In Search of a Critical Moment - The Story of ZPPR

This film tells the story of the Zero Power Plutonium Reactor (ZPPR), which was a special test reactor in Idaho designed to supply information essential to the development of economic fast-breeder, central-station, nuclear-power plants. The film shows the construction of the ZPPR by the Argonne National Laboratory, its many safety features, plutonium handling and storage, the computer that analyzes the data obtained by the reactor, and the fuel loading and attainment of reactor criticality.
Produced by the Atomic Energy Commission's Argonne National Laboratory.
The reactor operated between 1969 and 1990. At one point, the word “plutonium” in its name was changed to “physics” for PR reasons, making it the Zero Power Physics Reactor. These days, the ZPPR facility is a part of the Idaho National Lab. It has been decommissioned and is being converted to other uses, e.g., for the National Reactor Innovation Center. Read more about ZPPR at: en.wikipedia.o...
The digitization of this 1970 color 16 mm film in 4K resolution was funded by Nick Touran of whatisnuclear.com via film from the National Archives in December 2022. He has a 345 GB file in ProRes format if anyone needs it without as much compression.
Courtesy: National Archives and Records Administration

[@joelblankenship269]

Proud to have operated and supervised this Facility over the past two decades. A truly unique machine, and a substantial loss to nuclear technology when it was forced to shutdown!!!

[@yuglesstube]

Why was it forced to shutdown?

[@JC-vo5dt]

It is incredible to think that so many o you did this work for 20+ years and the Gov't just cancels it? 1. Was the shutdown recent (since Biden took office)? 2. Was shutdown date planned? 3. Was shutdown due to USA conversion from fossil fuels to "renewable" energy? 4. Was all research and testing shown in film done solely for future electricity production? 5. What now happens to all of the nuclear material (apologies if confidential)? Thank you.

[@MitzvosGolem1]

A new era of interest in Nuclear power now. Pebble bed fuel Westinghouse AP1000 and SMR units .

[@johnbaum1000]

@@yuglesstube also since the idea of breeder type reactors they found richer deposits of uranium in multiple places including in the North in Canada.

[@sylvaintexier8609]

​@@MitzvosGolem1 smr : 1/10th the power, 1/4th the price. = Dead end.

[@johnstilley5063]

I didn't expect so much production value!

[@winstonsmith478]

Interesting history, but when it comes to breeder reactors, LFTRs please.

[@kotnapromke]

Эти реакторы нужны только для Третьей мировой войны. Ядерной.

[@brmakl1]

Control rods with fuel? Interesting. I always thought control rods were for controlling fission and not initiating it?

[@robinwells8879]

They can be both. The reactor mass is just subcritical and with the insertion of the control rods it goes critical. They also contain the other elements used in the proposed reactor design structure to verify proof of concept. Sodium, stainless and aluminium etc. Everything that would be present in the real core.

[@brmakl1]

@@robinwells8879 Maybe I don’t quite understand the terms, but for simplicity, I thought with control rods inserted, that would essentially stop the reactor? Pulling the rods out would start it back up?

[@robinwells8879]

@@brmakl1 both are rods and they can control the reaction! I think that at this early stage of the science they were chasing the point of criticality and so it was easier to achieve it with adding fissile material. Geometry is so important to the physics alongside simple mass. Later when they understood the point of criticality it became easier to insert rods to quench the reaction by absorbing neutrons rather than adding them to initiate it. I am not really qualified but this is my understanding.

[@brmakl1]

@@robinwells8879 no worries! I see what you are saying now and I agree. I am also by no means educated on this stuff but always interested to learn bits here and there. Very fascinating! Thank you for the reply!

[@robinwells8879]

@@brmakl1 my pleasure. It was a new concept to me also.

[@Yaivenov]

Huh. A deadblow hammer, but as a containment roof. Interesting.

[@carlyleporter5388]

Wonder how many of them dudes caught cancer?

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Due to their work or by smoking? My guess is their risk of getting cancer from smoking is way greater.

[@johnstilley5063]

I didn't see anything (other than smoking) that looked fishy to me. I would guess... none. This wasn't the Wild West, they knew the difference between alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. And they knew how to mitigate each.

[@Sevensixtytwo]

Which one to choose; global warming or sometimes occuring nuclear meltdown? O tempora O mores.

[@rockets4kids]

All of these research reactors were part of a program to learn more about the technology in order to determine the optimum strategy for large scale power generation. In the end, the PWR design used on submarines was simply scaled up as that is what Westinghouse and B&W had experience with. This is despite the fact that it was far from the best choice for a large scale reactor. Given that most research was winding down even before TMI we're a good 40 years behind where we should be when it comes to nuclear power generation research.

[@unkelib4391]

skerry that they put 3oo kg plutonium to getter to see when it vil go critical when it only tuck a few kilo to destroy Nakazaki

[@jimseibyl5140]

Fusion makes fission obsolete…..in about 30 years.

[@caav56]

It's always about 30 years.

[@LordZontar]

Yeah, commercial fusion power has been about 10-30 years away for the last 50 years now.

[@RCAvhstape]

I never get tired of watching these old government films. The mid 20th Century was an amazing time and these films do a great job of explaining things.

[@benchapple1583]

But instead of this we have windmills.

[@gkess7106]

Film was created in 1970. Sounds like E. G. Marshall narrating.

[@BeechSportBill]

If you haven’t been to the “B” Reactor museum at Hanford, you NEED to go…

[@BeechSportBill]

Columbia Generating Station…WPPS II continues to provide safe power for the North West…

[@tunneloflight]

Other than running with a broken main pump bracket, and injecting hydrogen gas to reduce corrosion on the other bracket, hoping that it doesn’t break and cause a nuclear accident. Hope isn’t safety culture. It is the opposite. It is unsafe. An accident made vastly worse by the hydrogen injection, with reduced safety margins. And also, it is a sister to the Fukushima reactors, which showed just how unsafe this class of reactor is in a station blackout. The major part of the disaster at Fukushima was driven by hydrogen gas evolution from the destroyed cores. That would be even worse in an accident at CGS.

[@georgegonzalez2476]

How quickly you forget the other four uncompleted WPPS reactors that have cost power users billions of dollars with exactly zero benefits.

[@davidleadford6511]

Have seen the reactor on display at EBR-1. Had difficulty understanding what it was all about. This video really helps now.

[@whatisnuclear]

Technically the one in EBR-I is ZPR-3, but yeah it's the same exact concept.

[@daryllect6659]

9:12 - "For lack of a proper tool, I'll just use these pliers to push these together."

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

That's nothing in the nuclear industry. Louis Slotin decided it was sensible, in the name of accurate science, to use a screwdriver to keep two half spheres of plutonium separated, that together formed a critical mass. Needless to say, Murphy's law happened and Slotin died 9 days later of you-know-what. "Fun" fact: That same Demon Core (The name given to that core) that killed Slotin also killed Harry Daglian a year earlier when he used it for experiments with neutron reflecting bricks. Murphy paid a visit, Daglian dropped a brick in the wrong place, and presto. He died a week later. So, to recap: Safety in the nuclear industry has dramatically increased since the 1940's.

[@daryllect6659]

@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 My uncle worked at The Radiation Laboratory at Berkeley, then went with Teller to Livermore. The EBR-1 is really something to see, but the nuclear jet engines outside are really amazing!

[@georgegonzalez2476]

So they had about 340 kilos of Pu in the reactor. About 34 bombs equivalent. No wonder they brought the pieces together very carefully.

[@kotnapromke]

Плутоний 239 можно взорвать от 3кг. Используя правильный нейтронный детонатор и бериллиевую оболочку определенной формы. Именно так делают малые тактические ядерные заряды на 3-10кт. Которые помещаются даже в калибре 160мм. 9кг это для устаревшей технологии имплозии с помощью линз из обычной взрывчатки.

[@robinwells8879]

But the density was not high so only 100 watts. That’s a lot of fuel for not much return in energy in this format.

[@FreejackVesa]

Those ending credits sure are jaunty for a technical film about nuclear reactors lol

[@kotnapromke]

Напоминает Доктора Стренджлава и его веселого ковбоя!)

[@robertgift]

Do not like hearing "containment problems are dramatically reduced". What did they consider "dramatically"?

[@caav56]

Much easier to contain room-pressure coolant, than water at several thousand psi.

[@CONCERTMANchicago]

From what I understand film could be as high as 15K resolution. And now anyone can zoom in on KZbin videos, we have the best of both worlds in our hand.

[@ScoochieR]

I think the nightmare music that is usually associated with these informative nuclear documentaries might have contributed to the downturn of nuclear energy. Unfortunate .

[@holretz1]

It's a perfect building, from the outside it looks like the lair of some evil organization....perfect to make conspiracy theories...

[@ronaldgarrison8478]

Technically, this is just detailed enough that I can still sit back and let the zeitgeist wash over me, aided by the music and video fx. There is a part of me that so would love for this to be the way to the Future. But it was not to be. We're on a whole different path. Not necessarily better or worse, but very different.

[@iLumberjack]

Jazz flute was the key to most of the 20th century's scientific progress. We ignored it's demise at our peril.

[@ronaldgarrison8478]

@@iLumberjack Does jazz flute break down nuclear waste?

[@iLumberjack]

@@ronaldgarrison8478 yes, but there's always the risk of flute polarity flipping and becoming folk flute.

[@ronaldgarrison8478]

@@iLumberjack That might explain Jethro Tull Disparagement Syndrome. I've run into that a time or two.

[@robinwells8879]

Sadly they were mostly used to generate more plutonium for weapons rather than electricity. The plutonium then became a worry to keep secure.

[@richardjonsson1745]

Congratulations on the coming baby! ❤️

[@Nill757]

“containment problems are dramatically reduced” Missed out there.

[@whatisnuclear]

Pretty sure they're referring to the fact that low-pressure coolant reduces the concerns related to containing 2200 psi water.

[@Nill757]

@@whatisnuclear Yes, sorry, engineer here. I meant to comment on how we all missed out on the enormous advantage of a fast reactor with a liquid metal coolant, thus no pressure vessel, thus no primary side steam explosion threat, given the US cancellation of the fast reactor program. By Clinton, wasn’t it? I would have liked to see more discussion in the film of the main problems, at least in my view: Pu as a fuel and its production chain, and the risks of Na fires as w Super Phenix.

[@joelblankenship269]

@@Nill757 Almost zero risk of sodium fire with this design. I stored almost 10 metric tons of sodium plates in the warehouse. They were clad in stainless steel, and were room temp. Sodium is not a liquid and very reactive until over 208 degrees F.

[@Nill757]

@@joelblankenship269 In a reactor as a coolant, it is a heated liquid and not a solid sandwiched in steel. See the Super Phenix accident. This low power experimental reactor has no reported operational Na fires, as have other builds, so it’s possible, though I don’t understand the failsafes.

[@joelblankenship269]

@@Nill757 In this particular design, the sodium coolant was in the plates, and kept at ambient temperature. Since it was such low power, the cooling was maintained with fans and HVAC, and kept at approx. 90 +/- 0.25 degrees. The physics and nuclear properties they were gathering was the same, regardless of temp. I also qualified and operated Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR-II), and we maintained the sodium coolant in a double tank at 700-883 degrees. Since the sodium does not boil until approx 1600 degrees, we were able to keep the argon cover gas pressure at 1.0 inch HG, and never had any primary leaks or fires either.

[@DavidL-ii7yn]

To a modern nuclear professional, there is so much about this that is uncomfortable. Let's start with smoking inside an antique nuclear facility where there is almost certainly contamination. It's not like modern plants that are kept spotless.

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Curious question: Would the radiation sensors pick up the radio active contaminants in cigarette smoke, if someone were to light one up in a modern facility?

[@DavidL-ii7yn]

@@paulmichaelfreedman8334 No, it is a miniscule amount of radiation. It's about not accidentally ingesting any contamination: particularly beta or alpha emitters. In the old days, this tended to get spread around with operating age. Note that radioactive particulate can have strong electostatic charges and will cling to stuff. This is a very interesting subject with lots of "operating experience" being used to create modern practices. Modern nuclear stations are kept incredibly clean. They are also designed better for control of contamination. Doses for workers are a small fraction of what they once were.

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

@@DavidL-ii7yn Although I never studied nuclear physics (for a degree), I did get a good basic understanding of "normal" physics in high school. But I always used to ask the teacher deeper questions than we officially had to learn. For instance, Protons, neutrons and electrons were discussed. My questions were things like "Why is the neutron slightly heavier than a proton?" And the answer would involve the quarks, and of course I then went on to ask what Quarks were. The teacher gave me a vague answer because he knew I would not understand the scientific description, but it made me curious enough. Now, over 30 years on, I have a much deeper understanding of Quantum mechanics although not on the mathematical level, but as I have autism(undiagnosed until I was 50), I have a profound visual understanding of QM, admittedly some of those are analogous to what "really" happens, if we can even say that in this context...

[@narmale]

heh, these old video's really sell dont they? you think they really knew what they were doing by the way they talk and present themselves, then we look at history and realized, holy hell, how are we alive LOL

[@orangejjay]

@@narmale huh? They absolutely knew what they were doing. You think they just magically got lucky and willed these massive operations into existence? Wake up. Educate yourself. Do better. People weren't idiots back then like you sound today.

[@alexanderlangeveld]

Was this narrated by Ronald Reagan?

[@anthonyalbillar-montez5946]

Year 2023

[@frikkied2638]

“64 one half million dollars” lol what’s that?

[@Woody2Shoe]

64.5 million you idiot.

[@K-Effect]

This is how you start to make ginormous reliable horsepower

[@smatthewson2613]

This structure looks like a good basis for a reactor for a lunar base. How you would deal with radiatively cooling it with a 300kelvin diurnal variation I dunt kno tho...

[@jmd1743]

Hundreds of Miles of Underground water canals to passively cool the reactors. Think of fantasy Dwarfs having a Venice culture. Cool thing about a underground facility is that if it cost millions of dollars to build individual underground rooms then mining would have never been economical. Underground rooms could potentially last thousands of years on the Moon & Mars.

[@leechowning8728]

by placing it where it will not get sunlight. Without the atmosphere, only directly lighted points get hot. If you build it out of direct light, like underground, you have very near absolute zero. And yes, at least the first few reactors on the moon need to be fast reactors, because we are always going to need power, and we cannot waste space taking up massive fuel assemblies for each plant. Since we know there is U238 on the moon, fast reactors could be used to process the fuel to make more, for more powerplants.

[@narmale]

man these old propaganda films make you think they know what their doing... then we find out they didnt have a clue xD

[@orangejjay]

Oh yeah? Who's this we? And what makes you think you know better than them? lol Just the fact that you think a few decades ago was some stone age of information proves how little you know. Certainly you know less than anything that the experts who made what was essentially the bleeding edge of technology come to fruition. But go on ... let that ego keep talking. Tell us more about how they knew nothing back then and you know so much more. We'll believe you. ;)

[@narmale]

@@orangejjay hot damn dude, triggered much?

[@IMO1964]

I think you'll find math experiment etc these geniuses knew quite a lot more than you're giving them credit for quite a lot of knowledge has been lost.

[@Rorschach1024]

Clearly filmed before TMI.

[@Phil-D83]

They are fortunate nothing went horribly wrong with those old reactors minus a few relatively minor incidents