Throwback Thursday: Which Plant Is This?

tbtninemilepointSeen from an aerial perspective, a boiling water reactor site is under construction — carved out of part of a 1,500-acre site. Look familiar? Can you guess what plant this is and roughly what year this photo was taken?

Author: Moderator

Public Affairs Officer for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

11 thoughts on “Throwback Thursday: Which Plant Is This?”

  1. Where is your throwback Thursday piece for yesterday, the 28th?! Must be hard to find something good to throwback about with us nuclear power predators around. (:-) Keep in mind though you need to keep posting stuff so you can bury some of the blogs you get a lot of negative feedback on under your older blog sections. (:-) I am proud of you though for never deleting them, right!? Or is that just the case on the Open Forum Blog that nobody reads?!

  2. According to the NRC’s Information Digest, the provisional OL was issued in 1969 with the full-term operating license issued in 1974 for Unit 1. Unit 2’s OL was issued on 7-2-1987.

    Moderator

  3. There was a hydrogen explosion at TMI? Mark 1 containment at Fukushima didn’t contain much of anything? Inerting the drywell at Fukushima wouldn’t have prevented the hydrogen explosion that took place on the refuel floor. Where is the data that shows any fuel made it past the reactor pressure vessel? Also, how many people have been killed due to radiation exposure from the TMI and Fukushima accidents? That’s right……zero.

    Moderator Note: Some content removed for adherence to the Blog Guidelines

  4. A point of clarification. NMP1 OL was issued 08-22-1969 and NMP2 OL was issued 10-31-1986.

  5. Hard to tell from this pic. Looks like the site took a direct hit from an F5 tornado. (:-) That genie-shaped container survived very well it seems. Kind of looks like a prickly pear with those things stuck in it. Were those tornado-borne missiles? So its NMP and the genie bottle is perhaps the BWR Mark I containment. Just like the 23 other Mark 1 containments at BWR reactors in the US. This is the same identical containment design that didn’t contain much of anything at Fukushima. In fact these “containment” structures have been controversial almost from the time the first one went into operation in 1969 at Oyster Creek in NJ. These structures are relatively small and weak “pressure suppression” containment structures. As chronicled in his book “Fukushima” Dave Lochbaum writes “After the hydrogen explosion at Three Mile Island…the NRC required that the relatively vulnerable Mark I and II containments be “inerted” with nitrogen gas to prevent such explosions.”
    But as Dave notes also this was not the Mark I’s only problem. A prolonged station power blackout would result in the core melting through the reactor vessel inside the containment and the steel containment liner itself, defeating each of the multiple layers meant to prevent radioactive materials from reaching the environment. How sadly prophetic! After years of bickering with the nuclear industry and the NRC’s own Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, who vigorously opposed five staff recommendations for design improvements, the NRC ended up only adopting and acting on two of the recommendations. This is oh so typical of the nuclear industry. They fight tooth and toenail over any safety improvements as that will affect their bottom line and their profits. There are after all just a typical greedy corporation. So what can you expect anyway?! Perhaps a nuclear power plant regulator that puts public safety first and not the industry it is supposed to be regulating.

  6. Yes, this is the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Plant, located six miles east of Oswego, New York. The photo is circa 1966. The first unit was issued an operating license in 1974; the second unit in 1987. Both licenses were renewed in 2006. Photo courtesy of the Department of Energy.

    Moderator

Comments are closed.