Japan Earthquake: nuclear plants

  • Thread starter gmax137
  • Start date
Filling in more questions about timing, this time in relation to fuel removal from reactor 4 pool.

I think the last we heard about this was a pool & reactor debris survey from August:

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_130809_07-e.pdf

According to that the debris removal work should have started in late August, and I expect that if they don't get stuck, we will hear about the next phase before the end of this year.

edited to add that schedule can be seen in this document from later in August, after they formed a plan based on the debris survey I just mentioned:

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_130826_07-e.pdf

Fuel removal currently scheduled to start mid-november according to that.
 
Last edited:

etudiant

Gold Member
1,150
75
Well... Once they will be able to remove Sr (and some other elements) they should dump that water somewhere. Even if I prefer places where it'll be isolated for some time (this includes some natural reservoirs deep below), it would do practically nothing even if they mix it well in the ocean.
Logic would suggest park it in a tanker, freeze it and send it to someplace really cold. It should not be too hard to keep it as an ice cube for a century or two somewhere in a polar region.
After that it should not matter if the tanker rusts out beneath the cargo.
 

jim hardy

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2018 Award
9,750
4,750
I'd suggested a line of old Liberty Ship boilers to distill it. Demineralizers are wonderful but you are left with a LOT of contaminated resin. And seawater wrecks demineralizer resins quickly.
Boiler sludge would be more compact i'd think.
 

jim hardy

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2018 Award
9,750
4,750
oops double post - how'd that happen?

removed
 
Last edited:
1,199
584
I guess there isn't significant difference in concentration of D compared to natural water.
As it seems, you are right:
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9263&page=113
So it cannot be used as a raw material for the heavy water industry.

Logic would suggest park it in a tanker, freeze it and send it to someplace really cold. It should not be too hard to keep it as an ice cube for a century or two somewhere in a polar region.
After that it should not matter if the tanker rusts out beneath the cargo.
My idea is to pump it down to some geologic formation where the water moves only slowly.
But the 'rust in peace' is also good. It has to be 'out of the way' only for a hundred year or so.
 

tsutsuji

Gold Member
1,220
15
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/genpatsu-fukushima/20130918/index.html Damages such as cracks were found in 8 locations at elevation 66 m on the unit 1/ unit 2 stack (full height, about 120 m). The cracks are thought to have been caused by the March 2011 earthquake. Tepco will check the resulting earthquake resistance against future earthquakes. The stack is presently unused. As the radiation in the stack vicinity is as high as 10 Sv/hour Tepco is studying how to perform a detailed survey.

http://www.tepco.co.jp/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_130918_13-j.pdf Japanese language handout with picture.
 
189
13
Thanks to everyone for the updates.


I found this on the TEPCO site, dated July 25th

Progress Status and Future Challenges of the Mid-and-long-Term Roadmap toward the Decommissioning of Units 1-4

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/roadmap/images/d130725_01-e.pdf



I also found this on the NRA site.

Updated Status of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station - Sept. 16

http://www.nsr.go.jp/english/data/20130917_presentation.pdf [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
189
13
New method reduces analysis time of radioactive strontium

http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201309190058 [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
131
10
LabratSR
New method reduces analysis time of radioactive strontium

Although the conventional technique has superior analytical sensitivity, with only a minimal amount of components needed to be reliably detected in sample, the process took from two to four weeks
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311dis...AJ201309190058 [Broken]
has long existed in the "iron" and running in 30 minutes qualifies.

http://akp.com.ua/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=119:seb-01-150en&catid=71:bettaspectren&Itemid=106
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving
Top