Skip to main content

Friday Flash Fun

With apologies to MetaFilter for blatantly ripping off their Friday Flash Fun idea, we offer up AE4RV's Nuclear Plant Operator game. Enjoy!

Friday Flash Fun

Comments

anony-mouse said…
"You are in control of a small commercial nuclear power plant.  [b]Your goal is to produce as much power as possible without causing a meltdown.[/b]"

Ingenious summary of how people see nuclear power plants. The fact that maxing out the plant is rather normal, and that a meltdown is only possible after a horrible accident, is somewhat missed. :/
George Carty said…
Just a note on the game - it seems like 0% control rods means "fully in" and 100% means "fully out" - I had two meltdowns before I realized that :(
Adam said…
There are several nuclear plant simulations on the web, many of which are similarly guilty of misrepresenting various aspects of NPP operation (level of control, absence of automation, likelihood of failure, time-scale, etc.) to make core damage more probable. Although this undoubtedly makes for a more interesting simulation, the (perhaps) inadvertent effect is that people (continue to) overestimate the risk associated with NPP.

This program is especially guilty of this.

Other interesting details:
-The plant is a 20MWe PWR
-The GUI has 18 annunciator lights, including the comical "Power Output Low" and "Meltdown".
-The GUI outputs four properties that characterize the plant state: Reactor Temperature, Steam Generator Temperature, Cooling Tower Temperature, and Reactor Power, all on analog scales with handy green, yellow and red bands so the operator knows whether the number is OK.
-The operator has control of the Control Rod Positions, Primary Coolant Flow, Secondary Coolant Flow, and Emergency Coolant Flow, all adjustable from 0-100% rated flow.
-The operator can only adjust these variables once per game-day, after which the plant conditions are updated. All transients literally take "days".

I'm a bit curious which equations the simulation is using, but no such information is provided by the website or demo.

Also did anyone else notice the reactor coolant flow diagram? The coolant seems to around the core (down the downcomer, below the core, and back up the downcomer) rather than through it.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…