Japan: 9.0 Earthquake-Tsunami-Nuclear Reactor Status #4
- Thread starter Quiche
- Start date
- Status
They buried Chernobyl by dumping concrete, and now sand over the thing. As for dangerous? Who knows? I wonder if Chernobyl is still reacting.
As for shocking experience, I imagine water would turn to steam pretty quick and go into the atmosphere. After that, maybe it will work?
My strictly uneducated guessing.
tehcloser
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 15,013
- Reaction score
- 39
Very low radiation detected on U.S. west coast: sources
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/low-radioa...owards-north-america-20110317-115636-813.html
Sources in Vienna........nice, how about some sources from HERE. Like oh, maybe one of those new monitors they set up for this?
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/low-radioa...owards-north-america-20110317-115636-813.html
Sources in Vienna........nice, how about some sources from HERE. Like oh, maybe one of those new monitors they set up for this?
ScorpRising
To thine ownself be true
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,147
- Reaction score
- 7
UFO
Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2011
- Messages
- 168
- Reaction score
- 1
ScorpRising
To thine ownself be true
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,147
- Reaction score
- 7
1 - I don't think that's the brightest idea... But it wouldn't put the radiation into the ground so long as they just bury them in their pool and in the core... the reactors are not going to be "usable" again...
2 - the lines should be insulated so it wouldn't be so shocking... It also depends on the voltage running through the lines, which I would expect to be high to power the commercial pumps.
ScorpRising
To thine ownself be true
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,147
- Reaction score
- 7
Quoting myself as I just raised another question... I know the area is evacuated so running a high voltage "extension cord" shouldn't be a danger to anyone... but did they do it right or just lay a big ole line on the ground for a half mile?
UFO
Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2011
- Messages
- 168
- Reaction score
- 1
http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/pluto.htm
Alot of mumbo jumbo but even I can understand this.
Do we know how much plutonium is in reactor 3?
MOO
Alot of mumbo jumbo but even I can understand this.
Do we know how much plutonium is in reactor 3?
MOO
What difference would that make? Yeah, if it isn't properly grounded, people could get electrocuted, but I'm assuming (you all know the saying) they are taking precautions against that. I don't understand the concern about the cable. They aren't going to stick a high-voltage cable directly into the reactor as far as I know - they are hooking up the water supply to cool it down.
Am I wrong? I could be.
Thanks for getting me caught up with your posts.
Here is what I have asked a few times (as have several of you)---since those spent fuel rods were stored above the containment vessel housing the reactor at the TOP of the buildings, what has happened to them at the 3 buildings (Units 1, 2 and 4 I believe??) that have no roofs? That video that was released yesterday showed a mangled mess of twisted metal and building framework. I find it VERY difficult to think that there has not been any damage to any of the spent fuel rod pools and therefore, the spent fuel rods themselves.
I do not believe that we will get any accurate or truthful information from anyone b/c the news is bad---very bad. I have done what many of you have----stocked up on vital items and will live my life normally. But I do think that survival of the fittest is now the same as survival of the prepared. JMO.
Here is what I have asked a few times (as have several of you)---since those spent fuel rods were stored above the containment vessel housing the reactor at the TOP of the buildings, what has happened to them at the 3 buildings (Units 1, 2 and 4 I believe??) that have no roofs? That video that was released yesterday showed a mangled mess of twisted metal and building framework. I find it VERY difficult to think that there has not been any damage to any of the spent fuel rod pools and therefore, the spent fuel rods themselves.
I do not believe that we will get any accurate or truthful information from anyone b/c the news is bad---very bad. I have done what many of you have----stocked up on vital items and will live my life normally. But I do think that survival of the fittest is now the same as survival of the prepared. JMO.
We have a health concern/radiation hot line here in CA that people can call with their concerns.They played the outgoing greeting last night on the radio as the hotline keeps regular office hours and was closed. It was a bit comical to hear the voice refer to it as Nuc-u-lar instead of nuc-le-ar.
While that doesn't promote confidence,LOL, I am not concerned about the amount of radiation that is making its way here to SoCal.
While that doesn't promote confidence,LOL, I am not concerned about the amount of radiation that is making its way here to SoCal.
The possibility of dumping sand and then concrete was discussed several days ago and "they" decided that was not a viable option b/c the sand would just melt due to the high temperatures and the weight of the concrete could actually worsen the situation by causing cracking in the containment vessels----HOWEVER, if they were able to cool the reactors down (I assume they would do this by the re-connected power line working) then maybe it is again a possibility?? I just remember several quotes from nuclear experts saying that this plan (sand and concrete) at that time would not work.
ScorpRising
To thine ownself be true
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,147
- Reaction score
- 7
I'm just thinking... No danger in connecting to the water pumps, etc. It was the risk of electrocution (that doesn't look like it's spelled right) I was looking at. But, there's no one but workers around and they SHOULD know how to deal with electricity.
bbm -
I live in So CA too and agree with you except would add that I am not concerned about today's amount. What about the near future? I am still worried. Also, will we get "extra" exposure anyway, 'cause it's cumulative?
God bless and protect all the children in Japan and here.
ScorpRising
To thine ownself be true
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,147
- Reaction score
- 7
For your reading pleasure: The three ways plants here can be decommissioned (taken out of service). This includes TMI-2 which is currently in SAFSTOR with post defueling monitored storage (TMI-1 employees periodically check the plant).
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/decommissioning.html
Licensees may choose from three alternative decommissioning strategies: DECON, SAFSTOR, or ENTOMB.
Under DECON (immediate dismantlement), soon after the nuclear facility closes, equipment, structures, and portions of the facility containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits release of the property and termination of the NRC license.
Under SAFSTOR, often considered “delayed DECON,” a nuclear facility is maintained and monitored in a condition that allows the radioactivity to decay; afterwards, it is dismantled and the property decontaminated.
Under ENTOMB, radioactive contaminants are permanently encased on site in structurally sound material such as concrete and appropriately maintained and monitored until the radioactivity decays to a level permitting restricted release of the property.
The licensee may also choose to adopt a combination of the first two choices in which some portions of the facility are dismantled or decontaminated while other parts of the facility are left in SAFSTOR. The decision may be based on factors besides radioactive decay such as availability of waste disposal sites.
To be acceptable, decommissioning must be completed within 60 years of the plant ceasing operations. A time beyond that would be considered only when necessary to protect public health and safety in accordance with NRC regulations.
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/decommissioning.html
Licensees may choose from three alternative decommissioning strategies: DECON, SAFSTOR, or ENTOMB.
Under DECON (immediate dismantlement), soon after the nuclear facility closes, equipment, structures, and portions of the facility containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits release of the property and termination of the NRC license.
Under SAFSTOR, often considered “delayed DECON,” a nuclear facility is maintained and monitored in a condition that allows the radioactivity to decay; afterwards, it is dismantled and the property decontaminated.
Under ENTOMB, radioactive contaminants are permanently encased on site in structurally sound material such as concrete and appropriately maintained and monitored until the radioactivity decays to a level permitting restricted release of the property.
The licensee may also choose to adopt a combination of the first two choices in which some portions of the facility are dismantled or decontaminated while other parts of the facility are left in SAFSTOR. The decision may be based on factors besides radioactive decay such as availability of waste disposal sites.
To be acceptable, decommissioning must be completed within 60 years of the plant ceasing operations. A time beyond that would be considered only when necessary to protect public health and safety in accordance with NRC regulations.
Sand, dumped directly on the reactors, probably wouldn't work. I believe it would make glass? As an offshoot, OT, I'm reminded of a place or two in the desert where "glass" has been found, for no good reason. Interesting. I'm easily amused.
Back on topic - concrete, however, MIGHT work, it seemed to in Chernobyl. It was after the concrete sarcophagus began deteriorating that they starting pouring sand, but that was a few years later.
I think my biggest concern is - even though the reactor(s) might be covered with concrete, would they still be reacting UNDER there? If they potentially are, what does/will that mean? Is it even possible? Guess in a way I'm asking if there is any way to STOP a nuclear reaction once it started a melt down.
Quiche
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 9,130
- Reaction score
- 500
Plutonium in troubled reactors, spent fuel pools
Quote: Only six percent of the fuel rods at the plant's Unit 3 were a mixture of plutonium-239 and uranium-235 when first put into operation. The fuel in other reactors is only uranium, but even there, plutonium is created during the fission process.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/18/plutonium-troubled-reactors-spent-fuel-pools/#ixzz1GyHBv3uK
eta: #3 has 90 tons of spent fuel
Quote: Only six percent of the fuel rods at the plant's Unit 3 were a mixture of plutonium-239 and uranium-235 when first put into operation. The fuel in other reactors is only uranium, but even there, plutonium is created during the fission process.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/18/plutonium-troubled-reactors-spent-fuel-pools/#ixzz1GyHBv3uK
eta: #3 has 90 tons of spent fuel
UFO
Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2011
- Messages
- 168
- Reaction score
- 1
Just a thought, albeit an out of this world thought.
I'm an open minded guy. I can believe that there is life outside of the planet Earth somewhere in the universe. More intellegent than human life, possibly. Do I think more intelligent alien life has been to our planet, no way.
BUT, what if it has.
We have a ton of conspericy theorists out there who believe this.
If this progresses to the point that we really are doomed, (which I don't think it will), is this the sort of event that will lead to an introduction.
And I realize that my username and avatar do help me in defending my sanity. Again this is just a silly thought that popped into my little head.
I swear I'm not :nuts:
I'm an open minded guy. I can believe that there is life outside of the planet Earth somewhere in the universe. More intellegent than human life, possibly. Do I think more intelligent alien life has been to our planet, no way.
BUT, what if it has.
We have a ton of conspericy theorists out there who believe this.
If this progresses to the point that we really are doomed, (which I don't think it will), is this the sort of event that will lead to an introduction.
And I realize that my username and avatar do help me in defending my sanity. Again this is just a silly thought that popped into my little head.
I swear I'm not :nuts:
Seems to me our "space" brothers have been floating around since Adam and Eve. If so, are they just watching while we blow ourselves up? Or are they waiting the chance for us to file in two by two, like Noah's ark to go aboard the "ship" like in Noah's day?
I honestly don't believe we've reached the "critical" stage just yet, but I sure will shake my head when some of our more enlightened brethren disappear.
At the moment, however, I am not thinking "outer space", I'm wondering about "inner space" where this disaster is occurring, and all the horrors we will have to face tomorrow or the next day - the bodies under the rubble, the radiation-caused illnesses. The fact that, I BELIEVE, sometimes we don't know what in 'ell we are doing to ourselves and our planet.
No put down, UFO, just expressing how I feel.
I honestly don't believe we've reached the "critical" stage just yet, but I sure will shake my head when some of our more enlightened brethren disappear.
At the moment, however, I am not thinking "outer space", I'm wondering about "inner space" where this disaster is occurring, and all the horrors we will have to face tomorrow or the next day - the bodies under the rubble, the radiation-caused illnesses. The fact that, I BELIEVE, sometimes we don't know what in 'ell we are doing to ourselves and our planet.
No put down, UFO, just expressing how I feel.
- Status