Photo showing decimated reactor building troubles me

  • #26
238
1
Can they flood the core with liquid nitrogen?
An interesting question. I doubt that they would, as you might flood Uranium Lava with a liquid gas and end up with a gas layer between the uranium and the liquid. Supposition only on my part, but it might retard the cooling down of the Uranium.

Liquid Nitrogen might also not carry boron in it, thus removing boron from the presence of the Uranium Lava and that could invite another criticality transient hiccup within the Lava. Not good if you are trying to cool it down.
 
  • #27
The courageous workers at the Fukashima plant, most of whom will die from cancer in the coming years, are now extremely desperate to stop total meltdowns of all four reactors.

Desperate to the point of trying to plug leaks with newspapers and trash bags.

I think they should just entomb the reactors with concrete, then build giant towering steel, lead, and concrete containment structures over them just like they did with Chernobyl.

Apparently the deeply corrupt "TEPCO" corporation is actually trying to salvage whats left of the reactors. Which is why efforts like encasing the reactors with concrete to permanently end this disaster, have been delayed. I think TEPCO should finally realize that it is impossible save the plant, and it should just be left forever abandoned like Chernobyl.

I hope the Japanese people and their government should sue TEPCO into bankruptcy and criminally prosecute some of the executives for gross negligence, and putting profits before health and safety.

My main concerns are how much plutonium-contaminated water has been leaked into the pacific ocean. If the smallest imaginable amount of plutonium is consumed, it will cause cancer with almost 100% certainty. This could devastate the fishing industry in the pacific ocean. There isn't any way of telling how far this contaminated water will spread. Possibly even to the beaches of the coastal states here in the US. Fish caught from the pacific should be screened for trace amounts of radiation.

A large percentage of the fish sold in grocery stores in the United States and abroad are fished out of the pacific.

Allegedly some of this radioactive water was dumped into the pacific ocean intentionally by TEPCO (illegal dumping of toxic waste.)
 
Last edited:
  • #28
10
0
They cant entomb 4 unstable reactor buildings,they need to try and regain control.That is all they can hope for.
 
  • #29
238
1
Fishman, there are only three reactors that are at risk. I believe that all three have had partial to full meltdowns. The cores need continued cooling until there is no risk of them melting through from wherever they are at present to the actual ground underneath them. To walk away not might assure a massive steam explosion if the Uranium Lava reaches the water table under the sea coast. In that case we might see a steam fissure for a long time that emits radioactive particles with it.

Plutonium has such a long half life that it emits little radiation. It it is scattered around the bed of the ocean as small particles its weight will result in it sinking into the sand or between the pebbles on the ocean floor. Short of somebody picking up a slab or Plutonium and licking it over and over and over and over again, it does not pose a health threat as a solid piece of metal. If it is finely ground, and you inhale the dust of that "powder" it can kill you. I strongly recommend not grinding it and snorting it as then it can be very injurious to your health.
 
  • #30
177
0
Water is the moderator (in the technical term as it slows down the fast neutrons to slow neutrons. I think your question should have been, "would I add water without boron?"

Considering that adding water would dilute the boron in the reactor in a bleed and feed situation (especially in a reactor that has been breeched where it automatically bleeds by itself), doing so could cause a criticality transient. People could turn blue before your eyes.
Not a good idea unless you like high doses of radiation.
Your are quite correct. A layman's misuse of the term moderator.
 
  • #31
...When you compare this technical diagram of the Fukashima reactor to the image in the OP, the reactor containment building should be visibly sticking out of the center of that obliterated reactor building...
The photo you used of the destroyed unit 3 that looks like it's burned to the ground is an optical illusion. The brown ground in the photo is actually a hill that obscures the lower part of the building. (I was fooled by this myself and thought the same as you. I thought the reactor had been blown to hell, judging by that photo.)

[PLAIN]http://news.sirfpaisa.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Fukushima-Daiichi-nuclear-power-plant.jpeg [Broken]


Here's a different angle:

[URL]http://images.publicradio.org/content/2011/03/16/20110316_fukushima-daiichi-nuclear-complex02_33.jpg[/URL]

Notice the height of Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 appear to be the same accounting for the angle that the photo was taken and such.

It also appears that Units 3 and 4 weren't built exactly like Unit 1 or like the cutaway diagram of a BWR Mark 1. Notice Unit 1 on the left in the photo above. It's got the blowout panels for the top two or three floors sort of like the cutaway diagram. Steel girders and metal panels.

[URL]http://modernsurvivalblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/general-electric-boiling-water-reactor-mark-I.jpg[/URL]

Yet the top floors of Unit 4 have concrete posts:

[URL]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Ca-0hEixr4Q/TZfRXsrkq2I/AAAAAAAAAzg/PWaH4D9OFT4/s1600/fukushima.jpg[/URL]

That's definitely the top since the bridge crane would have to be under those roof supports.

So it looks like Unit 3 was built like 4 and the top floors would be where the bridge crane was.

[URL]http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20110322/600_fukushima_unit_3_reactor_ap_110322.jpg[/URL]

Still, you look at this next photo and you have to wonder what damage the reactor vessel took:

[PLAIN]http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2011/04/01/81459-fukushima-daiichi-nuclear-plant-aerial-view.jpg [Broken]

Too bad Tepco hasn't released, to my knowledge, any detailed schematics of their plant. It would end speculation such as this.

(Disclaimer: I'm just a layman. All of the above could be a crock.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #32
8
1
general-electric-boiling-water-reactor-mark-I.jpg


Yet the top floors of Unit 4 have concrete posts:

fukushima.jpg


That's definitely the top since the bridge crane would have to be under those roof supports.
i agree that is very troubling.
 
  • #33
238
1
Have any of the nuclear cores of Fukashima reactors 1-4 melted through the bottom of their reactor vessels?

I believe this has already happened to at least one reactor at the Fukashima NPP, and TEPCO is hiding it.

I hope it doesn't burn it's way through the containment vessel and drywell.
There was no core in Reactor Four so that one is out.

There is enough admission to conclude that there was reactor core damage in Units One, Two and Three. Authorities who are not part of Tepco or the Japanese government have stated that Reactor two has breached the reactor vessel. That has not been confirmed by TEPCO or the Japanese government as far as I know right now. Until that is confirmed, it has not officially happened.
 

Related Threads on Photo showing decimated reactor building troubles me

  • Last Post
2
Replies
25
Views
8K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
60
Views
29K
Replies
12
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
955
  • Last Post
Replies
10
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
8K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
9
Views
2K
Top