snorkack said:
Shortening your quote to show that you introduced the stable isotopes:
Incorrect. I was referring to radionuclides, as in "The further a radionuclide is from the 'line/curve of stability' the lower the fission yield." This is evident when reviewing the 'chart of nuclides'. Not only is the fission yield lower, but the half-lives tend to be shorter, i.e., the radionuclides are less stable.
Taking a look at the Chart of Nuclides, and the independent fission yields (IFY) of
235U and
239Pu (for thermal neutrons) sit on or below the 'line/curve of stability', so they are inherently 'neutron-rich'. See attached image (green means very low probability, the orange/brown squares are below the 'line/curve of stability'.
snorkack said:
How broad is the distribution of count of neutron multiplicity? Is it only 2 or 3, never an average between fission events with 1 and events with 4?
The free neutron yield per fission would be averaged over the multiplicity range, usually between 2 or 3 for practical purposes, i.e., in a nuclear reactor, and the multiplicity vector shifts with the incident neutron energy. I picked a simple example of 2 or 3 neutrons per fission. I also left out ternary fissions, in which a nucleus fission into three fission products, the lightest ones of concern being T and less oftern
4He, and even rarer quaternary fission.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_fission
snorkack said:
238U is much more likely to undergo spontaneous fission.
More likely that what? Note the half-life of
238U, which means a very low decay rate, then SF occurs 5.44E-5% of the time, so not very often.
snorkack said:
Consider that even rich ores like pitchblende where few neutrons are lost in O, H or elsewhere and mostly all neutrons are captured by U have not been critical for last 1,8 Gyr.
This is not necessarily correct. One does not find pure UO
2 or U
3O
8 in ores, but it is distributed with other metal oxides, e.g., oxides of Th, Pb, lanthanides, elements from the decay of Th, U, . . . , in addition to other minerals. Oklo was a unique event.
https://world-nuclear.org/informati...uranium-resources/geology-of-uranium-deposits
It is true that the 'enrichment', or proportion of
235U in 'natural' U has decreased (by decay, an d perhaps by one more criticality events (with attendant production of fission products)) over the last ~4.5 billion years, so events like Oklo 'natural reactor' are exceedingly rare, if not impossible.
snorkack said:
And the burnup of the ore does not accumulate over the existence of the ore.
Please explain one's statement. Burnup, in the context of a nuclear reactor, is simply the energy produced per unit mass of fuel. One may quantify burnup in terms of fissions per initial metal atoms (FIMA, often given as a percent) or in terms of MWh/kgHM or GWd/tHM, where HM = heavy metal atoms, which is U in conventional LWR, or (Th, U, Pu)X, where X could be O
2, N, C, Zr, Mo, . . . . Some folks like to report burnup in terms of mass of metal oxide.
snorkack said:
Because when U-238 does absorb 1 neutron, the resulting Pu-239 has halflife 24 kyr... to α. Which drops the mass number to 235. To produce a nucleus of Pu-240 requires the Pu-239 nucleus to catch the second neutron, not within the Gyr that the ore lies in ground but within the 24 kyr before Pu-239 decays.
Perhaps I should have prefaced the comments about
238U and production of Pu isotopes with "In a nuclear reactor, . . . ", or in a supernova, or some configuration where there is an amount of
238U in a copious quantity of neutrons.
A situation like Oklo, or other 'natural reactor', the geochemistry complicates the systems, since the enviornmental conditions change, e.g., continents drift, and some land was underwater for a period, and different minerals have different solubilities depending on pH (acidity or alkalinity). It could have been a one time event, or successive events separated by some undetermined time span (millenia, or eons). When an even happens, it would be a transient event; some fission products will be lost, while others will remain nearby. Each geological system is unique regarding composition, homogeneity/heterogeneity, hydrology, . . . .
snorkack said:
Neutron-rich isotopes of fission fragments, however, DO form naturally on Earth as products of spontaneous fission.
Certainly.
For general interest -
https://indico.fnal.gov/event/16420/attachments/23235/28811/NVassh_FRIBGW170817_2018.pdf