@Tcups: In addition, the fuel assembly that would in that scenario be attached to the FHM, would be protected from the blast as it was under water. The FHM would be send skyward with the assemply dragging behind it. Once the machine reaches the zenith of its parabolic track, the attached...
@Tcups: It looks like the telescopic arm has an attachment that grasps one fuel assembly at a time. There is an attached camera to assist in locating the thing precisely, i.e. making sure the machine is placed exactly plumb with the assemblies in the storage rack or rector, so when it extracts...
@Tcups: Regarding your latest scenario (the flying fuelmachine). I can't find fault with it thus far, particularly because it ties together bits of information that didn't make sense before, especially how these rods could have ended up on that side of the building. While it seems a wild...
Actually, one would assume they'd wish to build new reactors at the same location, so that the rest of the plants can be used again, if that's at all feasible.
Also, what's the possibility of building a concrete shell around the reactor buildings, and filling the whole thing with water, so...
This one would be a hell of a lot easier to entomb, as there remains an external shell in place. Pretty much all they have to do is open all internal doors and pump the whole building full of concrete (with a lot of absorbing material in it), with only some of the top floors requiring...
@Tcups: I didn't think you suggested otherwise, I was responding to Jens' comment #2270, who appeared to suggest just that.
I agree that it's unlikely that operators would put fuel in the equipment pool, used or otherwise, for the reasons you already give, plus that the equipment pool doesn't...
@Tcups: Here's how I see that photograph. Take a ruler and place it alongside the SFP edge in the left of the picture to get a feel for the perspective. You'll see that the machine is actually wider than the SFP, contrary to what Jens suggested.
Also the fact that there is a gate shows that...
Look again Jens, it appears this photo was taken from the SFP, with the machine standing over the reactor vessel. It looks like the perspective has you fooled, you can see the machine bridge tracks on the other side of the pool there.
I wonder if anybody can answer the question why the control rod arrangements appear to be such a complicated construction with individual drives for each rod (as it would appear to be from the diagrams I have seen). Am I correct in assuming that the control rods are pushed up hydraulically, and...
"Economics dictates reason"
No, economics IS reason, it's just that its basic assumptions and hypotheses are rather iffy.
I'd agree that an empirical approach to recorded tsunami heights would appear to have been a sounder route, although I haven't read that report. Nevertheless, the way I...
"Well, no. A pressure vessel in the primary containment would have to withstand a pressure transient that blew that containment apart."
I was referring to the "secondary" containment of course (the dry well), also in relation to the gate. It is obvious from all diagrams that there is no...
"Implication: the plug is likely still atop the core containment. The blast came outward through the SFP gate, breeching the side of the containment, then, upward, out of the SFP."
Only problem is that that doesn't mash with the actual lay out, where the SFP is on the other side of the...
"The pressure transient required to blast the concrete plug to 500 metres is of the order required to rupture the reactor - assuming the reactor was not breached by a melt-down in the first place."
Quite apart from your calculations and the correctness of the assumptions, the effect is either...
@jensjakob: one would assume they continuously vent from the reactor vessel to the dry well, as that is in fact the cooling procedure going on with sea water. This venting ends up through the wet well also, as per the design. What is not according to design is any leaking of the containment...