Nuclear Catastrophie

[Tman]

Dean, having worked for long shifts in full chemical gear I can tell you hooking up those outside pumps is a monumental task even in the best of conditions.

[octane]

try arch-conservative Ann Coulter's newest (March 16) column "A GLOWING REPORT ON RADIATION":

http://www.anncoulter.com/

It's been quite a while since I've seen such a magnificent collection of
non sequiturs and straw-men.
What a wonderful splendid textbook of logical fallacies.

[Dean Los Angeles]

I hope the Japanese are listening.

A special working group set up in Ukraine has passed Japan its proposals on stabilizing the situation at the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant in Japan.

The group comprises specialists who were involved in clearing the aftermath of the nuclear breakdown at the Chornobyl NPP in Ukraine.

"The proposals were passed by first deputy head of the State Agency for the Zone of Alienation Dmytro Bobro and deputy head of the National Security and Defense Service Serhiy Parashin through the Japanese embassy in Ukraine," the Ukrainian Emergencies Service said in a statement circulated on Thursday.

According to Ukrainian specialists, to bring the heat processes in Fukushima-1 reactors under control, it is necessary "first, to ensure a normal cooling mode in the spent fuel pools by pumping water, sea water as a last resort, into them; second, the type of reactor fuel coolant needs to be changed - water, which might trigger a steam-zirconium reaction fraught with the release of hydrogen and potential blasts, should be replaced with low-melting and chemically neutral metal, for instance tin which will pull heat away from the fuel rods (molten or damaged) towards the inner walls of the reactor, while continuing to use sea water to cool down its outer walls".

The tin 'lake' inside the reactor will "reduce the discharge of heavy fission products and bring ionizing radiation levels down. Chipped tin could be pumped in through steam communications under pressure using cylinders with helium or argon".

[Moxnix]

http://www.japanquakemap.com/

[DocBeech]

Some of the world nuclear agencies are rating this as a 6 out of 7 on the INES or International Nuclear Incident Scale. Which makes sense since 3 mile Island was a 5 with no casualties, and this one already has 15 dead, and 27 being treated for radiation. They believe core 4 has been dry for days now which means the fuel rods would have cracked leaking very dangerous radioactive material in to the atmosphere. Even though they are working on the situation no one has been close to the cores in days. They are using Global Hawk Drones to try to take photos and assess the problem remotely. The firefighters though are the ones in real trouble. They were exposed to levels of radiation that would cause sickenss or serious health issues, and are being treated at an "unkown" location right now. Meaning they want them out of the public eye for some reason? I think they recieved lethal or harmful doses of radiation and they don't want the knowledge public yet.

[Moxnix]

http://www.japanquakemap.com/

Repost.  Takes a moment to run, but maps the more than 550 aftershock after the big one. 

[wobblywalrus]

My work occasionally involves saving bridges or roads during floods.  Often we do work in or near the rivers during the high water.  Occasionally it becomes too dangerous, futile, or both and we get the people and equipment out of harms way.  The bridge or road is on its own.  We come back when everything calms down and we fix or replace as needed.

I know there will not be a nuclear explosion, but what will happen if the workers withdraw from the reactors and let them burn?

[hotrod]

It depends on what is burning and what the local winds are doing.

The good thing is, in the northern hemisphere the prevailing winds "most of the time" are out of the west, north west. Although on the coast you can get on shore winds, odds are more often than not the winds would carry most of the smoke and particulate matter out to sea.

As you say, sometimes the better part of valor is to abandon the problem and let it go. In this case though if the problem is super heated control rods in a dry storage pool, it is one of those things that will only get worse for along time, so it probably justifies some extraordinary efforts to control it like the folks at Chernobyl who did the initial helicopter drops to smother the reactor.

One of the issues is, that the Criticality of the fuel is determined not only by its amount, but in part by its geometry, and in part by how it is moderated.
I use the word Criticality to refer to how close it is to producing a self sustaining chain reaction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticality_accident

One of the ways they keep special nuclear material from going critical (starting a chain reaction) is to control its geometry. A given mass of material might be super critical (act like a bomb although very ineffeciently with only a few pounds explosive yield) if in the shape of a sphere. It might be critical ( acting like nuclear reactor with a self sustaining chain reaction) if it is shaped like a fat cylinder, and just below critical if shaped like a long thin rod. Same amount of material but the geometry changes how many neutrons actually hit another fissionable atom. In a sphere you have the maximum mass to surface area ratio, so relatively few neutrons escape the mass without running into another fissionable atom. In the fat cylinder you have more surface area for the same mass so more neutrons escape without causing another fission. As a thin rod, you have maximum surface area and most of the neutrons escape without hitting another fissionable atom.

If the fuel rods get hot enough to melt and run like candle wax they could puddle into a mass that is more sphere like than rod like and begin to produce lots of energy due to a chain reaction. That will create lots of heat usually followed by a small explosion that blows the molten mass apart, but in the process it would produce lots of new radioactive decay products and lots of small particles of highly radioactive material in the form of smoke. This is something that they very much want to avoid. I do not know for sure if the fuel elements chemical make up precludes that sort of melting scenario or not. It might be physically impossible for a serious criticality to occur and only a lesser situation where the metal gets very very hot and gives off very fine particulates (like smoke) that would spread large amounts of radioactive material about. I simply am not up on the specific fuel pellet design of these plants and what can or cannot happen at very high temperatures. In most cases I am familiar with the uranium is in the form of oxides so it cannot "burn" in the classic sense but it can get to very high temperatures.

Moderation can also cause a problem, as a mass that is in the wrong shape and  just below a critical state (not quite capable of a chain reaction) can become critical (or super critical) if suddenly immersed in water. So they also have to worry about what happens if they let the fuel run dry and then try to flood it with water later.

Bottom line, this is the sort of situation that in most cases is better attacked vigorously and early. If you get behind the power curve it is like a spin on the salt at some point you cannot catch it any more, and your going for a ride no matter what you do. I don't think they are at that point of no return, but giving up too early could guarantee a bad situation would get worse. Unlike a house burning that you can back off and wait for it to burn out, this in my opinion would not be the sort of situation you would want to with draw from until you are absolutely sure you have no other option.

Someone with actual nuclear fuel design experience would have to address the details of what is possible and impossible due to the actual physical form and makeup of the fuel rods in this plant design. I don't have the background to address that specific question in detail only in theory of certain what if situations.


Some of you might find this article on the "Watt's Up with That" blog interesting:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/17/live-real-time-monitoring-map-of-radiation-counts-in-the-usa/#more-36112

Here are a couple other blog posts on this general topic:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/17/in-light-of-radiation-fears-i-offer-this-repost/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/14/some-quotes-news-bytes-on-the-nuclear-energy-tsunami/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/11/nuclear-meltdown-race-to-save-reactors-in-japan/





Larry

[Dean Los Angeles]

They can't walk away from it because it will keep releasing unacceptable levels of radioactivity.

Units 5-6 have a generator controlling things and they would probably be able to put those units back on line sometime in the future.

Units 1-4 are still out of control and unpredictable. There is no other way to put it. All of them are junk.

Despite the explosion at unit 1 the containment vessel seems to be intact. It may take another week or two to get the pumps working. The damage from the explosion and radiation will complicate this.
I was surprised that it took 5 days to run power 6/10ths of a mile. Turns out the didn't even START until Thursday.
Still wildly unpredictable until that time, but it looks like it is holding for now. The guess is that 70% of the fuel rods are damaged.

Unit 2 may have a leak in the suppression chamber at the bottom. A big problem to deal with, but when the pumps are running they will have time to deal with it.
There has been continuous steam coming out the hole in the side of the building. They have been releasing pressure in spurts to control the pressure in all of the units. The continuous steam isn't good. The guess is that 30% of the fuel rods are damaged.

Unit 3 had a large explosion. It was felt 25 miles away. The damage looks pretty severe. There has been a massive steam cloud coming from the wreckage. The spent fuel pool is an unknown quantity. The containment vessel looks like it is intact. This one is the only one with plutonium in the fuel. Still potential for big problems.

Unit 4 is the biggest worry. They are all BIG worries, but this one is the worst. The reactor was shut down for maintenance and hasn't a problem after the earthquake. Nothing was said or noted about the spent fuel pool until there was an explosion. Because there was no fuel in the reactor it had to come from the spent fuel pool. There was no steam coming from it that was in any picture or report. There was no steam coming out after the explosion either. They are reasonably sure that the pool has cracked from the earthquake or explosion or both. Some water sloshed out during the earthquake.

Because of the wreckage and high radiation levels the fix is not guaranteed. If the pool won't hold water then they will probably have to bury it. 

I think the biggest obstacle to all of this is Tokyo Electric Power Company. They ran out of fuel on a pump. They let the pool they were getting the water from run dry. They waited almost a week to run a power cable. They have a big history of lying. They pulled everyone out at one point.

You could argue that they pulled the people out to protect them. At the same time they are endangering millions.

The U.S. recommended a 50 mile evacuation zone for U.S. citizens and military. It was also our way of telling the Japanese citizens they should too.

In China there has been panic buying of salt. The rumor was that the radiation is falling into the ocean and they will be buying radioactive sea salt.

I think this is largely the reason Japan has stuck to a level 4 on the International Nuclear Event Scale. (Just raised to 5) It is clearly higher but they don't want to panic the population. On the other hand, that ship has sailed, hasn't it?

I know 4 co-workers that have purchased potassium iodide.

I can only refer to The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.  "Don't Panic"

[johnneilson]

If you think it is difficult to find Iodine pills, try buying a Geiger counter or dose meter.

Reminds me of the Y2K hysteria.

Am I concerned, yes, on several levels. But, I am more afraid of what will happen in the future by "mass hysteria".

John

[DocBeech]

Well we can't eat seafood from the gulf, or the pacific now, looks like the atlantic has a monopoly soon to come

[wobblywalrus]

Thanx for the thoughtful answers to my question.  The depth of knowledge in the group of people on this forum always amazes me.

[fastman614]

Okay... here I am for the present in Quebec, Canada. The only English language programming on the radio is our venerable CBC.... so, the hysteria monger here in Canada are attempting to use  the Japanese situation as wa y to "force" the governments to back down on the coninued or expanded use of nuclear power.

The interesting thing is tha all of the nuclear power facilitie in Canada are nowhere near any oceans.... the Great Lakes don't quite qualify as oceans, do they?

The big question tha has been bothering me and, to date, the radio pundits have not even discussed, is this: Did the reactors suffer the damage from the earthquake directly, or did they actually survive it only to have their emergency infrastructure wiped out by the tsunami?..... in essence, was the earthquake directly the cause of the catastrophe or was the resulting tsunami the cause?

Because, if the reactors can survive the earthquake...... in an area like central Canada which is not noted for large magnitude earthquakes, and having virtually no possibility of resultant tsunamis even with a large earthquake .... are the fear mongers really nothing more than that?

[wobblywalrus]

Sea level is referenced from a point on the earth called a bench mark.  The bench mark certainly would not be on the Oregon coast where the land drops up to 30 feet in earthquakes or in the Oregon Cascades that measurably rise.  The geodetic survey chose a location they felt would be very stable.  It would not rise or fall and there would be little chance of an elevation change from an earthquake.  The benchmark is somewhere in the eastern Canadian arctic on the stable land mass called the "Canadian Shield."  Eastern Canada has some of the most stable ground on the planet.

[Milwaukee Midget]

Eastern Canada has some of the most stable ground on the planet.

A point that seldom comes up.  Mostly granite and gneiss.  Geologically speaking, it would also be among the safest places on earth to bury spent nuclear waste.