concrete fragments on the floor of the reactor building. A
subsequent inspection revealed that more than half of about 15,000 heavy
dowels installed in 2001 to safeguard central plant components in both
Biblis reactors against earthquakes had in fact been installed incorrectly
and were not as strong as required.
In addition, the Biblis reactors are virtually unprotected against terrorist
attacks from the air, even though they are located only a few flight minutes
from Germany's busiest airport in Frankfurt. The concrete containment shell
of reactor A is less than 60 centimeters thick, a problem also encountered
at two other aging plants, Brunsb?and Philippsburg 1.


German Mishaps Put Nuclear Power under Scrutiny

Part 3: Aging, Unmotivated Workforce




Experts believe that the risks posed by plant personnel even outweigh those
of an airborne terrorist attack. Employees who have spent years staring at
the plants' security monitors without experiencing a major incident are
bound to acquire a false sense of security, which ultimately leads to a more
lax approach to safety precautions. In 1987 this phenomenon resulted, at the
Biblis A nuclear power plant, in what until then was the most serious
incident in the history of German nuclear power. For hours the team in the
control booth ignored a warning light indicating an open valve in the
cooling cycle.



"Working in a nuclear power plant is incredibly boring, but you still have
to be completely on the ball," says Michael Sailer of the Darmstadt-based
RSC. "Sloppiness is dangerous." Another factor complicating the problem is
the aging of workers at nuclear power plants. Operators are having trouble
recruiting new employees. Nuclear power plants are "simply no longer sexy,"
says Jef Vanwildemeersch, a former Belgian government official and now a
nuclear industry lobbyist. In the mid-1980s there were about 300 students
learning the nuclear power business in Germany. By 2006 that number had
plunged to only about 20, half of them coming from abroad.


Insiders also report a lack of motivation among employees. The work ethic
has suffered as a result of cost-cutting measures, job cuts and outsourcing.
According to Uwe M?r, a lecturer at the Essen Power Plant School, "the mood
is somber at a few power plants because many are focused on the time they
have left until retirement." Because of personnel shortfalls, some companies
are bringing early retirees and pensioners back to work to ensure continued
operation. Utilities E.on and RWE say they are already spending "millions"
to train new employees internally.
Nevertheless, internal criticism of the industry and its current state
remains a taboo. Eberhard Grauf, the former director of the Neckarwestheim
II nuclear power plant, was abruptly dismissed in July 2004. Grauf, a
professional with an international reputation, had previously complained
about "unacceptable work loads" at the plant operated by energy giant EnBW.
Overloading the Transformer

Industry insiders complain that for some time power plant operators have
been attempting to squeeze as much profit as possible out of their old, and
for the most part depreciated, reactors. In recent years, for example, the
owners of the Kr?nuclear power plant have invested about ?50 million in
technical improvements to increase the efficiency of the plant's turbines, a
move that has brought a 7 percent improvement in net output. But these
alleged improvements have also increased stress on secondary systems such as
the plant's transformer, systems that were apparently not retrofitted. In
fact, this may have been the cause of the Kr?fire. According to G? Pikos, a
nuclear expert from the western German city of D?"the transformer was
apparently already damaged by a string of earlier incidents." Pikos believes
that this, combined with the increase in turbine output, was what ended up
overloading the transformer.







E.on has also asked the Bavarian state government for its approval of a
similar efficiency upgrade at its Gundremmingen nuclear power plant. Raimund
Kamm of the Forum for a Responsible Energy Policy is concerned about the
upgrade: "It's the same situation as when you're upping a car's performance.
The engine becomes more powerful, while the brakes stay the same."


Minister of the Environment Gabriel is familiar with these risks. But he is
equally alarmed over scenarios that extend into the political arena. He and
fellow members of his party are becoming increasingly concerned that the
operators of aging nuclear power plants will take advantage of the current
mood to attempt to push through a program that could only be to their
benefit. By agreeing to shut down trouble-prone reactors prematurely and
transfer their operating licenses to newer reactors, companies could extend
the operating life of the newer reactors by five to 10 years.
This sort of maneuver would put pressure on politicians, especially Social
Democrats. One of them, Gabriel, will soon have a chance to demonstrate how
strong his support is for unconditionally abandoning nuclear power. This
week he is scheduled to meet with Klaus Rauscher, the head of Vattenfall
Europe.
By Matthias Bartsch, Frank Dohmen, Simone Kaiser, Sebastian Knauer, Udo
Ludwig, Cordula Meyer, and Roland Nelles

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

RELATED SPIEGEL ONLINE LINKS

  a.. Vattenfalling: Energy Giant Fires Nuclear Boss (07/16/2007)
  b.. Atomic Errors: Merkel Furious about Nuclear Mishaps (07/11/2007)
  c.. The World from Berlin: Nuclear Safety Meltdown in Germany (07/10/2007)
  d.. Atomic Safety in Germany: Reactor Affected in Nuclear Power Plant Fire
(07/04/2007)
  e.. Energy Summit: Merkel Nudges for Nuclear Power Comeback (07/03/2007)