Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster

  • Context: Fukushima 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bryan 1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nuclear
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility of bombarding the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear reactors with various particles (alpha particles, protons, neutrons, and electrons) to alter the radioactivity emitted by the reactors. The scope includes technical viability, potential consequences, and the implications of such actions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the possibility of bombarding the reactors with particles to change the emitted radioactivity.
  • Another participant acknowledges the theoretical possibility but argues that it is not technically viable and would create additional problems.
  • A further reply emphasizes that only neutrons would have any significant effect, but notes that alpha particles and electrons lack the penetration needed for such a process.
  • This participant also points out that bombarding with neutrons could lead to the creation of more dangerous fission products and highlights the challenges of separating radioactive elements.
  • Another participant asserts that any alteration would likely increase radioactivity, questioning the benefits of such an approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility and consequences of bombarding the reactors, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations regarding the effectiveness of different particles, the need for separation of radioactive materials, and the specific challenges posed by isotopes such as Caesium-137.

Bryan 1
Is it possible to bombard the reactors at the Fukushima power plant with alpha particles and or protons, and or neutrons and or electrons in a combination that would alter the radioactivity presently being admitted by the failed reactors
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Possible? Sure, why not. Technically viable - no. It would create tons of new problems on top of those we already have.
 
Bryan 1 said:
Is it possible to bombard the reactors at the Fukushima power plant with alpha particles and or protons, and or neutrons and or electrons in a combination that would alter the radioactivity presently being admitted by the failed reactors

Not to make anything better. The only kind of radiation that would do anything is neutrons. Alpha particles and electrons won't penetrate into any material. If you want to transmute anything with them you need tiny samples in vacuum. This is useless here.

If you want to irrediate anything with neutrons, you will have to separate the stuff that will get more dangerous from the stuff that will get less dangerous. Unfortunately there is far more stuff that will become more dangerous than less dangerous. Firing neutrons at the remaining nuclear fuel will produce more fission products and plutonium. You would need to separate all the radiactive elements, and if you had done that you would already have solved the problem

Transmutation of nuclear waste seems only to make sense for transuranic elements, which you could let fission in a reactor to form fission products, which will be much shorter lived. The main problem at this time is Caesium-137. Unfortunately it doesn't absorb neutrons well. It will collect over a few years in a nuclear reactor after all. Firing neutrons at a swimming pool of mostly water with a bit of 137Cs in it isn't useful.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bandersnatch
Bryan 1 said:
that would alter the radioactivity presently being admitted by the failed reactors

Sure. The alteration would make everything more radioactive. What is the benefit of that?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
49K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14K ·
473
Replies
14K
Views
4M