Recent content by alpi

I don't think it is meaningless to have the fuel elements and/or corium covered with water that is no longer boiling, either by heat exchange or by continuous replacement with purified cold water.

If the temperatures in the empty spaces inside the containments (or around the corium) is brought down to less than 100 degrees I guess there would not be any radioactive steams escaping from the containments, since the driving force is gone. That sounds like good progress, whatever it is called.

Why would any responsible politician say such a thing? I think people should be allowed to return to their homes immediately. The radiation doses indoors where modern people spend most of their lives are less than the reported fairly harmless doses outdoors in the affected areas.

Why bother with a British newspaper saying that a melt-through is "the worst possibility in a nuclear accident"? The previously melted fuels are solids heavy as lead and are not going anywhere.

A typical example of "research" carried out by anti-nuclear activists.

Ishikawa says here http://www.gengikyo.jp/english/shokai/Tohoku_Jishin/article_20110413.htm that the melted cores likely have crusts of "around 20-30 centimeters" which seems believable. I think there shouldn't be much difference between a completely solid core and a core with a thick crust.

If the melted fuel (corium) has fallen down from the reactor pressure vessel I think it would be easy/easier to get it covered with water since water naturally flows downwards. What's the importance of a temperature of less than 100 degrees? Also boiling water has good cooling capacity. Or...

Why would anyone care what these people believe?

Is "The New York Times" an official? Or ex-skf.blogspot? :wink:

What about chemically reactive volatiles?

Would it be better to forcibly evacuate more people despite what is said here http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,780810,00.html ? Don't think so.

Steam turbine driven safety systems relying on decay heat seem to be standard in BWR:s and were functioning in Fukushima. Search for RCIC and HPCI in these links. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_water_reactor_safety_systems...

No. The fuel elements or what is left of them just have to be submerged in water and the lost water (boil-off) be replaced. Edit: Lack of submerging in water wouldn't be dangerous if it was possible to cool the fuel elements by spraying water.

Why do the politicians in Japan not just inform the public that the accidents in Fukushima happened because there were no plans in Japan or elsewhere for dealing with a total station blackout lasting for more than a couple of hours? It appears that the only thing you have to do to ensure...