Sellafield partly closed after 'above normal' radiation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the recent incident at Sellafield, where elevated radiation levels were detected at a perimeter monitor. Participants explore the implications of this detection, the response from the company, and the nature of the radiation levels reported, questioning whether they indicate a significant issue or are merely a reflection of naturally occurring background radiation.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the company's claim that the elevated radiation levels are due to naturally occurring background radon, suggesting that the response to send non-essential workers home indicates some level of risk.
  • Others point out that the company later clarified the situation, attributing the readings to natural background radiation and not to any operational issues at the site.
  • A participant questions the qualifications of the workers who were sent home, suggesting that if most were non-radiation qualified, the decision to call them off makes sense in the context of safety protocols.
  • Concerns are raised about the plausibility of naturally occurring radon being detected for the first time after decades of monitoring, with some suggesting that it may not be the first occurrence but rather the first time it has been publicly acknowledged.
  • Another participant shares personal experience with radon spikes in other facilities, indicating that such occurrences can happen under specific environmental conditions, which may explain the detection at Sellafield.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; there are competing views regarding the nature of the radiation levels detected and the implications of the company's response. Some believe there is a significant concern, while others argue it is a non-issue related to background radiation.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the historical monitoring of radiation levels at Sellafield and the specific conditions under which radon spikes may occur, as well as the qualifications of the workers affected by the incident.

Bandit127
Gold Member
Messages
278
Reaction score
35
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-25975785

They have/had "above normal levels" at a perimeter detector. As far as I know this would detect airborne radiation. And presumably at far lower levels than the source.

"A spokesman stressed there was no risk to the public or workforce." Really? So they tell all non essential people to stay home on a whim? That is not a reaction to no risk. It is a reaction to some risk.

Am I adding two twos and getting five to think that there is a significant leak somewhere within the plant. (By significant I mean a release that is a result of a failure of three safety systems - defense in depth usually means three layers of safety systems).

Perhaps I am just bitching about a spokesman who thinks we are stupid and doesn't mind stretching the truth.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Did you even read the second sentence of the article?

"The company later said it was naturally occurring background radiation and not attributable to any issue or problem with any operation on site."

"Rory O'Neill, director of stakeholder relations, said: "One of the 20-odd site perimeter monitors that we have is registering above normal levels of radiation."

"Overnight the monitoring system initially indicated elevated levels of activity. Following investigation and analysis, we can now confirm these levels to be naturally occurring background radon."

"Day personnel, agency staff and contractors have been told to stay at home until Monday."

I presume the reason why day workers were sent home today (a Friday) and told not to report back until Monday was because... it's the weekend.

The article borders on the absurd in terms of trying to cause panic over absolutely nothing.
 
I read the whole article in detail at about 10:00 this morning and they hadn't attributed it to naturally occurring radiation at the time. It has been updated since - I should have checked before I posted the link.

Thanks.
 
One thing I have a question on, is what percentage of workers called off had rad-worker type qualifications?

If there is an indication of an issue on-site, all non-qualified rad-workers are not allowed to show up. So if they did the call off, and it was mostly non-rad-workers, that would make a LOT of sense.
 
A belated comment.
Does it not surprise that 'naturally occurring background radon' would manifest for the first time at one site after more than 60 years of monitoring? Seems implausible to me.
 
etudiant said:
A belated comment.
Does it not surprise that 'naturally occurring background radon' would manifest for the first time at one site after more than 60 years of monitoring? Seems implausible to me.

I don't think it's the first time, it's probably just the first time we've heard about it.

The plant's I've worked in get radon spikes from time to time. It's particularly bad if you have a combination of ventilation issues combined with very cold/dry temperatures. Normally equipment can discriminate radon by looking at the energies and/or the alpha-beta ratio, however with enough radon concentration many radiation detectors will disable their radon disciminator function. I've lost clothing before to false radon alarms because I had too high of a concentration on me (had to go get them a day later when enough decayed).

Just my thoughts.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
11K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 94 ·
4
Replies
94
Views
28K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
70K