New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Nuclear Accident Is Long-Feared "Station Blackout"

At a press briefing, physicist Ken Bergeron explained the type of accident occurring at Fukushima. Steve Mirsky reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

“The type of accident that is occurring in Japan is known as the station blackout: loss of off-site AC power—power lines are down—and then a subsequent failure of emergency power on-site, the diesel generators. The station blackout has been one of the great concerns for decades.”

Physicist Ken Bergeron, speaking on March 12 during a press briefing. He worked on nuclear reactor accident analysis at Sandia National Laboratories.

“The probability is hard to calculate primarily because of the possibility of what are called common-cause accidents, where the loss of off-site power and of on-site power are caused by the same thing. In this case the earthquake and tsunami. We’re hoping that all of the barriers to release of radioactivity will not fail. So far the first barrier, which is the fuel cladding, has apparently failed, because they are detecting cesium. We now have to hope that the subsequent layers, including primarily the containment building, will succeed in preventing release of major amounts of radioactivity.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

For more from Bergeron, see my article on the SciAm Web site "Nuclear Experts Explain Worst-Case Scenario at Fukushima Power Plant"

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe