Recent content by Maclomer

I assume the ultimate temperature of the melt would depend on the mass of the molten material and the equilibrium between internal heat generation and conduction/radiation of heat away from the melt. I presume it could get awfully hot - enough to easily melt steel and even concrete with which it...

In all of the reactors (setting aside the spent fuel pools) the absolute imperative is to maintain cooling by whatever means is feasible and, however it is done, active cooling will probably be needed for many months. Right now we know some of the cooling is done by directing water jets onto...

Just for the record, and these guys are probably too young to remember the huge fuss over Sr-90, the bones of a whole generation exposed to nuclear fallout (from Nevada tests and elsewhere) contained hugely elevated levels of the isotope - compared to the prior generation. Please see...

Promecheng - Thanks for the good answer - taking the BBC figures, the rate of decay is extremely fast in the beginning and then it slows down - I assume because it is the sum of several exponentials. Given that it is .5% at the end of Day 1, I therefore assume it will still be a significant...

Snippet from BBC: 16 March 2011 Last updated at 16:16 ET By Richard Black Environment correspondent, BBC NewsReactors "Once a reactor is turned off, radioactivity and heat generation in the rods die away quickly; down to 7% of the original power within a second of switch-off, 5% within a...

I'm not a nuclear engineer and I am mystified by some of the technical information given off by 'experts' on BBC, CNN etc. Focusing on reactor #2 at Fukushima: the steam pouring from it looks like a 'steady state' situation - meaning that the water going in is sufficient to maintain a status-quo...