Nuclear Disaster Unfolding In Fukushima Options

[lunk]

Examples of some half value layers, related to a gamma energy of 2 MeV:

* Air: 12000 cm
* Water: 14 cm
* Concrete: 9 cm
* Lead: 1.4 cm

perhaps the plates from used lead acid batteries could be used as roofing tile, if the rainwater is radioactive anyway...

[bill]

"Without the moderator - the water - the chain reaction in the reactor and with this enrichment rate of the fuel is impossible. This is second.
to recap: no water=no chain reaction. "


BRILLIANT

so in a LOCA when the water boils away from the fuel rods the reaction just stops

Great I knew this was just an illusion

Fantastic we have nothing to worry about

dick head




2100 degress Fahrenheit (I aggree he should have specified ) but leave it to you to automatically assume it is BS

Look it up Like I did, the Zircaloy water reraction starts going well at 1325 Degrees K (or about 2100 degrees F)


"Why you just don't go and don't start your own thread? "


I did, dumb ass, go to the top of this thread and look


and 'this guy' is Arnold Gundersen with his own real company and he is using his real name, not hiding behind some tume-is-the-what-ever avatar
Here is his CV --- so what have you done in the nuclear industry 'Tume-is-the-new-dickhead'


personally I think a certified nuclear engineer with an MS in Nuclear engineering and 39 years of experience has alot more credibility that some annonomous person posting as Tume whatever


http://www.fairewinds.com/content/who-we-are

"Arnie is an energy advisor with 39-years of nuclear power engineering experience. A former nuclear industry senior vice president, he earned his Bachelor's and Master's Degrees in nuclear engineering, holds a nuclear safety patent, and was a licensed reactor operator. During his nuclear industry career, Arnie managed and coordinated projects at 70-nuclear power plants around the country. He currently speaks on television, radio, and at public meetings on the need for a new paradigm in energy production. An independent nuclear engineering and safety expert, Arnie provides testimony on nuclear operations, reliability, safety, and radiation issues to the NRC, Congressional and State Legislatures, and Government Agencies and Officials throughout the US, Canada, and internationally. In 2008, he was appointed by the Vermont Senate President to be the first Chair of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant Oversight Panel. He has testified in numerous cases and before many different legislative bodies including the Czech Republic Senate. Using knowledge from his Masters Thesis on Cooling Towers, Arnie analyzed and predicted problems with Vermont Yankee’s cooling towers three years prior to their 2007 collapse. His Environmental Court testimony concerned available and economically viable alternatives to cooling towers in order to reduce consumptive water use and the ecological damage caused by cooling tower drift and heated effluents. As the former vice president in an engineering organization, Arnie led the team of engineers who developed the plans for decommissioning Shippingport, the first major nuclear power plant in the US to be fully dismantled. He was also an invited author on the first DOE Decommissioning Handbook. Source term reconstruction is a method of forensic engineering used to calculate radiation releases from various nuclear facilities after nuclear incidents or accidents. Arnie is frequently called upon by public officials, attorneys, and intervenors, to perform source term reconstructions. His source term reconstruction efforts vary. Arnie has calculated exposures to oil workers, who received radiation exposure while working on wells. He has also calculated radiation releases to children with health concerns, who live near a nuclear facility, like the one that carted radioactive sewage off-site and spread it on farmers' fields. Finally, he has performed an accurate source term construction of the radiation releases from the Three Mile Island nuclear accident. Also involved in his local community, Arnie has been a part-time math professor at Community College of Vermont (CCV) since 2007. He also taught high school physics and mathematics for 13 years and was an instructor at RPI's college reactor lab.

[lunk]

Take it easy Bill,
anger blinds.

[lunk]

http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/f1-np/camera/index-j.html

live web-cam of Fukushima reactors from Tepco.

[elreb]

Cherry blossoms, cherry blossoms, On Meadow-hills and mountains As far as you can see. Is it a mist, or clouds? Fragrant in the morning Sun

Cherry blossoms, cherry blossoms, Flowers in full bloom

Cherry blossoms, cherry blossoms, Across the Spring sky, As far as you can see. Is it a mist, or clouds?

Fragrant in the air…Come now, come…

Let’s look, at last!

[lunk]

thanks Elreb.

Fukushima nuclear plant - Two Flyovers shot in high definition

[bill]

"Take it easy Bill,"


I backed way off from my original inclination ...

eta

anger is not a bad or inappropriate reaction to the arrogance (as expressed by tume) that created this disaster

there are people that need to be put in prison and the POS that shill for them are not far behind in culpability

This post has been edited by bill: Apr 2 2011, 10:51 PM

[tumetuestumefais...]

BRILLIANT

so in a LOCA when the water boils away from the fuel rods the reaction just stops

Great I knew this was just an illusion

Fantastic we have nothing to worry about

dick head

I've heard here something about cherry picking This is a splendid example of it. (+strawman) I haven't written anything like that the reaction stops when the water boils out. What I've written is no water=no chain reaction. This means when there is no chain reaction in the pool (or in reactor) and no water there, a chain reaction can't start there - which is what is here the point. You don't need to stop chain reaction in SPS because there isn't any. What would be good for you is to finally find out the difference between chain reaction and decay heat. That's what is the important for the storage pools. That's why the water is there for - to get it out, it is true that it serves also as a gamma shield - Ground Pounder is partially right and I appologize for not very well formulating it (although lead is much better, especially against some vitally important parts of spectrum) but mostly it is there to shield fast neutrons which Lead is not very good shield against.

I did, dumb ass, go to the top of this thread and look

Then I'm leaving, sorry, I after the 12 pages of fearmongering didn't noticed this is your thread. Mea culpa. I hope you will get better portion of horror with the others. Sorry that I've disturbed your disaster thriller.

and 'this guy' is Arnold Gundersen with his own real company and he is using his real name, not hiding behind some tume-is-the-what-ever avatar

I've signed my analysis I've lnked here already. You just need to follow links - Here for you again. And What is your real name bill, I haven't found anything about you in your profile...
Just btw you know why I chosed the nick tumetuestumefaisdubien? (and not Bill or Dick...or whatever)

Here is his CV --- so what have you done in the nuclear industry 'Tume-is-the-new-dickhead'

This is third serious breach of rules of this forum by you just in one post. Will the moderators do their job here? Doesn't seem so...

personally I think a certified nuclear engineer with an MS in Nuclear engineering and 39 years of experience has alot more credibility that some annonomous person posting as Tume whatever

If he would not talk BS then he would be credible. The credibility comes with telling a truth not with a CV. Who says with a poker face the Plutonium is "volatile" either fakes his credentials, or worse, he didn't learned much through his carreer...

[bill]

personally I think a certified nuclear engineer with an MS in Nuclear engineering and 39 years of experience has alot more credibility that some annonomous person posting as Tume whatever



????
again
so what are your qualifications tume ....

[lunk]

personally I think a certified nuclear engineer with an MS in Nuclear engineering and 39 years of experience has alot more credibility that some annonomous person posting as Tume whatever



????
again
so what are your qualifications tume ....

Bill, personal attacks are not welcome here.
please tone it down.

[BarryWilliamsmb]

What drives me around the bend is that we've been through this all before with Chernobyl.

A lot could have been learned from that disaster but as is usual for management, even the smallest lessons did not make it to the top of our current nuclear awareness.

Cripes I hate how hard it is for us to learn from our mistakes.

Now we're ALL in the game...

2006 The Battle of Chernobyl (HQ) 1hr 32min 1 clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiCXb1Nhd1o

[BarryWilliamsmb]

I fucking love you Elreb.

[tumetuestumefais...]

????
again
so what are your qualifications tume ....

And who is the one who is asking??
I think there is something about me in my profile unlike in your.
I'll add that except I'm expert on terrorism - that's why I'm at P4T and now especially here in this thread to mitigate irrational terrors some people so like to be manipulated into - I've studied elite technical college where we had nuclear technology and energetics for 4 years. Besides it I'm extensively discussing the issues around it for decades with my friend who is nuclear physicist specialized in the 4th generation nuclear technologies research&development and occassionaly I write about the energy policies with regard to the nuclear energy. I'm not professional in the nuclear engineering, but I think I'm quite well able to do discern between truth and public opinion manipulation in pursuing an agenda regarding this nuclear energy issue, because I'm observing it for years. I know more than basics about nuclear processes, several times I've visited CERN and I think I can soberly assess the advantages and disadvantages of the nuclear energy in global scope as well as the real dangers the Fukushima chain of events resulted into.
-There's in my opinion now no more likelihood of further explosions or fire from the storage pools as well as it isn't from the reactors -if the established procedures to mitigate the decay heat will continue. As well as there is no real danger of a significant leak of Plutonium (anyway there are much worse things there than Plutonium - as e.g. the Cs-137, which is highly volatile + dozen of other things more dangerous than the Plutonium in this type of accident).
What I'm worried about - and I was saying it from the very beginning - is the sea water reactor cooling - which is the serious breach of the GE Mark-1 severe accident mitigation guidelines - resulting in corrossion of the materials they're not designed to withstand it, also what I'm concerned about is the very likely-to-sure breach of the No2 pressure supression chamber which results in leak of highly radioactive water in the basement of the plant which will be relatively very expensive to contain and decontaminate (and I'm afraid the TEPCO is corrupted enough they'll leave it to leak into the ocean - which the consequences of couldn't be too large, but I very much don't like poisoning oceans on any level) not speaking the PSC breach is seriously hampering the efforts to cool the No2 reactor by standard procedures for the case of the meltdown.
My opinion is that TEPCO allocated their accident mitigation resources to other plants and leaved Fukushima on the low priority level, because it anyway was scheduled for decommission, so now the expenses and the plant will most probably pay the insurance and japanese government - taxpayers - which I find being quite extremely dirty bussiness somebody should be put into the jail for a long time.
But who knows how much of the resources they've had in first place for immediate need (I suspect not poor -when they were able to mitigate the other newer powerplants power loss) after the quake and tsunamies and I also really wonder that there was no immediate assistance of the GE resources - it is their technology.
I think there were several mistakes done during the mitigation of the power loss and the accident management was activated too late. For the emergency maintaining the water level to prevent the meltdown would be needed just several dozens of tons of fresh water which I really wonder the japanese were not able to get there together with the mobile backup generators and that the whole thing progressed to partial meltdown (which btw means not literally melting of the fuel, but compromising its structure), hydrogen generation and subsequent explosions, which further crippled the systems - and even so why they didn't flodded the containments with the sea water when they didn't have anything else (not the reactors) as the Mark I severe accident guidelines suggest it is beyond my understanding. It almost looks like LIHOP, because one hardly imagines the country with so many reactors hasn't an emergency plan for getting couple of trucks of water and mobile generators on the site in not just hours, not dozens of hours, but in three cases almost a week later and also that it hasn't a special unit for such cases which would take over for accident management when the TEPCO was unable to do it alone or even maybe didn't much wanted and leaved the 50 poor people to mitigate it there alone with firefighters, police and SDF -which are not much equiped with special material and knowledge to do so effectively.
In case of the TEPCO director I would think to "fall ill" - as he did during the progress of the things at least two times - is not the right thing to do, I think a seppuku would be better -to leave the post to somebody more competent. Which shows not even the Japan is what it was...
The radiation poisoning consquences will be likely not serious as I look at the measurements, with the exception of the poor Litate willage, where the readings are quite high because presumably the relatively narrow cloud turned there back crashing into cold air and falled down with rain. This place will need decontamination if they want to make it habitable without risk. I wonder where the Tepco will get the money for it.

The contamination of the rest of the Japan and elsewhere except immediately around the Fukushima plant is according to multiple sets of readings relatively low and not dangerous in longer perspective after the short-half-lifes decay enough (like a month and something from now - when the people could come back to most of the evacuation zone) - levels something like almost whole Austria, Slovenia Greece, parts of Croatia, Finland, Sweden, Norway after the Chernobyl even now after 25 years - the countries, which are thousands of kilometers far from Chernobyl. That's why I think the severity of Fukushima disaster is incomparable with Chernobyl.

But it is not a result of a luck in Fukushima, but a result of immediate full scram of the reactors after the quake and despite the ill development then also a result of the reactors being in the containments with large pressure suppression chambers, which clearly contained most of the radioactivity release by melting cores in the water there, and which would otherwise leak out into the air with severe consequences comparable then to Chernobyl very easily.

So to recap: it were the containments and the scram (fully inserting all control rods to immediately and fully stop the chain reaction which produces large amounts of highly radioactive mix of mostly high gamma emiters of which especially the Cs-137 is way much more dangerous one in longer perspective then the rest put together) after the almost unprecedented quake.

So the safety measures preventing the worst worked relatively very well at Fukushima despite poor accident management and limited mitigation resources after the quakes and tsunamies - that's why I write in my analysis of the nonsensful Chernobyl-Fukushima comparison from the CTBTO employee/environmentalist-with-agenda that the nuclear technology paradoxicly proved relatively safe at Fukushima, despite it was projected in 60-ties and despite the unprecedented disaster in the Japan history.

The nuclear technologies of the 60ties are not optimal, but surelly better than the technology used in Chernobyl by the too selfconfident soviets, which resulted due to multiple design flaws in combination with multiple security protocol braches in the extremely severe accident involving as we know now from the signature a nuclear explosion of approx. 10t TNT equivalent. (so no "hydrogen explosion" some feed the public with since 25 years to not instigate fears which would be the rational ones)
Yet the number of the deaths and ilnesses there and resulting from the contamination later is still much less than the number of deaths and illnesses resulting just yearly from the coal based electroenergetics in USA or which resulted globally from the atmospheric and submarine nuclear tests conducted by USA and soviets in 50ties.
That's why I prefer peaceful nuclear energy use although I think that the fleet of the old nuclear powerplants should be renewed by up-to date technologies - which is seriously hampered by the antinuclear activists - for example there was no new nuclear plant in USA projected&built after the Three Mile Island - since 30 years! - because it is politically impossible - which results in aging plants of obsolete design (although still much better than Chernobyl RBMK reactor without containment) nobody really wants to close because it would result in blackouts - as there is no viable substitution for them other than again the nuclear - nothing from the renewables is much economically feasible to substitute for it. Moreover there's not the potential (of steadily available power) in this resources and to say for example that solar has the 12 Gw is just absolutely misleading, because it has zero potential at night - when one needs light - and many dozens of percents less if there just a cloudy weather comes, which happens often especially in winter for long periods of time, when the energy is even more needed. If it would be able to substitute for the steadiness of the nuclear power availability I'll not say a thing, the problem is that it clearly isn't. The same works for the wind energy which is even more unstable than the solar. So you anyway need backup sources - so in fact you invest twice to get the same power outcome -if we omit you need much more complicated grid management and stronger powerlines for large power redirections which is almost another same capital investment. So thrice.
I'm not completely against this technologies where it is suitable, and I think for local powersources outside grid they are ideal, but I'm sure it is not suitable for large scale power generation which is needed for densely populated areas where is no place for them nor the potential and you'll need long powerlines to bring it from elsewhere with the considerable losses attached.

There is large unequality in the energy consumption in the world, what we see as matter of fact in the west that we have electricity in the wall if we pay the bills it is not so sure in most of the world. Most of the energy resources are bound to west, especially USA where is the highest energy consumption per capita in the world. I don't say a think the high consumption is bad, because it brings with the high living standard, education, services... available, nobody in third world even dreams about I just think it should be availeable also for others without the west sucking all for themselves using wars and imperial politics. It is not just. And I think only what can feasibly change this state of global unjustice is wise energy (which everything depends on) policies, which I think the nuclear energy research&development&application (including highest safety standards of course) can play crucial role to achieve.

I find it being a hypocrisy when the people in the west protest nuclear energy using long ago stereotypized demagogies - especially in USA, which has almost quarter of the nuclear powerplants in the world - while having their computers working on it or even on much much worse powersources for the environment (the pollution from coal is much higher INCLUDING the radiation pollution) as the coal plants clearly are, yet they pretend they fight against the environment pollution.

I find it being a hyenism when more coverage gets the Fukushima plant (clearly for pursuing the hydrocarbon lobby agenda in manipulating the public into irrational fears) where so far nobody died and it is unlikely any masses ever will, yet the coverage of the real disaster after the quake and tsunamies which severely dammaged 600+ km of the coast and killed dozens of thousands gets just minor time. One would surelly think it is on purpose the apparently very angry people like you, wittingly or unwittingly, serve to achieve.

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Apr 3 2011, 02:54 AM

[BarryWilliamsmb]

I uh, can't consume that many characters at once.

However, I do find this vid to be prophetic...

Cows With Guns

[GroundPounder]

perhaps the plates from used lead acid batteries could be used as roofing tile, if the rainwater is radioactive anyway...

should work. line the gutters and contain the runoff in a shielded barrel. still leaves the ground around the house as a problem. walls, shutters for the windows..lot of considerations.

[GroundPounder]

I uh, can't consume that many characters at once.

However, I do find this vid to be prophetic...

Cows With Guns

chickens w/ choppers!!!

[lunk]

(IMG:http://www.japc.co.jp/english/decommi/imgs/worldmap-e201003.gif)

http://www.japc.co.jp/english/decommi/world-e.html

"the future's so bright..."

[GroundPounder]

Ground Pounder is partially right ..

The credibility comes with telling a truth not with a CV.

ah truth. my catching your 'error' or whatever name you wish to attach to it, earns me a 'partially right'. unfortunately it happens to be more accurate or 'truthful' if you will, than your 'water is almost unable to shield gamma' statement.

that line of yours was the first piece of data that you used to back up your assertion that the guy on the video was talking bs. so, now you have committed sins of 'lying' and 'bearing false witness', because in that regard the guy in the video was being 'truthful'.

i hope you can grasp the distinction and not try to obfuscate using 14 paragraphs of rhetoric. not expecting 'mea culpa' or an acknowledgement for that matter, because you do bring another perspective to all matters at this forum, that we (me anyway) are thankful for. as they say even a stopped clock is right twice a day - point being, CV sometimes gets it right.

[tumetuestumefais...]

i hope you can grasp the distinction and not try to obfuscate using 14 paragraphs of rhetoric. not expecting 'mea culpa' or an acknowledgement for that matter, because you do bring another perspective to all matters at this forum, that we (me anyway) are thankful for. as they say even a stopped clock is right twice a day - point being, CV sometimes gets it right.

I didn't want to obfuscate anything. But mea culpa. I was too rush and made an error. I should think twice. At least something the guy has right. I shouldn't write anything just that. It anyway has not a sense to write my opinions somewhere nobody wants to read it, because I don't play the black'n'black game. I must say I never expected at this forum such furious insults like yesterday from the bill. Maybe I was writing the whole long post just to try get over it. But it somehow didn't work for me anyway. I'll not write here anything anymore.

[GroundPounder]

I'll not write here anything anymore.

fwiw, i don't believe anybody here wants that, bill included. i think emotions run high because it's a big thing to a lot of people, myself included. there just never seems to a be a break on the world stage to catch your breath and do some living w/o a disaster or war or some other piece of bad news showing up.