Total Fukushima radiation releases compared to total core inventories

  • Context: Fukushima 
  • Thread starter Thread starter clancy688
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Core Radiation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on the technical and numerical analysis of radiation releases from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, specifically concerning iodine (I-131) and cesium (Cs-137) isotopes. Participants seek to compare the released amounts of these isotopes to their original core and spent fuel pool (SFP) inventories. Key points include estimates of airborne and liquid releases, core retention, and the age of spent fuel, with a consensus that approximately 1-10% of the core inventory of I-131 and Cs-137 has escaped. The discussion references various documents and calculations to support these findings.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of nuclear reactor core inventories and isotopes, specifically I-131 and Cs-137.
  • Familiarity with radiation release mechanisms and containment failure scenarios.
  • Knowledge of nuclear fuel cycle concepts, including fuel burnup and exposure.
  • Ability to interpret technical documents related to nuclear safety and radiation measurements.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the methodologies for calculating radioactive decay and isotopic release using tools like ORIGEN2.
  • Explore the implications of containment failure on radiation release, referencing NUREG-1465.
  • Study the historical context and data from the Chernobyl disaster for comparative analysis.
  • Investigate the specifics of spent fuel pool management and its impact on radiation safety.
USEFUL FOR

Nuclear engineers, radiation safety professionals, environmental scientists, and anyone involved in nuclear disaster response and analysis will benefit from this discussion.

  • #31
Hmm, do you think the SFP's were designed to cope with the impact of 175 tons of RSJ falling from a height of 10 m. :-(
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
clancy688 said:
Something interesting:



http://www.webcitation.org/5xunDms1r

81 million TBq... that's more then ten times the 6 million TBq I have estimated with NUCENGs methods.

My numbers were based on conservative cycle lengths, exposure, enrichment and fuel design. The nubers they are quoting are even more conservative estimate of I-131 at shutdown, but they are using that big number to say less than 1% was released which then sounds like an artificially low number to make a point.
 
  • #33
"We could say all the I-131 was gone." Well, we could say that except that TEPCO reports increasing amounts of I-131. If intermittent criticality is still producing I-131, you may be calculating total inventory loss for some time to come.


clancy688 said:
Thanks for your answer.

Interest: Yes, mainly I131 and C137. Other isotopes are not of concern. I played a little with the Chernobyl radioactive materials and IAEOs I131 conversion table. In Chernobyl, I131 and C137 alone were responsible for over 80% of the converted I131 activity. Other isotopes won't change the "danger"-math.

Ignoring: Yeah, of course.

Core retaining: I skimmed through your documents but didn't find charts for core releases based on partial meltdowns and containment venting. I have to admit that I was hoping for your response when I created this thread. There's only a german source which calculated core releases based on different accident scenarios:
http://www.biu-hannover.de/atom/unsicher/teil2.htm#4
I think in our case it's something between "Heizrohrleck I am Dampferzeuger" (don't know how to translate this - probably a leak in the condenser) and "Kleines Leck I am Sicherheitsbehälter (Niederdruckpfad)" (Containment leakage)
Overall I'd think that 1-10% of the core inventory of I131 and C137 has escaped.

Airborne release: Well, that's the only thing we know for sure, since there are the NISA numbers they used for INES-7

Liquid release: That's a good question... I think all damaged or broken fuel rods have probably released most of their fission products into the basement. The constant waterflow should have washed it out.

Age for spent fuel: I think if we're only concentrating on C137 then age should be of no concern. We could say that all iodine is effectively gone, but that nearly all of the original C137 is still there. I don't think that the rods are older than five years.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
15K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 194 ·
7
Replies
194
Views
60K