advertisement


What the Fukishima is going on there?

 
I find the site 'most reassurring and Im so glad its all under control'
Im now going to spend more time at home in New Zealand and visit the grandchildren in Patagonia - they are such fans of Arnie

That Hanford spill sounds terrible - I smell 'another ageing Nuke plant that WE need to replace'

In the soil having eaten thru the floor 1000' from the river and too hot for human life

I have only heard tweets about this so thanks for the Hanford url

I darent read the others after that
 
Yeah, I like the fact that all on "Simplyinfo" is well thought through, has links to Tepco documentation etc - e.g. their current state of unit 1 paper, which, incidentally, I find more worrying than the Unit 4 SFP ( http://www.simplyinfo.org/?p=7955 ). If there's conjecture they say so, unlike Gunderson et al.
But let's not comment on him....
 
PARIS, MAR 4:
The head of French nuclear group Areva, a major supplier to Japan, said today six reactors would reopen in the country before the end of the year and that most of the country’s nuclear plants would eventually be put back on line.
Click to expand...

could be true but then the information comes via slashdot.org and the www:D
 
Hanfords leaky and 'old' tanks now publically described as leaking 1000 gals pa. And no means of addressing it with available equipment or tech

Perhaps u know better. 1000 Nice round fig.
 
According to an article Fukushima could spew out more than 15,000 times as much radiation as the Hiroshima bombing.

"We are now within two months of what may be humankind's most dangerous moment since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

"There is no excuse for not acting. All the resources our species can muster must be focussed on the fuel pool at Fukushima Unit 4.

"Fukushima's owner, Tokyo Electric (Tepco), says that within as few as 60 days it may begin trying to remove more than 1300 spent fuel rods from a badly damaged pool perched 100 feet in the air. The pool rests on a badly damaged building that is tilting, sinking and could easily come down in the next earthquake, if not on its own.

"Some 400 tons of fuel in that pool could spew out more than 15,000 times as much radiation as was released at Hiroshima.

"The one thing certain about this crisis is that Tepco does not have the scientific, engineering or financial resources to handle it. Nor does the Japanese government. The situation demands a coordinated worldwide effort of the best scientists and engineers our species can muster."

Meanwhile the Tories (and Labour) are figuring out how much money to give to EDF so they can build nuclear power stations in the UK, despite the fact that EDF have been ripping people off over electricity for years.

It's a sick world.

Jack
 
Man-yi @ Fukushima.jp http://thebulletin.org/suzukis-fukushima-updates another record of what is happening.

What about the Iran wishing to build HEU powered submarines? All perfectly legal as military reactors fall outside the regulatory framework, and besides the US have a fleet of them scuttling about the oceans of the world 24*7*365 - we live in exciting times but for how much longer?
 
jackbarron said:
According to an article Fukushima could spew out more than 15,000 times as much radiation as the Hiroshima bombing.

"We are now within two months of what may be humankind's most dangerous moment since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

"There is no excuse for not acting. All the resources our species can muster must be focussed on the fuel pool at Fukushima Unit 4.

"Fukushima's owner, Tokyo Electric (Tepco), says that within as few as 60 days it may begin trying to remove more than 1300 spent fuel rods from a badly damaged pool perched 100 feet in the air. The pool rests on a badly damaged building that is tilting, sinking and could easily come down in the next earthquake, if not on its own.

"Some 400 tons of fuel in that pool could spew out more than 15,000 times as much radiation as was released at Hiroshima.

"The one thing certain about this crisis is that Tepco does not have the scientific, engineering or financial resources to handle it. Nor does the Japanese government. The situation demands a coordinated worldwide effort of the best scientists and engineers our species can muster."

Meanwhile the Tories (and Labour) are figuring out how much money to give to EDF so they can build nuclear power stations in the UK, despite the fact that EDF have been ripping people off over electricity for years.

It's a sick world.

Jack
Click to expand...

Spent fuel rods are neither water soluble nor volatile, so no matter where they end up, they contaminate locally, not globally. There is no real mechanism for the "15000 times worse than Hiroshima" to disperse over a wide area. That aricle is pure unadulterated scaremongering.

You really should not comment about things you know very, very little about, Jack. Try reading some of the background science.

The water storage tanks are a far more threatening situation.

Chris

Chris
 
15,000 times more radiation than Hiroshima. Apart from the inconvenient fact (for the scare story) that Hiroshima was a bomb that spread it's radiation over a very wide area. The fuel pool is just sitting there in one localised spot. In many ways wide spread low level contamination if far more of a health risk than a locally contained high radiation risk. For one, it's far harder to remove and therefore has a huge long term impact. That's not to say that the fuel pool isn't potentially a huge risk to life as clearly it is a very radioactive source.
 
The SFP of reactors 1-4 are not just very radioactive, they are very unstable. Physically you have to accept the integrity of the concrete steel and water. Even if you withdraw a rod safely, there is no stopping it's movement to a safe place - no plan B. It needs remote crane lifting to another pool. If it is out of water it will catch fire after a time. These rods are seperated by a rack with neutron soaking spacers. If it collapses in the wrong way, then neutron producing elements pushed together would cause the worst outcome:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticality_accident#Incidents
 
demotivated said:
The SFP of reactors 1-4 are not just very radioactive, they are very unstable. Physically you have to accept the integrity of the concrete steel and water. Even if you withdraw a rod safely, there is no stopping it's movement to a safe place - no plan B. It needs remote crane lifting to another pool. If it is out of water it will catch fire after a time. These rods are seperated by a rack with neutron soaking spacers. If it collapses in the wrong way, then neutron producing elements pushed together would cause the worst outcome:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticality_accident#Incidents
Click to expand...

But as that article states nuclear reactors just won't cause nuclear explosions. Nuclear explosions require specific engineering and physics obstacles to be overcome and don't just happen "by accident" even with supercritical masses of fissionable material present.

http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_disasters/nuclear_disasters.html

http://mitnse.com/2011/03/18/what-is-criticality/

That said a meltdown hitting a water table is not something to be dismissed in any way shape or form. It would be a truly disastrous event.
 
If there was a continuous excursion in a fuel pool, the radiation level could be too great for anyone to approach. If rods are trapped in close proximity with no boron moderator the energy output can climb x 1000 in milliseconds eg SL1 accident x 6000 maximum in 4 miliseconds. The worst that could happen is the plant is evacuated and 5 pools and 6 reactors are abandoned.
 
demotivated said:
If there was a continuous excursion in a fuel pool, the radiation level could be too great for anyone to approach. If rods are trapped in close proximity with no boron moderator the energy output can climb x 1000 in milliseconds eg SL1 accident x 6000 maximum in 4 miliseconds. The worst that could happen is the plant is evacuated and 5 pools and 6 reactors are abandoned.
Click to expand...

That's no bloody good! What kind of scare headline is that!

Chris
 
" It is a compound that does occur naturally in nature, however, the levels of cesium found in the tuna in 2012 had levels 3 percent higher than is usual."

Same article. So much for the OMG WE MUST ALL PANIC COS WE GONNA DIE FROM RADIATION POISONING headline. Fresh Tuna is also relatively high in Mercury.

3% means, if we didn't need to worry about it before we don't need to worry about it now.

BTW here's another one, factual too.

"All homes built on granite rock foundations are radioactive"
 
demotivated said:
The radioactive isotopes are not found on earth because they have all decayed previously, only man made sources of cesium 137 and 134. If my tuna had 3% more cesium and it was all 134 or 137 I would have a big problem - a bit like these guys:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/09/japan-fukushima-tepco-idUSL4N0HZ0ZD20131009
Click to expand...

Rubbish. Granite is a natural radioactive source for example.

If you listen to the video you'll also notice that despite claims that the levels are as much as 10x higher than in previous years the levels are still far far lower in Tuna that would be considered of any concern in other foodstuffs that are also radioactive, such as bananas, brazil nuts and certain green leafed vegetables.

I don't see any headlines about radioactive bananas. So people need to stop being so reactionary and get some perspective on matters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top