Huge quantity of protective steel was left out of initial construction of China General Nuclear Corp’s first reactor, built close to Hong Kong in 1987

This article is more than 4 years old

This article is more than 4 years old

One of the Chinese nuclear power firms pushing for a stake in the UK’s energy industry left out hundreds of critical steel rods when building its first reactor near Hong Kong in 1987 because workers misread the blueprint.



The missing parts were added in a higher layer of the foundation, with extra steel to reinforce them, after the extraordinary mistake was discovered. The plant has now been operating safely for more than two decades.

But the nature and scale of the error raises serious questions about the rigour of Chinese nuclear firms and the country’s oversight regime, experts say.

“[This a prospective] partner who, when they built the first nuclear power station in China, forgot to put in a large percentage of the protective steel,” said Professor Steve Tsang, senior fellow of the China Policy Institute at Nottingham University. “Potentially we are putting ourselves in a very difficult situation.”

China General Nuclear Corp built and runs Daya Bay nuclear plant in Shenzhen. It is one of two Chinese power firms expected to invest in the UK’s Hinkley Point power station and potentially build and operate a future nuclear plant, along with China National Nuclear Corporation and French firm EDF.

Chancellor George Osborne, on a trade mission to China last month, said the government would provide £2bn in initial financing for the much-delayed project, which EDF has struggled to fund.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Hinkley Point nuclear power station in Somerset. Photograph: Richard Austin/Rex Shutterstock

Industry observers believe the Chinese cash for Hinkley is conditional on allowing Chinese firms to build their own plant at Bradwell in Essex. That project would function as a showcase for Chinese technology.

“I understand what the Chinese want, which is to have a demonstration plant, to show they can build inexpensively, quickly and reliably,” said Theresa Fallon, senior associate at the European Institute of Asian Studies.

“But it’s at a time when energy is relatively inexpensive, and this plant is a bit untried technology. I understand there are rules, but there were rules in Hong Kong too when you had the problems in Daya Bay. You are not building a gazebo, it’s really dangerous, serious stuff.”

News of the problems at one of China’s first commercial nuclear power plants only reached neighbouring Hong Kong weeks after the mistake was discovered on 14 September 1987.

“Construction was temporarily halted in September 1987 after it was revealed that workers laying down reactor building No.1’s concrete foundation had misread the blueprints,” the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists reported in 1991.

“But it was not until 9 October, after news of the mislaid rods reached Hong Kong, that Hong Kong investors admitted that construction had been stopped.”

Quality control inspectors examining the first layer of reinforced concrete poured for the building’s foundation discovered that 316 steel reinforcing rods were missing, CGN spokesman Hu Guangyao said. That was more than half of the 576 planned for the plant.

“The investigation found that the civil construction contractor misread construction drawings,” Hu said, adding that the firms had been selected by a public tender process and included French, German and Chinese companies.



Construction started again nearly two months later, on 9 November, after discussion with experts and operating partners on how to remedy the mistake given that the first layer of concrete had already set.

The power plant design includes five layers of reinforced concrete in its foundation, and so the company added the 316 L-shaped 40 mm steel rods in the second layer of the foundation “as per the original design”, Hu said. They also added more than 300 thinner rods “to form an even stronger steel net”.

Eventually the Chinese nuclear safety watchdog approved restarting construction, The plant has now been operating for more than 21 years, and Hu said the early error transformed the company’s safety culture.

“This incident was a critical lesson to every single one of us at CGN and a reminder that ‘safety is our top priority’,” Hu said. “This has become a guiding principle for CGN’s production and operation as well as CGN employees’ code of conduct ever since.”

What to expect from President Xi Jinping’s visit to Britain Read more

Opponents of nuclear power in Hong Kong were also concerned that a seismic survey of the reactor site had not been properly carried out or had been manipulated. In 1987, a newly recorded fault line, less than five miles from the Daya Bay site, was added to maps even though authorities said there had been an extensive geological survey.

Hu said the company carried out three years of seismology studies over a 300 sq km area before settling on the site. He did not directly address whether the nearby fault line had been overlooked.

“The Daya Bay nuclear power plant is located on a stable plate. No deep fractures exist within a 50km radius of the plant, nor has there been an earthquake greater than magnitude 6 within this radius,” he said.

A leading Chinese scientist told the Guardian this year that China’s nuclear power expansion plans are “insane” because the country’s safety controls are not rigorous enough.

“China currently does not have enough experience to make sound judgments on whether there could be accidents,” said 88-year-old He Zuoxiu, who worked on China’s nuclear weapons programme. “The number of reactors and the amount of time they have been operating safely both matter.”

Chinese government officials argue that nuclear technology has improved since the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island accidents, but that ignores the role that human error and flawed safety regimes played in both cases.

The operator of Japan’s Fukushima plant has admitted that the company failed to take stronger disaster prevention measures ahead of the earthquake and tsunami, for fear of lawsuits and protests.