It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
On the video, a professor Sekimura Naoto University of Tokyo was "broken hard, especially the reactor building of Unit 3 by a hydrogen explosion, a crane to move the fuel should be in the ceiling, appeared to fall on top of the fuel pool look. itself and fuel level of the pool is visible, there is a possibility that the damaged fuel rods by the crane fell,
Originally posted by kismetphayze
Did those of you who were watching the NHK feed notice the guy in the offices behind the news anchor walking around with the mask on?
Originally posted by okiecowboy
make sure you send the proper plugs...
we see what happens when you don't have the right one
By way of qualifications, my training is in physics in which I have a bachelor's degree. I also worked for five years at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station in New Jersey. Like the Fukushima plants, Oyster Creek is a GE BWR-I with a Mark I containment. It has a power rating roughly 1/3 higher than Fukushima Daiichi 1.
I believe I have a possible mechanism for how the water got to both the turbine building and also the ocean.
Now here is one of those dirty little secrets that may come into play in this circumstance. It is almost a certainty that some number of heat exchanger tubes have leaks. This is almost inevitable over time in an operating plant, nuclear or otherwise, especially one which uses saltwater as the cooling medium. It would not be noted under normal operating conditions because the radioactivity of the water would not be that great.
Fukushima Status Update 3/27 (Reactor water is in the ocean)
Given the difficulties of the working environment and the problems with the leaking water I think it is optimistic to think they will have core cooling systems returned to service within the next week at any of the units. This will mean more feed and bleed to remove heat. Also, they will need to track down the exact pathway(s) water is taking to get to the turbine building and ocean. They may or may not be able to isolate the problem and stop the leaking. Next best would be to be able to contain the leak at its source and drain that container continuously. Obviously this doesn't work if there are heat exchanger leaks but it may be possible to isolate this system using locally controlled manual cutoff valves.
I'm really not sure what is likely to happen with the leaking fuel pools. I fear that concrete entombment is likely in the future for at least one of them, possibly both units 3 and 4.
I expect the releases will need to continue for the next week at least, likely more until they get alternate means of heat removal back online. I also fear the ocean releases will continue for that same period of time, perhaps longer depending on the condition of the heat exchangers.
Cleanup and decommissioning may not be done as thoroughly as possible due to dose rates all around the site. They may well end up covering everything with sand, gravel, or other more suitable materials to contain the surface contaminants. I expect the site to eventually be abandoned and reactors 5 and 6 to also be decommissioned.
Many experts have shied away from describing worst-case outcomes, which are terrifying to contemplate and risky to mention. The risk isn’t just panicking the public. Crying wolf can threaten one’s expert status.
Japanese Nuclear Plant Officials Apologize Over Radioactivity Scare
An Inaccurate Reading at Unit 2 Showed Levels 10 Million Times Higher Than Normal in Reactor's Cooling System
Originally posted by 00nunya00
reply to post by Kailassa
I understood fine. I told you it was called "transmutation" and not half-life (but you didn't quote that did you?). Transmutation is a result of the process of decay that happens and is measured in half-life. Explaining transmutation is not the same as explaining half-life. When you were asked "what is half-life" you answered with the definition of transmutation.
No misunderstanding by me, anyways.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
The concept of losing half its radioactivity is that the quantity of radioactive particles will be about half of what it was, not that the individual particles are half as radioactive. A sample of a radioactive substance will show only half as much radioactivity, but only because there are only half as many individual radioactive particles as there was before.
In the case of Pu-239, that means that an individual particle can retain its radioactivity for literally millions of years... an active particle found today could have been created when dinosaurs roamed the planet.
ETA: and, like I replied in that thread days ago, I'm not willing to give you my further time on this matter. If you want to fight about this, please keep it in the thread where it began.