Society

Taishan nuclear power plant is near the coast in Guangdong Province in China. That’s about 60km west of Macau, and about 120km west of Hong Kong. It is 50km south of Taishan itself, a city with a population of 500,000.

On about the 15th June, various news sources reported on an incident at the plant. Fuel rods were damaged and gas released. The suggestion was that the gas was released as a way to deal with the problem. Or perhaps the release or escape of the gas was as part of the problem.

A New York Times article of 16th June states that “Nuclear scientists in the United States and Europe said in interviews this week that a buildup of radioactive gas in the water surrounding the fuel rods, while not uncommon at reactors elsewhere, was often a sign of poor design, manufacturing or management.”

Given the context, that comment at least raises the possibility that poor design, manufacturing or management is widespread worldwide.

That aside, which way do the prevailing winds blow in that part of Guangdong? An article as recent as the 13 May in the journal Nature states that “The region is influenced by the East Asian monsoon system, which is characterized by prevailing northeasterly and southwesterly winds in winter and summer, respectively.”

So if there was a major problem at this time of year, the wind would carry towards Macau and Hong Kong.

Update 20 June 2021

On 17 June, The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that “The China Atomic Energy Authority (CAEA) informed the IAEA yesterday that a minor fuel cladding failure  had occurred at the Taishan Nuclear Power Plant.”

The article goes on to explain that cladding failures are not uncommon. But it doesn’t explain what the cladding is beyond the obvious that it clads the fuel rods.

The glossary in the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission website (US.NRC) states that cladding is “The thin-walled metal tube that forms the outer jacket of a nuclear fuel rod. It prevents corrosion of the fuel by the coolant and the release of fission products into the coolant. Aluminum, stainless steel, and zirconium alloys are common cladding materials.”

I guess that if the cladding is damaged then coolant can reach the fuel rods. If that happens, then the fuel rods can release fission products into the coolants.

I understand that Taishan has about 60,000 fuel rods in its construction. The reports state that ‘about’ five rods were damaged. Why don’t they know the exact number that were damaged?

What causes a cladding tube to fail? Is it a mechanical failure when it hits against something? Is it a chemical failure because the heat generated in the rod punctures it? And how much radioactive gas was released to deal with the problem?

Update 21 June 2021

A report on the incident on June 16 by Reuters mentioned that another incident was reported by the Chinese National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA) in April. A burst of radioactive gas unexpectedly entered a pipe at Unit 1’s waste gas treatment system just as workers were trying to seal it, triggering an alarm.

Several outlets report that a Zhang Zhijian, a professor at the College of Nuclear Science and Technology at Harbin Engineering University died in what is described as mysterious circumstances. He is reported to have fallen off a building at 9.34 am on June 17, 2021. It is inevitable that some news reports will see his death as linked to Taishan incident, whether that is the case or not. What strikes me is Harbin University reporting the time of death so precisely.

Update 30 July 2021

The Financial Times reported on 30 July that the French nuclear operator EDF had recommended that the reactor be shut down because of a build-up of inert gases in the primary water circuit.

Also on 30 July, China General Nuclear Power Corp (CGN) issued a statement on its website at cgnpc.com that after consultation they had shut down the reactor to find the cause of fuel damage, and replace the damaged fuel and that the reactor is safe and controllable.

The Sunday Times on 30 July reported that following an increase in radiation levels that had prompted warnings from its French designers of an “imminent radiological threat”, the authorities had shut down the reactor.

In the unhappy Nazi party every member had a rank, some above and some below. Stick to the rules and you could lord it over those lower. But always you lived under the threat from someone higher. Such unhappiness from pretending you were king, whereas you were just a disposable link in the chain.

I concluded that that was why the uniforms were well styled, to enable party members to live with the distasteful knowledge that they were at the mercy of their superiors. Of course it was not just that their superiors were higher up; that is true in all organisations that have ranks.

The bitter pill for the individual in the Nazi party was that his superiors were Nazis. Nazis started out as bully boys, fighting on the streets. So the threat wasn’t just some theoretical worry of a verbal reprimand or of losing one’s rank. Get it wrong and you could be stood up against a wall. That’s what made it the unhappy Nazi party for each and every member. Even the boss had reason to be afraid.

I read that when the machine gunners were given the task of shooting down massed groups of people in Eastern Europe, they got a taste for it. Or they were horror struck and had to drink to be able to continue. Either way, their commanders learned that they had to bolt down the machine guns. They bolted the guns down so the gunners couldn’t just keep on traversing and murder their own. Once the gunners started, they didn’t want to stop.

Cheka, or The Chekist

There’s a similar theme in the film Cheka, or The Chekist, about a squad of executioners carrying out the orders of the local Soviet in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution. First comes callousness, then comes madness, which is a sane reaction to the horror of what one is perpetrating.

There’s a scene in the film where a cleaner is cleaning the corridors, and sees scrawled on the walls by one of the squad ‘Executioner’s apprentice school of the Revolutionary Socialist Party’. To the viewer, we see it was written with poor sardonic wit by one of the squad.

The cleaner lifts her head and looks down the corridor to the closed area. The wheels are turning in her head as she works out what is happening daily down there. She is on the brink between disbelief and of being horror struck when she senses the presence of someone behind her. The leader of the squad is looking down at her, and when she senses his presence she is terrified. And then quickly she takes her rag to wipe off the scrawl. He waits a moment, and then moves on.

Meghan is 39, I thought she was younger. Harry is 36. She is mixed race and he a member of the Royal Family. This makes her a target in the the way the Wallace Simpson was a target. When you buy into the Royal Family or are born into it, you follow the rules. Princess Margaret could not marry the man she loved, and she spent a lifetime fighting the consequences.

Harry’s Mother

Harry’s mother, Diana Princess of Wales, who was previously married to Charles the heir to the throne, died in a car crash when Harry was thirteen years old. There was a huge blaze of publicity around the event. Thousands upon thousands of people stood vigil outside Buckingham Palace. They loved the human face of the Royal Family that said that the world could be a more caring place. It took advice from Tony Blair the Prime Minister before the Queen acceded to lowering the flag at the Palace. She was seen as unnecessarily vindictive or cold or uncaring for not lowering the flag earlier. At the very least she seen as lacking understanding, which is a grievous fault in a reigning monarch.

Apart from this blip, the Queen has carried out her duties conscientiously throughout her reign. I am not looking at that here, but at Harry’s thinking.

The Royal Family and Business

Harry’s father, Prince Charles, has a thriving business based around organic agriculture. One of his uncles, Prince Andrew, has been involved as a middleman in any number of businesses. Another uncle, Prince Edward, owns a television production company.

All of these roles sit easily with the notion of the Royal Family’s life of service. In return for that service they are granted money out of the public purse.

Harry and Meghan and Business

Harry and Meghan could have gone into business that would sit easily with Harry’s Royal heritage. Instead, he and Meghan have marketed themselves. And that is a river that once crossed there is no coming back from. They are the product and their customers will want to examine the goods in detail.

It occurs to me that Harry may want to bring down the Royal Family because of what happened to his mother. What stars in the heavens brought Harry and Meghan together?

Should The Monarchy Go?

That question is being asked, and when I was young I would have said yes, the monarchy should go. It was after all a remnant of the discredited divine right of kings.

Then I read a line in a book, that before getting rid of something, make sure you have something with which to replace it. And that’s the big question. Yes, the end of the monarchy could go some way to ending social stratification in Britain.

But who would bring down the monarchy? It wouldn’t be the Conservative party. They would support the monarchy to the end. So if the monarchy fell it would be against a much bigger picture – revolution. We have had it before in the Interregnum under Cromwell and a civil war. What might come out of it this time? A one-party monolithic state? It’s possible – anything can happen in the heat of social disintegration.

While good men argue, bad men walk in and take over. So before getting rid of something, make sure you have something valuable with which to replace it.

In the 1960s, Marshall McLuhan said that social scientists should study the medium itself, not the content in it. He said that the characteristics of the medium dictates the message. He coined the phrase, ‘The medium is the message.’

In the 1960s entry to almost every kind of medium was controlled by the gatekeepers, so there wasn’t a whole lot of experimental stuff to see. There were a few counter-culture papers, but that was about it.

What would it be like, we wondered, if the gatekeepers who allowed access to publication were removed and everyone could say their piece?

Fast forward to today where people on all sides can speak to an audience.

And with what result? People have burned the bridges that connect them to people of opposite opinions. Politicians of all stripes have shown they are not statesmen: They too are caught in the fashion of hurling insults.

The medium encourages it, with isolated, insulated insults hurled by people whose intent is to cause hurt and pain. What pain are they in that they must give vent the way they do? What confusion swirls about them that they feel driven to do it? Will they grow tired of it?

Is this a blip on the road to a global village when we unite in recognition that we are all in this together? Whether kicking and screaming or dancing, it is going to happen.