- #701
TCups
- 486
- 0
antonl said:[PLAIN]http://www.faz.net/m/%7b7ae28c3d-c2a2-4b40-8e20-c536525a2b69%7dpicture.jpg
todays fire in reactor 3
omg.
Last edited by a moderator:
antonl said:[PLAIN]http://www.faz.net/m/%7b7ae28c3d-c2a2-4b40-8e20-c536525a2b69%7dpicture.jpg
todays fire in reactor 3
Playbook said:About the usage of seawater and the problems it creates:Now the Pacific Ocean has an average salt content of a 35 g / 1000 g of water
We assume that the reactor evaporates 2000 g (2 litres) water / second
therefore:
2 kg/s * 3600 s * 24 * 7 * 0.035 = ~42 tons per week or 6 tons a day !
That's definately a big issue at the moment. Could it be that the smoke coming out is from burning salt?
Engineers have managed to rig power cables to all six reactors at the Fukushima complex, and restarted a water pump that will help reverse the overheating that triggered the world's worst nuclear crisis in 25 years.
AntonL said:Salt melts at 801 degrees C and boils at 1413 degrees C
rhody said:FYI from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8394963/Japan-nuclear-crisis-fears-over-food-contamination.html" By Nick Allen, in Tokyo 10:09AM GMT 21 Mar 2011 Some good news...
Rhody...
mattm2 said:I think that the smoke from number 3 could be related to the ongoing electrical hookup. May be a piece of damaged equipment caught fire when they tried to power it back up with the newly run electrical line. All just speculation on my part and no links.
mattm2 said:I think that the smoke from number 3 could be related to the ongoing electrical hookup. May be a piece of damaged equipment caught fire when they tried to power it back up with the newly run electrical line. All just speculation on my part and no links.
|Fred said:
Those IR pictures seems to rule out some of Tcups hypothésis , if Spend fuel Rod were dispersed on site they would heat up and show.
|Fred said:
Those IR pictures seems to rule out some of Tcups hypothésis , if Spend fuel Rod were dispersed on site they would heat up and show.
TCups said:
OK, Oyester Creek, but then I have to assume that the most identifiable feature in the Fukushima building after the blast -- the intact square hole where the fuel casks are lifted by the crane, has been cut away from this drawing, correct?
Also, a small portion of the gate connecting the primary containment to the SFP is shown near the bottom of the transfer channel or "chute". If the scale is correct, it greatly reinforces my contention that the path of least resistance of a blast originating in the primary containment, outside of the RV would be through that gate (even if there are 2 of them, which does not appear to be the case) rather than out the top of the plug.
Notice the design. It appears to me that the logic behind a relatively thin-walled (concrete+ steel, or steel?) gate is that there is a large volume of water behind it, which under normal conditions, would tend to greatly reinforce the backside pressure on the gate at that point. If so, then here is another major design flaw. The reactor containment is compromised if the spent fuel pool is more than a few feet low on coolant. I suspect that the original designers considered an empty SFP with a hot reactor an unthinkable event. If so, then they should re-think that one.
Also, it occurs to me that if the overhead crane were parked at the north end of the building, it's weight would tend to bend the north end wall inward if the south, east and west walls were blown out, accounting for the under-folded north wall girders in our current pictures of Unit 3.
My conclusion:
Loss of water in the SFP greatly compromised the integrity of the reactor containment and the containment of the rods in the SFP when hydrogen and oxygen gasses in the reactor containment exploded. The dark smoke in the latest news release is ominous. I now fear that they may now have lost both the reactor core and the primary containment.
Someone please refute that.
TCups said:
Do you mean the picture of the newscaster with the screen behind him? Is there another source of more meaningful IR imagery?
mattm2 said:I think that the smoke from number 3 could be related to the ongoing electrical hookup. May be a piece of damaged equipment caught fire when they tried to power it back up with the newly run electrical line. All just speculation on my part and no links.
AntonL said:Yes I marked the area of the picture below, the most intense temp is south east corner of reactor 3
Sorry -I have not found a released version of the IR picture so we only have above when I did a quick screengrab when I saw above.
TCups said:Sorry, Anton -- I just can't seem to get oriented to the IR image and don't have a lot of time just now. The two pipes at the bottom of the color image are the steam pipes between the reactors and the turbine bldgs. one of the pipes should have a break. I can't see enough detail to make any conclusion without a lot more study. Later.
TCups said:OK, so the image is tightly cropped on reactor unit 3. The region of the smoke plume is extremely hot. There are scattered heat signatures in the remainder of the reactor bldg. I can't really conclude much about the remainder of the debris field(s) without a larger FOV and it is not clear what the window/level setting of the IR imagery is, but presumably it would be set to find something as hot as an exposed fuel rod.
TCups said:So far, I don't seen any contradiction to the containment explosion with blast of fuel rods and perhaps some scattered fragments of fuel rods outside of the FOV. But we are drawing conclusions of a picture of a TV picture at low resolution.
TCups said:"They", et al? 128ºC? Above the boiling point of water? In the spent fuel pool? I 'spec steam could be 128ºC, but not water in a pool, but I would need to know if any steam was rising when this image was obtained.
Also, if the window/level of the color IR spectroscopy were set at a "white" level =128ºC = hottest thing in the image, then I 'spec that everything above 128ºC would also be white, but I don't know the window/level of the color image or what parameters they used to measure the true temperature of the SFP, or even if the hottest thing on the image is what is being measured as the SFP temp. Not enough information in that single image. I do know were it looks hottest now, though, both in Bldg 3 and 4. And I do know that Bldg 3 is hotter than Bldg 4, apparently right where the smoke/steam seemed to be venting after the explosion and where my earlier 'spec was that it was the most likely site where a defect in the primary containment might occur after an explosion. I also 'spec that it wasn't hot "corium" that was seen hanging out the hole on the 3-side of Unit 4.
But you know what the constipated fly said, right? -- "I spec not."
Sorry if I speculate too much. Apologies.
ndray said:An analysis expecting damages on the SPF structure after the explosion on #3.
From the french institude for nuclear safety. (IRSN)
Link (french document) : http://www.irsn.fr/FR/Actualites_pr...Seisme-Japon_Point-situation-20032011-06h.pdf
L’IRSN estime que la dalle anti-missile située à la verticale de la cuve et de l’enceinte de
confinement a dû être détruite lors de l’explosion hydrogène du 14 Mars 2011. Si les ouvrages qui supportent cette dalle ont également été touchés, il est envisageable, outre les fuites éventuelles, que le niveau d’eau maximal possible au dessus des assemblages combustibles entreposés dans la piscine soit diminué (dans le pire cas : 1 mètre au dessus du haut des assemblages). Ceci expliquerait les débits de dose très importants au droit du bâtiment et confirmerait les efforts pour maintenir en eau cette piscine.
Pool of reactor No. 3
IRSN believes (speculates?) that the missile proof slab located vertically above the vessel and the containment (see Annex 1) has been destroyed (vaporized? shattered? popped off like a giant cork?) by the hydrogen explosion (where?) of the 14th of March 2011. If the structures that support this slab were also affected (the side of the SFP where the gate to the transfer chute is?), it is conceivable (one could speculate) that the possible maximum (maximum? - interesting choice of words) for water level above the fuel assemblies stored in the pool would be reduced (in the worst cases: 1 meter above the top of the assemblies). (if the earthquake didn't slosh it out like this morning's coffee at the speed bump, and if the shock wave of the blast that destroyed the missile proof plug didn't spill any more, and if the only leakage from the pool was at a level no lower than the transfer chute, and if all the dumping and spraying done before the radiation levels rose too high helped before too much more boiled off at 128ºC?) This (and only this?) would explain the very high radiation levels to the top of the building and the constant efforts needed to maintain water level in this SPF.
M. Bachmeier said:As long as your looking for answers and not drawing unfounded conclusions your contributing to understanding. The problem is that much of the information needed exists but is not being provided.
I don't know why we have an international watchdog if it doesn't bark loudly when pertinent information is withheld from public scrutiny.
TCups you are doing very well, no need to changeTCups said:You may be right about the speculation thing after all. I am sorry, everyone. It is my nature. I just can't help myself sometimes. I will try do better. I promise.
AntonL said:An http://www.slideshare.net/iaea/4-briefing-radiation-protection-20-03-2011a" regarding radiation levels
and
ongoing http://www.mext.go.jp/english/" published by Japanese government.
PietKuip said:The IAEA lists 15 kBq per kg of iodine-131 in spinage and up to 6100 Bq/kg in spring onions from Ibaraki prefecture.
Those are levels to worry about. Agriculture in the region seems impossible this year.
Note: This is not about the water level in this pool, this is only about the water capacity of the pool after some of its walls have been curtailed by the fall of this shattered and scattered slab and support.ndray said:IRSN speculates that the missile proof slab located vertically above the vessel and the containment (see Annex 1) has been shattered then scattered by the hydrogen explosion (where?) of the 14th of March 2011. If the structures that support this slab were also affected (the side of the SFP where the gate to the transfer chute is?), it is conceivable (one could speculate) that, besides possible cracks, the possible maximum (maximum? - interesting choice of words) for water level above the fuel assemblies stored in the pool would be reduced (in the worst cases: 1 meter above the top of the assemblies).
ndray said:[continued]
This would be sufficient to explain the very high radiation levels close to the building and the significant and constant efforts needed to maintain water level in this SPF.
TCups said:You may be right about the speculation thing after all. I am sorry, everyone. It is my nature. I just can't help myself sometimes. I will try do better. I promise.
dgdd said:I propose some modifications (in bold) to translation initially posted by ndray:
Note: This is not about the water level in this pool, this is only about the water capacity of the pool after some of its walls have been curtailed by the fall of this shattered and scattered slab and support.
Maybe the information here is about the presence of thick slab pillar(s) just near the walls of this pool.
myth_kill said:link is not working
rhody said:FYI: For perspective:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/42112536?slide=1"
Rhody... (no dark humor intended, the red face that is... well maybe, just a little)
joema said:The four-reactor Fukushima II Daini plant was just 7 miles due south of the Fukushima I Daiichi plant. It was on the coast just like the Daiichi plant, was hit by the same earthquake and Tsunami, and to my knowledge is of similar design.
Why was it not as badly affected?