He tells the accident as two stories. The first story is what happened. The second story is why those involved made some of their decisions. It is well worth the watch. After the TMI event, several changes happened to how the nuclear industry was run.
Hostages of Each Other: The Transformation of Nuclear Safety since Three Mile Island
In this book, the author details the workings of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO), a non-governmental industry group which oversees safety at nuclear plants.
This is an excellent and engaging account of the accident. The graphics are helpful, too.
Regarding the highlighted takeaway: "“Even in a situation where the operators shut down the emergency core cooling system, we melt 60% of the core, we detonate hydrogen within the containment building... that system prevented any meaningful public health consequences to either the general public or the operators of the plant, which is why Three Mile Island is one of the greatest arguments you have for nuclear safety." — James Krellenstein"
I get the point of this takeaway, but I wonder if you have thought about the difference between what the releases would be for a clean shiny spanking new plant like TMI 2 at the time of the accident, versus what they would be for plants that have aged for awhile. TMI 2 hadn't even been in commercial operation for a few months before this accident happened, so the reactor wasn't embrittled, none of the Steam Generator tubes leaked, and there probably weren't cracks or corrosion anywhere. That wouldn't have been the case for an older plant.
One of the best videos I have ever seen on what happened at TMI is this one:
Who Destroyed Three Mile Island? - Nickolas Means | The Lead Developer Austin 2018
https://youtu.be/1xQeXOz0Ncs
He tells the accident as two stories. The first story is what happened. The second story is why those involved made some of their decisions. It is well worth the watch. After the TMI event, several changes happened to how the nuclear industry was run.
Hostages of Each Other: The Transformation of Nuclear Safety since Three Mile Island
https://www.amazon.com/Hostages-Each-Other-Transformation-Nuclear/dp/0226706885
In this book, the author details the workings of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO), a non-governmental industry group which oversees safety at nuclear plants.
This is an excellent and engaging account of the accident. The graphics are helpful, too.
Regarding the highlighted takeaway: "“Even in a situation where the operators shut down the emergency core cooling system, we melt 60% of the core, we detonate hydrogen within the containment building... that system prevented any meaningful public health consequences to either the general public or the operators of the plant, which is why Three Mile Island is one of the greatest arguments you have for nuclear safety." — James Krellenstein"
I get the point of this takeaway, but I wonder if you have thought about the difference between what the releases would be for a clean shiny spanking new plant like TMI 2 at the time of the accident, versus what they would be for plants that have aged for awhile. TMI 2 hadn't even been in commercial operation for a few months before this accident happened, so the reactor wasn't embrittled, none of the Steam Generator tubes leaked, and there probably weren't cracks or corrosion anywhere. That wouldn't have been the case for an older plant.
Please, James, it’s Babcock, not Babcox or Babcocks.
The average downwind dose amounted to less than one chest X-ray.
So basically, America flipped out over an unscheduled chest X-ray.