If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.
Special Thanks To:
Aaron Holmes
Aaron Wheeler
Adam Horden
Alan Scrimgeour
Andre
Andrew Haynes
Anonymous000
asabase
Austin Weil
barney
Barry
Bert Hickman
Bill Kukowski
Blitzorn
Brandon Paradelas
Bruce Bowling
BubeeMike
Byong Park
Cesiumsponge
Chris F.
Chris Hooper
Corey Worthington
Derek Woodroffe
Dalus
Dan Strother
Daniel Davis
Daniel Uhrenholt
datasheetarchive
Dave Billington
Dave Marshall
David F.
Dennis Rogers
drelectrix
Dr. John Gudenas
Dr. Spark
E.TexasTesla
eastvoltresearch
Eirik Taylor
Erik Dyakov
Erlend^SE
Finn Hammer
Firebug24k
GalliumMan
Gary Peterson
George Slade
GhostNull
Gordon Mcknight
Graham Armitage
Grant
GreySoul
Henry H
IamSmooth
In memory of Leo Powning
Jacob Cash
James Howells
James Pawson
Jeff Greenfield
Jeff Thomas
Jesse Frost
Jim Mitchell
jlr134
Joe Mastroianni
John Forcina
John Oberg
John Willcutt
Jon Newcomb
klugesmith
Leslie Wright
Lutz Hoffman
Mads Barnkob
Martin King
Mats Karlsson
Matt Gibson
Matthew Guidry
mbd
Michael D'Angelo
Mikkel
mileswaldron
mister_rf
Neil Foster
Nick de Smith
Nick Soroka
nicklenorp
Nik
Norman Stanley
Patrick Coleman
Paul Brodie
Paul Jordan
Paul Montgomery
Ped
Peter Krogen
Peter Terren
PhilGood
Richard Feldman
Robert Bush
Royce Bailey
Scott Fusare
Scott Newman
smiffy
Stella
Steven Busic
Steve Conner
Steve Jones
Steve Ward
Sulaiman
Thomas Coyle
Thomas A. Wallace
Thomas W
Timo
Torch
Ulf Jonsson
vasil
Vaxian
vladi mazzilli
wastehl
Weston
William Kim
William N.
William Stehl
Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
... not Russel! Registered Member #1
Joined: Thu Jan 26 2006, 12:18AM
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Posts: 1052
Grenadier wrote ...
Well then, I might be needing my KI after all. Those reactors just seem to be getting worse by the day.
Again, it's important to note that unless you're living in Japan, the idea that you'll be needing nuclear fallout pills remains extremely unlikely -- I-131 has a fairly short half-life. It will take almost an entire half-life just for any fallout to cross the pacific, and given the diet of most Americans, several more half-lives before any iodine is ingested. It was a much bigger problem when nuclear testing was putting I-131 on the ground in a matter of hours rather than days.
More worrisome is the potential for release of cesium 137 from the spent fuel ponds, but KI won't do anything about that. Fortunately, cesium 137 mostly tends to end up near the reactor, so it's much more a concern for Japan than for the US. Prevailing winds would also tend to deposit most of it in the Pacific Ocean, where it will quickly be dispersed. I would expect, though, that keeping the ponds cool is extremely high on the priority list.
tl;dr: Nothing worth worrying about here in the US yet, but if things don't turn around for Japan and start going right things could get messy over there.
pauleddy wrote ...
The sad thing is that because of this disaster, nuclear agentcies in the EU are shutting down some of their older reactors in fear of this happen to there plants. Germany is shutting down all of their pre 1980 plants in till safety revalulation are complete. this should be a lesson for more plants or at least replacing the outdated ones. Here the US there hasn't been a new plant sence the 70's
I can't really be too heartbroken about the shutting down of the old reactors. Yes, it's a bit of a knee-jerk reaction, but it seems this disaster underscores that the several redundant safety systems are not nearly redundant enough. True, on the one hand, it's amazing that the reactors could withstand both the earthquake and the tsunami and not fare worse than they have. On the other hand, however, it seems we could be doing a lot better. There are some promising new reactor designs out there that range from much safer to meltdown proof; unfortunately the much safer reactors are politically unpopular because they can be used to produce nuclear weapons, and as far as I know the meltdown proof designs have yet to prove long-term financial viability.
What I do find heartbreaking is that it's going to be the reactor designs of the 1970s that dictate the future of nuclear power in the United States (and probably many other nations). Even if this current mess gets no worse, it's going to be better than two decades before the general public is willing to consider nuclear power again. I also worry that this will end up being quite the PR coup for natural gas and "clean coal." Then again, from what I understand, it does take quite a bit of fossil fuels to build and maintain a fission power plant, so maybe this will finally get us moving in a new direction. Looks like we'll get to see how it all pans out in the next several years.
Registered Member #89
Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 02:40PM
Location: Zadar, Croatia
Posts: 3145
Let me get this straight - the units 4, 5, 6 that were shut down previously are not only showing signs of overheating, but the unit 4 actually blew up as well and set it's spent fuel stack on fire? Or was all the damage caused externally by unit 2/3? Looks like too much information is being covered up now.
Does anyone have information on power output curve vs. time of this type reactor after shutdown? I've heard that cooling may be required for months even with no fission occurring. How long have they been off for maintenance actually? I can't find that information anywhere.
This would also help understanding how hot actually the spent fuel is - like enough to spontaneously (or easily) combust if left uncooled? I assume they usually don't have time to wait for it to cool down in the reactor when they swap it, so they just remove it hot and let it sit in the pools. Depending on when it was removed I agree it can be more dangerous than the reactors themselves if devoid of cooling.
Registered Member #3414
Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245
Marko wrote ...
Let me get this straight - the units 4, 5, 6 that were shut down previously are not only showing signs of overheating, but the unit 4 actually blew up as well and set it's spent fuel stack on fire? Or was all the damage caused externally by unit 2/3? Looks like too much information is being covered up now.
Does anyone have information on power output curve vs. time of this type reactor after shutdown? I've heard that cooling may be required for months even with no fission occurring. How long have they been off for maintenance actually? I can't find that information anywhere.
This would also help understanding how hot actually the spent fuel is - like enough to spontaneously (or easily) combust if left uncooled? I assume they usually don't have time to wait for it to cool down in the reactor when they swap it, so they just remove it hot and let it sit in the pools. Depending on when it was removed I agree it can be more dangerous than the reactors themselves if devoid of cooling.
Marko
All the fuel from No. 4 is in the pool, along with old, spent, fuel. It gives off heat (radioactivity) and has to be cooled. the water in the pool boiled off, and the fuel started burning (meltdown). There is less fuel in the 5 and six pools, but they were up to 84 degrees C earlier.
Registered Member #543
Joined: Tue Feb 20 2007, 04:26PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4992
With all the corporate spin doctors in the UK working flat out to avoid unfavourable comparisons between Fukushima Daiichi and British nuclear installations, it's not surpising that no one has mentioned the Kyshtym Disaster of September 1957.
At the Kyshtum installation in the Urals, the cooling system of a tank of high level nuclear waste failed, such that an explosion of superheated steam ejected some 80 tons of radioactive material into the environment.
It has since emerged that the CIA had first thought the explosion was an undeclared atomic test. When they later learned that it was an industrial accident, they kept the matter quiet so as not to raise concern over the safety of the US atomic programme.
Large tracts of land near Chelyabinsk remain dangerously contaminated to this day, and masquerade as the 'East Urals Nature Reserve' which no one may enter.
Many people died, some quickly, some more slowly, some not for decades of cumulative debility
... not Russel! Registered Member #1
Joined: Thu Jan 26 2006, 12:18AM
Location: Tempe, Arizona
Posts: 1052
Marko wrote ...
Let me get this straight - the units 4, 5, 6 that were shut down previously are not only showing signs of overheating, but the unit 4 actually blew up as well and set it's spent fuel stack on fire? Or was all the damage caused externally by unit 2/3? Looks like too much information is being covered up now.
Does anyone have information on power output curve vs. time of this type reactor after shutdown? I've heard that cooling may be required for months even with no fission occurring. How long have they been off for maintenance actually? I can't find that information anywhere.
This would also help understanding how hot actually the spent fuel is - like enough to spontaneously (or easily) combust if left uncooled? I assume they usually don't have time to wait for it to cool down in the reactor when they swap it, so they just remove it hot and let it sit in the pools. Depending on when it was removed I agree it can be more dangerous than the reactors themselves if devoid of cooling.
Marko
It's definitely the spent fuel that is the biggest concern right now. Evidently, without circulation of the cooling water, it readily gets hot enough to boil away the cooling water and then self-combust, which is what happened earlier. Depending on how the spent fuel is packaged, it may need to be cooled in water for years. Note that in the US and Canada, spent fuel is required to be stored such that even with catastrophic loss of coolant, the outer cladding on the fuel will not melt, so no combustion can take place. It seems quite odd to me that Japan would have more lax regulations on this matter. Anyone know why their fuel is combusting?
Registered Member #3414
Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245
Chris Russell wrote ...
.It's definitely the spent fuel that is the biggest concern right now. Evidently, without circulation of the cooling water, it readily gets hot enough to boil away the cooling water and then self-combust, which is what happened earlier. Depending on how the spent fuel is packaged, it may need to be cooled in water for years. Note that in the US and Canada, spent fuel is required to be stored such that even with catastrophic loss of coolant, the outer cladding on the fuel will not melt, so no combustion can take place. It seems quite odd to me that Japan would have more lax regulations on this matter. Anyone know why their fuel is combusting?
I'm speculating a bit here, Chris, but as I understand it, spent fuel requires 'processing' before it is safe and can be stored without being cooled. I assume the 'processing' involves 'diluting or dispersing' the waste in another medium, and recovering the plutonium and uranium. I believe there is only one 'processing plant' in the UK, at Sellafield. I understand that after processing it is stored deep underground.
Registered Member #3414
Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245
The Japanese government is considering using military helicopters to drop water onto the spent fuel pools using the same techniques they use for forest fires, but even if they get a 'direct hit', won't it all just splash back out (like putting a cup under a tap and turning it on fully), taking the fuel rods with it?
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.
Nuclear events taking place in Japan.
