Talk:Petten nuclear reactor

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Petten nuclear reactor article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Physics Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Petten nuclear reactor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On the contents of "Safety issues"

I have some concerns about the contents of the section "safety issues", especially the quotes from Mr. Saris. After reading through sources [18] and [21] it has become clear that at least the second quote in the wiki, as well as numerous other allegations by Mr. Saris are not in line with official reports and investigations by panels of experts. Source 18 directly rejects the quote it's supposed to be supporting, stating (roughly translated)^[1]: "The automatic activation of the emergency power plant had failed due to a fault in the control- and signalvoltage. This voltage is supplied through a AC-DC converter supplying 110V with battery backup. In case of total power loss to the complex, power to this AC-DC converter is also cut, and the battery is supposed to take over. This battery failed, and as a result none of the three backup generators started. The reactor of the HFR had, as per design, shut down automatically after power was cut and the facility switched to emergency power from the Emergency Power plant (Dutch: Noodvoeding installatie) and the Supply Without Interruption (Dutch: Voorziening Zonder Onderbreking) with which, among other things, the electric post-shutdown cooling pump (Dutch: nakoelpomp)could be run for half an hour. Next to this the emergency diesel cooling pump was completely available. After about 4 minutes grid power returned and within 10 minutes the reactor was started again."

Source [21], the NRC article, points out that most claims Saris made in 2016 were either not in line with expert opinions or factually untrue, like his claim that the reactor was no longer used for research (at the time it was in use for research into molten salt reactors among other things) and that the isotopes made there could be made more easily and cheaper in cyclotrons.

In conclusion I doubt Mr. Saris should be quoted in the article at all, but I do think it should be mentioned that numerous safety issues have arisen over the years, most recent incidents being of INES level 0, but also some incidents of INES level 1 and 2 in 2013 ^[2]. Next to this NRG, the owner of the facility, was placed under strengthened surveillance by the ANVS, the dutch government agency for nuclear safety, in 2013 ^[3], but that same agency published in 2016 that it had found that the safety situation had improved considerably ^[4].

Inspector Tea (talk) 16:15, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

[1] ttps://www.laka.org/nieuws/2009/bijna-meltdown-in-hfr-in-2001-520

[2] ttps://www.autoriteitnvs.nl/ongewone-gebeurtenissen/hoge-flux-reactor-nrg

[3] ttps://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2016/05/28/de-onverwachte-drone-aanval-op-petten-2471756-a370245

[4] ttps://www.autoriteitnvs.nl/actueel/mededelingen/nos

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]