Is Fukushima fixable?

This is something I have often wondered about and would like to open a discussion. Please let us keep it strictly to the actual physical problem at Fukushima.

Okay here we go:

1. There are 3 destroyed nuclear reactors.
2. What can be done technology wise to mitigate the problem?

No matter how many different ways I try to wrap my head around Fukushima solutions... I honestly can't come up with any viable answer.

I think it's pretty safe to assume that at this point, 1,327 days later, if there was a whole lot that could be done, it would have been done by now.

When people start proposing solutions...they rapidly forget the reality of the situation which is this:

Technology wise, when it comes to the three destroyed reactors, you are basically talking a pump to keep pumping cold water down three holes. That's it..it just gets worse from that point forward.

2 of the 3 cores are most likely at the bottom of what's left of the containment vessels... reactor 3 is any ones guess as to how much core material remains inside.

We know there is no fission, because there is no steam and because there is no steam, that means the outer crust of the cores is below the boiling point of water. There is no possible way for Tepco to hide the amount of steam if it wasn't.

But every time they try to lower the water levels in the reactor buildings, the temperature starts going up.

They are really between a rock and a hard place at this point....they have to keep pumping cold water down the holes because they can't risk the cores heating to the boiling point of water. They can't stop the flow of groundwater because they need that as well to cool the cores.

They can't dig them up because of the massive radiation levels involved.

I just can't see a way out of the situation that's even remotely plausible.

What am I missing? (besides brains, that's obvious)

a reply to: RickinVa

So far past being fixed it's not even funny. Soon, the Godzillas will begin emerging.

Any number of things could cause another Fukushima in any number of places around the world.

Don't worry, just await the inevitable.

a reply to: RickinVa

Build a concrete hemisphere in four pieces/wedges, north south east and west of the facility atop transports like the ones used to move the Saturn 5 rockets, then push them in to place. Then mine under the facility but above the water table and pour vast amounts of concrete to prevent any core material leakage into the groundwater and soil. If we can build the Hoover dam more than 1/2 a century ago we can achieve a project such as the above.

All that's required on Humanity's part is materials and effort not to mention rather a few lives lost due to radioactive exposure I imagine.

a reply to: andy06shake

The problem is that the water table is very shallow... they are right next to the ocean... that's one of the biggest issues...the groundwater level is above the basement level...its a bad situation.

The damage is already done, but i agree that concrete is the best method. It's just a matter of figuring out how to bury the thing...

a reply to: RickinVa

One would have imagined company's such as Tepco would have foreseen this particular problem arising and had the common decency to build said facility in a rather more stable environment. The again chance would be a fine thing!

a reply to: daaskapital

I have already been on the record repeatedly saying that eventually Tepco will dump a bunch of boron and concrete on top of it and walk away... but that leaves a scenario of thousands of years of leakage into the Pacific Ocean.

I think the Japanese have really screwed the proverbial pooch on this one and they know it. Strange world in which we live.

a reply to: andy06shake

Tepco isn't the only company that built reactors in geologically unstable areas... they are the only ones that it has come back to bite them on the ass so far.

a reply to: RickinVa

Short of the invention of some kind of industrial strength biological organism that soaks up radioactive particulate matter and then becomes inert enclosing the thing in concrete is the only viable option.

Serious question/option,
Can Tepco build a hard reinforced concrete shelter over the contaminated site and detonate a nuclear device suspended inside the reinforced structure.
Thus forming a kind off Nuclear "Weld" covering the three ruptured reactors.

a reply to: foxhound2459

Detonation of any atomics to fix the problem seems like a Dr Strangelove notion to me. The concrete will never be able to withstand the force of the explosion. All you would do is fracture any containment vessel built and probably introduce more radioactivity into the atmosphere.

You're certainly thinking outside the box, ile give you that.

a reply to: RickinVa
In this case, the only solution is dilution.
How convenient having the ocean right there to mix it into.

I think we need some kind of ET tech to vanquish that sucker to a black hole

a reply to: andy06shake

Then mine under the facility but above the water table and pour vast amounts of concrete to prevent any core material leakage into the groundwater and soil. If we can build the Hoover dam more than 1/2 a century ago we can achieve a project such as the above.

The Hoover dam was built on solid bedrock, not down on the beach. They diverted a river channel to build it, not an entire ocean. It is impossible to contain an entire ocean.You could try digging a hole in the sand on the beach and see. The plants were established on the edge of the ocean in order to facilitate the enormous amounts of water needed to cool them during operation. This means the water table for the entire ocean is right there below the plants. They are at sea level essentially. The amount of water in and around the cores ebbs and flows with rain and storms.

They have tied to imagine this idea of yours already with a 'giant ice wall'. Ultimately, any attempt to hold the water back if successful, also keeps that water from cooling the cores. The whole place is fractured like an egg shell from the quake. Leaks are two way into and out of the facility. The enormous weight of the buildings themselves also makes it impossible to "dig under" them.

The predicament overall is just like the OP has surmised. The cores are like 'cold' stars buried in wet sand below huge slabs of concrete. How do you get to them, take them apart and move them? Move them where? How long before the 'cold' stars are safe to handle? How long does a star live? All the safeguards were designed to prevent this from happening. Once it happened though there is no viable solution to put the Genie back in the bottle. Pandoras box is open and the evil has fled into the world.

Rots of ruck Japan.

a reply to: daaskapital

The damage is already done, but i agree that concrete is the best method. It's just a matter of figuring out how to bury the thing…

Containment is breached. Any attempt to re-contain the cores will create the same problem all over again. Gasses build up and boom, breach of containment. Thats what all those marvelous containment features were established to prevent in the first place.The tent on number one is capturing those gasses and filtering them… all they need to do is keep changing the filters on that giant air cleaner… forever.

Besides where to bury the contaminated filters the "solution" to number one "outgassing" is not a solution, just a bandaid.

a reply to: intrptr

I never said it would be easy and totally agree the situation appears rather untenable. Possibly concrete is not the best or only available material for the job, maybe something lighter in weight, yet still retains a measure of shielding is required?

How would you address the problem intrptr?

I really have no clue, but it seems that there is a fix for this, we're just too ignorant to find it. Ultimately, the real problem is a runaway nuclear reaction. If they could slow down or halt the reaction, then most of the problems with Fukushima are dealt with. Right now, cleaning up by removing the rods and loose material to safe containment is all they got and that is a slow and touchy process.

Can the energy from the reaction be transported away by something other than water? Can they add anything directly to the nuclear material that will dilute it and slow or stop the reaction? Is there anything that would interfere or cancel out the reaction in the melt down, like some electromagnetic energy field? What would happen if they super cooled it, would it explode or slow the reaction? Can they introduce a liquid that will deposit a reaction suppressing substance on the core material? If it gets hotter, can they vent, condense and collect the by products, or will it get hotter until it blows again? Is there any substance that radioactive particles are attracted to and get stuck on for containment? Can the process of radioactive decay be accelerated some how?

Deal with the runaway reaction and the problem will be solved. How that can be done is the big question.

ETA: Here is a Star Trek fix. Create a small black hole and suspend it near the reactor to slow time around the meltdown until we have the tech to deal properly with it. Of course we'll need a bigger reactor near by to power the black hole. Argh!

a reply to: andy06shake

I don't have a solution. Thats the problem with the technology. As long as they work, the energy is "controlled" and all that containment isn't really necessary.

When they "break" there is no containment that will hold the 'uncontrolled' energy inside.

They sort of compromised when they built the damn things. The compromise is one of cost vs. worst case scenario. They didn't cover every base because you can't. Besides, the worst case scenario was thought to be unlikely…

Awww, that'll never happen (engineers cross fingers behind backs).

a reply to: RickinVa

Phytoremediation was used at the Chernobyl site. Certain plants remove certain radioactive materials from soil and ground water. A table of plants suitable for various materials is provided here.

a reply to: intrptr

Certainly a sticky wicket if ever there was one. New materials are required I imagine or some kind of biological agent that soaks up radiation.