Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,606
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    ArlyDude
    Newest Member
    ArlyDude
    Joined

Reactor meltdown possible in Japan.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

There's an interesting thread between those freaking out about this and those trying to act all cool and in-the-know and say it isn't a big deal. It strikes me as a big deal-- a Level-6 event on that scale on a populated island is a big deal-- and I share the puzzlement of some that anyone in this discussion would presume to know the level of risk here or the potential outcomes. The experts on the scene-- the ones trying to stabilize the reactors-- don't even know that.

And there lies the difference I think. It may not be a Chernobyl, but we are dealing with a much more densely populated area. I think that is the concern here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What credentials do you have to make these assertions? Even from basic college physics I know that a chain reaction can accelerate with increasing temperature. So I suppose a chain reaction could be plausible in the worst case scenario. In addition if the containment vessels are at atmospheric pressure, I don't believe any assertion of their containment abilities until a robot our some other device is able to investigate. Not trying to be alarmist but I also don't think it's reasonable to make an assertion as if it's fact that this can't have a similar scale impact as chernobyl. I think the fact is that we still have no clue what the potential impact of this disaster can be.

None. I have no credentials.

The kind of "rods" in this reactor are not the same as the kind in Chernobyl. They are specifically designed to NOT undergo the same kind of fission chain reaction that occurred at Chernobyl. I don't know what it would take to send them into chain reaction, but I know it's very difficult with the current technology.

And again, no containment is not the same as compromised containment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None. I have no credentials.

The kind of "rods" in this reactor are not the same as the kind in Chernobyl. They are specifically designed to NOT undergo the same kind of fission chain reaction that occurred at Chernobyl. I don't know what it would take to send them into chain reaction, but I know it's very difficult with the current technology.

And again, no containment is not the same as compromised containment.

Well you do have the credentials of being a scientist. That alone should let people know you have a higher understanding of how things work. You might not be a nuclear scientist but you do have physics and other science related course work under your belt. While I'm not taking your posts as the gospel I am paying close attention to anyone with a red tag on their name as they do have a science background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what is being said..which may or may not be accurate. 1-3 appear "somewhat" stable and water levels are being maintained high enough so prevent further melting. They just have to keep water on them long enough to cool them down, then encase them in concrete, etc. Rather unclear regarding the status of the water level/temp in 4 which is the most worrysome at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know how long it takes spent fuel rods to cool enough to not worry about them melting without water cooling them? I'm assuming that the rods that are constantly being referred to are spent "used" fuel rods. What about the rods in the reactor that were being used when the quake happened? I keep hearing about when they cool down....I thought that was an extremely long process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the full article from the breaking news posted earlier...

------------------

The situation at the quake-hit Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant in northeastern Japan ''has worsened considerably,'' the Institute for Science and International Security said in a statement released Tuesday.

Referring to fresh explosions that occurred earlier in the day at the site and problems in a pool storing spent nuclear fuel rods, the Washington-based think tank said, ''This accident can no longer be viewed as a level 4 on the International Nuclear and Radiological Events scale that ranks events from 1 to 7.''

Noting that a level 4 incident involves ''only local radiological consequences,'' it said the ongoing crisis is ''now closer to a level 6, and it may unfortunately reach a level 7'' -- a worst case scenario with extensive health and environmental consequences.

''The international community should increase assistance to Japan to both contain the emergency at the reactors and to address the wider contamination. We need to find a solution together,'' it said.

http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/03/78374.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know how long it takes spent fuel rods to cool enough to not worry about them melting without water cooling them? I'm assuming that the rods that are constantly being referred to are spent "used" fuel rods. What about the rods in the reactor that were being used when the quake happened? I keep hearing about when they cool down....I thought that was an extremely long process.

It takes 3 or 4 years for rods to cool down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know how long it takes spent fuel rods to cool enough to not worry about them melting without water cooling them? I'm assuming that the rods that are constantly being referred to are spent "used" fuel rods. What about the rods in the reactor that were being used when the quake happened? I keep hearing about when they cool down....I thought that was an extremely long process.

Fuel that has been stored for at least five years in water has cooled sufficiently, and its radioactivity decreased enough, for it to be removed from the spent fuel pool and loaded into casks. This frees up additional space in the pool for storing spent fuel newly removed from the reactor.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/dry-cask-storage.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this thread is going to be pretty long

Can someone clarify

this latest report from Reuters, two more blasts?

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said two workers at the Daiichi plant in Fukushima were missing after two more blasts at the facility on Tuesday blew a hole in a building housing a reactor and cooling pool for spent fuel rods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2141: The European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) has asked 500 bone marrow transplant centres to be ready to treat Japanese victims of the nuclear accident if needed. In its request, the group said there was real concern that a "significant number of workers attempting to control the damaged nuclear power station" in Japan may receive "doses or whole body radiation over the next week or so," AFP reports.

BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone clarify

this latest report from Reuters, two more blasts?

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said two workers at the Daiichi plant in Fukushima were missing after two more blasts at the facility on Tuesday blew a hole in a building housing a reactor and cooling pool for spent fuel rods.

That's from earlier.

Nothing to do with the latest breaking info coming out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just naturally fear the worst case situation with multiple reactors in jeopordy.

If the earthquake is 9.0 we can assume a great deal of buildings collapse. Are these containment structures even capable of withstanding a quake of that magnitude and multiple aftershocks close to 7? If the issue with chernobyl was containment structures, and we already have radiation several kilometers away from Fshima, I fear we could see a situation that rivals Chernobyl. Its obviously not contained if theres radiation escaping. The drop in radiation was simply a windshift. (Evident in the fact we saw USS Reagan sailors sick) If we have levels of radiation as high as reported in the nuclear reactor and control room that further dampens efforts. (Not to mention support for containment is radically lower already due to the worse disaster in Japan since WW2.) The governments resources are already crippled. I fear we (and the PM even) do not know the entire situation at hand due to ths communication issues across Japan.

It all just smells such trouble, does it not?

I'm sure someone has already corrected all your mis-statements, but I'll do so too:

First - The epicenter was over 100 miles away. Its not like the 9.0 was right underneath.

Second - Radiation levels are much lower than Chernobyl.

Third - No sailors on the Reagen are or were sick. They were just contaminated. Slightly.

Fourth - Government resources are not "crippled". Certainly they aren't doing great, but much of the country was relatively unaffected by the quake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was just listening to the radio, think it was NPR. Fire "towering" from #4 per one source within the Japanese government. Ugly.

Comical when people say this is or isn't a previous event. It's a drawn out mess that will find it's place in history. It doesn't have to be anything like chernoybl to be a major catastrophe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...