OSUmetstud Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 How did the holes develop in the #4 containment building? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetjanet998 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 The US Army is taking a larger role in damage control and fire/nuclear suppression. Yesterday, I was not joking about the suicide workers, in that I felt strongly that these folks would step up to the plate and try to get the job done. It's in there DNA. source? someone posted in this thread last night the us army helped put out the fire yet no word from the us military Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoastalWx Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 How did the holes develop in the #4 containment building? That's what I'm wondering. Perhaps from the other explosions, or something that may have malfunctioned/explosion at the #4 building? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetjanet998 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 How did the holes develop in the #4 containment building? not the containment building....that i am aware of. just the upper part building above the containment(the part that exploded on 1 and 3).the spent fuel rods are not stored in a containment building Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodhi Cove Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 this is much more dangerous then what is going on in the other reactors with no containment building http://en.wikipedia....Spent_fuel_pool About one-fourth to one-third of the total fuel load of a reactor is removed from the core every 12 to 18 months and replaced with fresh fuel. Spent fuel rods generate intense heat and dangerous radiation that must be contained. Fuel is moved from the reactor and manipulated in the pool generally by automated handling systems, although some manual systems are still in use. The fuel bundles fresh from the core normally are segregated for several months for initial cooling before being sorted in to other parts of the pool to wait for final disposal. Metal racks keep the fuel in safe positions to avoid the possibility of a “criticality”— a nuclear chain reaction occurring. The maximum temperature of the spent fuel bundles decreases significantly between 2 and 4 years, and less from 4 to 6 years. The fuel pool water is continuously cooled to remove the heat produced by the spent fuel assemblies. Pumps circulate water from the spent fuel pool to heat exchangers, then back to the spent fuel pool. Radiolysis, the dissociation of molecules by radiation, is of particular concern in wet storage, as water may be split by residual radiation and hydrogen gas may accumulate increasing the risk of explosions. For this reason the air in the room of the pools, as well as the water, must permanently be monitored and treated. Thanks for the information. I've been so focused on active units, that the spent fuel storage hadn't hit my radar. More info below about "The fuel inventory in the pool is detailed on page 9. According to TEPCO, each reactor generates 700 "waste" fuel assemblies a year, and there are 3450 assemblies in each pool at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, plus another 6,291 in a common pool in a separate building." http://dcbureau.org/201103141303/Natural-Resources-News-Service/fission-criticality-in-cooling-ponds-threaten-explosion-at-fukushima.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovintheWhiteFluff Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 From the New York Times....Serious stuff A 1997 study by the Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island described a worst-case disaster from uncovered spent fuel in a reactor cooling pool. It estimated 100 quick deaths would occur within a range of 500 miles and 138,000 eventual deaths. The study also found that land over 2,170 miles would be contaminated and damages would hit $546 billion. That section of the Brookhaven study focused on boiling water reactors — the kind at the heart of the Japanese crisis. The threat is considered so severe that at the start of the crisis Friday, immediately after the shattering earthquake, Fukushima plant officials focused their attention on a damaged storage pool for spent nuclear fuel at the No. 2 reactor at Daiichi, said a nuclear executive who requested anonymity because his company is not involved in the emergency response at the reactors and is wary of antagonizing other companies in the industry. The damage prompted the plant’s management to divert much of the attention and pumping capacity to that pool, the executive added. The shutdown of the other reactors then proceeded badly, and problems began to cascade. Mr. Shiomi of Tokyo Electric said that in addition to the power and cooling failures, some water had spilled from the pools. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/world/asia/16fuel.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spent_fuel_pool Combustion of the nuclear fuel is not possible with American or Canadian electrical power reactor fuel rods since these consist of very stable uranium dioxide pellets. Burning of the cladding is unlikely since storage methods in the United States require fuel to be stored such that in the event of a catastrophic loss of coolant the steady state temperature of the fuel assemblies in air does not exceed the cladding melt temperature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinch Leatherwood Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Thanks for the information. I've been so focused on active units, that the spent fuel storage hadn't hit my radar. More info below about "The fuel inventory in the pool is detailed on page 9. According to TEPCO, each reactor generates 700 "waste" fuel assemblies a year, and there are 3450 assemblies in each pool at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, plus another 6,291 in a common pool in a separate building." http://dcbureau.org/...-fukushima.html Yikes. What horrifies me is Pilgrim Nuclear station here in Plymouth MA now stores all their spent rods too onsite. This is the mess of this whole thing, just like TMI it'll change procedures forever. -- Re all the conflicting information. I was just watching Jim Cramer on CNBC noting the same thing. Basically that the markets are all over the place because none of the information coming out has been good. It's a mish-mosh of bad or partial intel. They don't seem to know why building 4 has holes in it but last I heard they were suggesting the rods may have heated causing hydrogen issues and that caused building 4 to erupt partially as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperNET Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 source? someone posted in this thread last night the us army helped put out the fire yet no word from the us military 1355: The US military has detected low levels of radiation at its Yokosuka base, south of Tokyo, Reuters reports. Not sure they want that published....it's a sensitivity issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisM Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 just saw this on another forum, lots of conflicting information for sure Umm guys if you want the facts about this, ask an expert. Not an anti-nuclear campaigner like most of the media has been doing. http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/ Also check out his updated posts. There's about one a day about the unfolding situation. If you're too lazy then read this quick summary below: Now, where does that leave us? The plant is safe now and will stay safe. Japan is looking at an INES Level 4 Accident: Nuclear accident with local consequences. That is bad for the company that owns the plant, but not for anyone else. Some radiation was released when the pressure vessel was vented. All radioactive isotopes from the activated steam have gone (decayed). A very small amount of Cesium was released, as well as Iodine. If you were sitting on top of the plants’ chimney when they were venting, you should probably give up smoking to return to your former life expectancy. The Cesium and Iodine isotopes were carried out to the sea and will never be seen again. There was some limited damage to the first containment. That means that some amounts of radioactive Cesium and Iodine will also be released into the cooling water, but no Uranium or other nasty stuff (the Uranium oxide does not “dissolve” in the water). There are facilities for treating the cooling water inside the third containment. The radioactive Cesium and Iodine will be removed there and eventually stored as radioactive waste in terminal storage. The seawater used as cooling water will be activated to some degree. Because the control rods are fully inserted, the Uranium chain reaction is not happening. That means the “main” nuclear reaction is not happening, thus not contributing to the activation. The intermediate radioactive materials (Cesium and Iodine) are also almost gone at this stage, because the Uranium decay was stopped a long time ago. This further reduces the activation. The bottom line is that there will be some low level of activation of the seawater, which will also be removed by the treatment facilities. The seawater will then be replaced over time with the “normal” cooling water The reactor core will then be dismantled and transported to a processing facility, just like during a regular fuel change. Fuel rods and the entire plant will be checked for potential damage. This will take about 4-5 years. The safety systems on all Japanese plants will be upgraded to withstand a 9.0 earthquake and tsunami (or worse) I believe the most significant problem will be a prolonged power shortage. About half of Japan’s nuclear reactors will probably have to be inspected, reducing the nation’s power generating capacity by 15%. This will probably be covered by running gas power plants that are usually only used for peak loads to cover some of the base load as well. That will increase your electricity bill, as well as lead to potential power shortages during peak demand, in Japan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Windcredible! Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Have a family friend and his wife who had been at an evac center in Koriyama, some 15-20 miles inland from the reactors. They were thinking of leaving a couple days ago but the US Embassy recommended they stay put. With the situation worsening, they were planning on leaving first thing Wednesday...but apparently they got a call from the Embassy checking on them, and shortly after they started handing out masks and wet towels at the evac center Tuesday night (in Japan). After that they made the wise decision to bolt. They made it to Aizuwakamatsu, an additional 15 miles inland. Said he's "shocked by the normalcy of things here." Sounds like they're gonna try to head farther south via bus on Thursday. The whole situation out there is just messed up...really got to feel for all those affected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovintheWhiteFluff Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 just saw this on another forum, lots of conflicting information for sure Umm guys if you want the facts about this, ask an expert. Not an anti-nuclear campaigner like most of the media has been doing. http://bravenewclima...le-explanation/ Also check out his updated posts. There's about one a day about the unfolding situation. If you're too lazy then read this quick summary below: Now, where does that leave us? The plant is safe now and will stay safe. Japan is looking at an INES Level 4 Accident: Nuclear accident with local consequences. That is bad for the company that owns the plant, but not for anyone else. Some radiation was released when the pressure vessel was vented. All radioactive isotopes from the activated steam have gone (decayed). A very small amount of Cesium was released, as well as Iodine. If you were sitting on top of the plants’ chimney when they were venting, you should probably give up smoking to return to your former life expectancy. The Cesium and Iodine isotopes were carried out to the sea and will never be seen again. There was some limited damage to the first containment. That means that some amounts of radioactive Cesium and Iodine will also be released into the cooling water, but no Uranium or other nasty stuff (the Uranium oxide does not “dissolve” in the water). There are facilities for treating the cooling water inside the third containment. The radioactive Cesium and Iodine will be removed there and eventually stored as radioactive waste in terminal storage. The seawater used as cooling water will be activated to some degree. Because the control rods are fully inserted, the Uranium chain reaction is not happening. That means the “main” nuclear reaction is not happening, thus not contributing to the activation. The intermediate radioactive materials (Cesium and Iodine) are also almost gone at this stage, because the Uranium decay was stopped a long time ago. This further reduces the activation. The bottom line is that there will be some low level of activation of the seawater, which will also be removed by the treatment facilities. The seawater will then be replaced over time with the “normal” cooling water The reactor core will then be dismantled and transported to a processing facility, just like during a regular fuel change. Fuel rods and the entire plant will be checked for potential damage. This will take about 4-5 years. The safety systems on all Japanese plants will be upgraded to withstand a 9.0 earthquake and tsunami (or worse) I believe the most significant problem will be a prolonged power shortage. About half of Japan’s nuclear reactors will probably have to be inspected, reducing the nation’s power generating capacity by 15%. This will probably be covered by running gas power plants that are usually only used for peak loads to cover some of the base load as well. That will increase your electricity bill, as well as lead to potential power shortages during peak demand, in Japan. How old is this? I see no mention of an exposed pool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HIPPYVALLEY Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Yikes. What horrifies me is Pilgrim Nuclear station here in Plymouth MA now stores all their spent rods too onsite. This is the mess of this whole thing, just like TMI it'll change procedures forever. -- Re all the conflicting information. I was just watching Jim Cramer on CNBC noting the same thing. Basically that the markets are all over the place because none of the information coming out has been good. It's a mish-mosh of bad or partial intel. They don't seem to know why building 4 has holes in it but last I heard they were suggesting the rods may have heated causing hydrogen issues and that caused building 4 to erupt partially as well. Yeah and the geniuses at NRC just renewed the 45 year old VT Yankee license even the though VT legislators and most citizens were in total opposition. So much for states rights. Depending on where and how far the radiation spreads (other nations etc) there may be a lot of folks looking for alternative food sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott747 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 How did the holes develop in the #4 containment building? There was initial damage from the explosion of #3 which then led to what they believe was another hydrogen explosion at #4. At 6:14 a.m., a blast occurred at the No. 4 reactor and created two square holes sized about 8 meters by 8 meters in the walls of the building that houses the reactor. At 9:38 a.m., a fire broke out there and smoke billowed from those holes. The utility said it cannot deny the possibility that the early morning explosion was caused by hydrogen that was generated by a chemical reaction involving the exposed spent nuclear fuel and vapor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan11295 Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 From reading the updates on that site the last updates were before the problems at #4 were known I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisM Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 How old is this? I see no mention of an exposed pool. Not sure, JUST saw it posted on another forum. does it say it in the link? whoever wrote it sounds like an idiot, honestly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mello Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 can folks please stick to posting NEWS STORIES and not climate change blogs or nuclear advocacy blogs (like this)? this thread needs facts, not politics. Yes, because the MSM has been so excellent at providing us clear unbiased information.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisM Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 it is CLEARLY dated March 13. and if he sounds like an idiot, why post it? I'm just showing how easy it is to get conflicting information in a situation like this. You sound annoying, chill out. failed internet cop is a fail. and I was answering someone else's question on whether there was a date or not. I wasn't asking for myself. Don't try to make me sound like an idiot, or else...:gun_bandana::gun_bandana: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodhi Cove Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Not sure, JUST saw it posted on another forum. does it say it in the link? whoever wrote it sounds like an idiot, honestly... Yeah, but I found this status grid from Tepco interesting.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSUmetstud Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 interesting...that NYT story that was posted seems to contradict the wikipedia blurb I posted. The NYT stories says the spent fuel rods can catch fire after the water is boiled off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebo Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 interesting...that NYT story that was posted seems to contradict the wikipedia blurb I posted. The NYT stories says the spent fuel rods can catch fire after the water is boiled off. I'd avoid wiki on this, for obvious reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klw Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 My understanding is that the issues here are being caused because the loss of power due to the earthquake caused the coolant system to fail as it could not be powered. The back up power generators failed so battery power was brought in. Those batteries only lasted so long. My question throughout is very simple and probably shows that my understanding is only a very rudimentary one but I haven't seen an explanation. The whole point of the atomic plant is to generate power. Can they not use the reactors to power the coolant system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scuddz Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 My understanding is that the issues here are being caused because the loss of power due to the earthquake caused the coolant system to fail as it could not be powered. The back up power generators failed so battery power was brought in. Those batteries only lasted so long. My question throughout is very simple and probably shows that my understanding is only a very rudimentary one but I haven't seen an explanation. The whole point of the atomic plant is to generate power. Can they not use the reactors to power the coolant system? Just out of curiosity? What do you think would be the first thing that should happen during an earthquake at a Nuclear facility? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovintheWhiteFluff Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 My understanding is that the issues here are being caused because the loss of power due to the earthquake caused the coolant system to fail as it could not be powered. The back up power generators failed so battery power was brought in. Those batteries only lasted so long. My question throughout is very simple and probably shows that my understanding is only a very rudimentary one but I haven't seen an explanation. The whole point of the atomic plant is to generate power. Can they not use the reactors to power the coolant system? The problem is that the electrical systems that controls the reactors were destroyed due to the tsunami. They need to pump water in because it's the only way to cool the reactors. Source: NHK Worldwide TV - Someone that helped with Chernobyl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LovintheWhiteFluff Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Just out of curiosity? What do you think would be the first thing that should happen during an earthquake at a Nuclear facility? Indeed....the plants automatically shutdown as soon as an earthquake is felt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HIPPYVALLEY Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 From Faux News Fox News website: YOKOSUKA, Japan -- The U.S. Navy said Tuesday that very low levels of airborne radiation were detected at Yokosuka and Atsugi bases, about 200 miles to the north of the Fukushima nuclear power plant. "While there was no danger to the public, Commander, Naval Forces Japan recommended limited precautionary measures for personnel and their families on Fleet Activities Yokosuka and Naval Air Facility Atsugi, including limiting outdoor activities and securing external ventilation systems as much as practical," a statement said. "These measures are strictly precautionary in nature. We do not expect that any United States Federal radiation exposure limits will be exceeded even if no precautionary measures are taken," it added. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/15/navy-detects-radiation-200-miles-japan-nuclear-plant/#ixzz1Gg7kJF8w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klw Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Indeed....the plants automatically shutdown as soon as an earthquake is felt. Well the system is obviously still creating heat. I didn't know if there was a mechanism within a plant design to do something with it while the plant was shut down. But otherwise yeah that is facepalm worthy. In my defense I did say my understanding of the plant design is quite rudimentary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodhi Cove Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 My understanding is that the issues here are being caused because the loss of power due to the earthquake caused the coolant system to fail as it could not be powered. The back up power generators failed so battery power was brought in. Those batteries only lasted so long. My question throughout is very simple and probably shows that my understanding is only a very rudimentary one but I haven't seen an explanation. The whole point of the atomic plant is to generate power. Can they not use the reactors to power the coolant system? The reactors have been damaged, the control desks are inoperable (and the rooms too dangerous for operators to stay in,) the rods have quite likely had partial meltdowns. They simply cannot walk in and flip on the power switch to restart the units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Indeed....the plants automatically shutdown as soon as an earthquake is felt. I honestly have no clue on how this or any other reactor operates, but my understanding is that the various ways they get electricity to pumps was destroyed/rendered inoperable by the tsunami. Would it have been possible to bring in other generating sources (say, a ship?)and use that to operate the pumps? I'm sure it was logistically impossible and probably too late now anyway... Corium lava anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoarfrostHubb Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 The reactors have been damaged, the control desks are inoperable (and the rooms too dangerous for operators to stay in,) the rods have quite likely had partial meltdowns. They simply cannot walk in and flip on the power switch to restart the units. No, they have to crank a handle first...like an old Model T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.