Should I Be Concerned About the Igniting of Our Atmosphere Due to Fukushima?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 05:58 AM
link   
From Wikipedia:
"Plutonium is a transuranic radioactive chemical element... It reacts with... nitrogen... Both plutonium-239 and plutonium-241 are fissile, meaning that they can sustain a nuclear chain reaction."

Here's hoping that if there is another incident like the one at Fukushima Daiichi Unit 3 which allegedly spewed plutonium isotopes into the air having had its MOX-fuel-based reactor explode, then the fissile plutonium isotopes fizzle out before they react with the nitrogen in the atmosphere thereby igniting that atmosphere in a nuclear chain reaction.

Footnote: not only was cold fusion once thought to be impossible, it was believed by engineers that the design and development of a V8 engine for cars was impossible, yet, since then, we have had the V8, the V6, the double V6 meaning the W12, and even a V5 engine.

Back to plutonium: it's a nasty, nasty poison.

I've already pointed out that the oxygen content of the atmosphere has decreased since the A-bomb was developed and since Edward Teller came across with his premises. The decrease in oxygen content may represent an increase in nitrogen content. My, my!

P.M.
edit on 26-7-2014 by theworldisnotenough because: Corrected grammar.




posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

Yes!!!! you did it. I'm proud of you
you did some research and posted some evidence. Couple things though first I would shy away from using wikipedia as a source. It's been know to be full of inaccuracies, and you need to provide a link to your source so other people can go through it. But sense you put in the effort I'll go ahead and discuss this with you. Now when it is said that Plutonium reacts with Nitrogen they are talking a bout a chemical reaction to form PuN (plutonium nitride) This is not a fission reaction and in no way makes the nitrogen ignitable.
www.webelements.com...

Now the only Nitride of Pu is Plutonium Nitride PuN, PuN is created by heating Pu in nitrogen gas (N2) at high temperatures. This actually more than likely happened at Fukushima Chernobyl and atomic testing. But PuN is an unstable molecule and decomposes very quickly. With in a few days at room temperature. Making any PuN created during any of these events long gone.
pubs.rsc.org...#!divAbstract

But even if it was not and stayed in the atmosphere it still would not have any effect on making the atmosphere fissile. Because




The energy loss to radiation always overcompensates the gains due to the reaction. This is true even with rather extravagant assumptions concerning the reactivity of nitrogen nuclei in the air.


fas.org...

Also any Nuclear accident involving fissile uranium will release Pu because U238 gets turned into Pu239 by neutron capture. So MOX fuel is not needed.

Regarding your foot note you have yet to provide a source that physicist claimed that Cold fusion was impossible with proof of that claim and a source saying it is now possible with proof that it is now possible. And decreasing Ox and increasing Nitrogen has no relevance to this discussion as I just proved above. If anything its a good thing as far as Plutonium is concerned because Pu has 3 oxidative states some of which are stable so less O and more N means less Pu in the air.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 06:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: theworldisnotenoughWhat you and the other respondents apparently choose to allow to fly over your heads is that Edward Teller's concerns about ignition of the atmosphere were CONFIRMED by his colleagues albeit at a low probability of happening.

So, this raises the question: back then, what were the calculated odds of an ignition of the atmosphere by a nuclear bomb test... one out of 1,000,000,000 or one out of 1,000,000 or one out of 1,000? Were people lying about the odds of such an event just to get the Manhattan Project back on track? Let me tell you: there's a lot of lying coming out of governments and the mainstream media these days.



In an "All Experts" Internet forum at en.allexperts.com... , on the subject of nuclear ignition of the atmosphere, in a reply dated 3/17/2009, NK chimed in with:

"Oppenhiemer, the head scientist that managed the Manhattan Project, theorized that it was possible that an atomic bomb could cause an exothermic reaction with atmospheric oxygen and nitrogen, but not probable. Before an atomic bomb was detonated, that group of scientists calculated that there was a slightly less than 3 to a million chance that the atmosphere would ignite."

A three-to-one-million chance is equivalent to 1 out of 333,333.

To put this into perspective, the odds of winning the top jackpot of the Jersey Cash 5 drawing on a one-dollar bet are 1:658,008, and people have won the top jackpot on a one-dollar bet.

I can continue with even slimmer odds of winning top lottery jackpots, but you readers should have already gotten the point.

P.M.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: theworldisnotenough

originally posted by: theworldisnotenoughWhat you and the other respondents apparently choose to allow to fly over your heads is that Edward Teller's concerns about ignition of the atmosphere were CONFIRMED by his colleagues albeit at a low probability of happening.

So, this raises the question: back then, what were the calculated odds of an ignition of the atmosphere by a nuclear bomb test... one out of 1,000,000,000 or one out of 1,000,000 or one out of 1,000? Were people lying about the odds of such an event just to get the Manhattan Project back on track? Let me tell you: there's a lot of lying coming out of governments and the mainstream media these days.



In an "All Experts" Internet forum at en.allexperts.com... , on the subject of nuclear ignition of the atmosphere, in a reply dated 3/17/2009, NK chimed in with:

"Oppenhiemer, the head scientist that managed the Manhattan Project, theorized that it was possible that an atomic bomb could cause an exothermic reaction with atmospheric oxygen and nitrogen, but not probable. Before an atomic bomb was detonated, that group of scientists calculated that there was a slightly less than 3 to a million chance that the atmosphere would ignite."

A three-to-one-million chance is equivalent to 1 out of 333,333.

To put this into perspective, the odds of winning the top jackpot of the Jersey Cash 5 drawing on a one-dollar bet are 1:658,008, and people have won the top jackpot on a one-dollar bet.

I can continue with even slimmer odds of winning top lottery jackpots, but you readers should have already gotten the point.

P.M.


Thats all fine and dandy that Oppenhiemer calculated this before an atomic bomb was even detonated but then a couple years later Teller and two other physicist came along after the bomb was detonated and proved his calculations wrong. I find it funny that you had an issue with the age of the paper I posted than post a quote from a forum that quoted a calculation that was even older than the source I provided.
edit on 27-7-2014 by BGTM90 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: theworldisnotenough


Conducted as part of the Manhattan Project by the U.S. Army on July 16, 1945, the Trinity Test was the first ever detonation of a nuclear device.

The bomb's initial development was slowed by fears of project scientist Edward Teller who speculated that a fission bomb might ignite the Earth's atmosphere with a self-sustaining fusion reaction of nitrogen nuclei.



The above is from Youtube video entitled "5 Experiments that Could have Destroyed the World" with Youtube I.D. of A9S9gwhS6Yk starting at elapsed time of 1:24.

The video goes on to explain that recalculations were done proving that such an eventuality was highly unlikely, and so the project continued.

Well, that's all well and good for an atom bomb of that day.

Supposedly the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex has spent fuel rods in a precarious state which, if touched together, could set off a chain reaction fission event equal in power to 14,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs.

What will this do to the nitrogen atoms of the atmosphere? Will our atmosphere ignite due to Fukushima as Edward Teller feared during the Manhattan Project decades ago?

Does this mean that planet Earth can be turned into a miniature version of the sun if only momentarily?

Calling all physicists!

P.M.

The main problem with this idea is the composition of the spent fuel rods in question. The Fukushima reactors used MOX (mixed oxides) fuel. The materials in these rods are not conducive to the type of fission necessary for an atomic explosion. At worse, they could generate a meltdown. Only specific isotopes of Uranium and Plutonium are usable for bomb making, and they generally require extremely high purity. The combination of isotopes found in MOX fuel rods would actually hinder the type of runaway reaction necessary for detonation by absorption of the neutron flux that initiates an atomic explosion. Hope that helps.





new topics

top topics
 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join