It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Japan declares 'nuclear emergency' after quake

page: 489.htm
513
<< 486  487  488    490  491  492 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Red, I think you got it right too! You win the connect-the-dots kewpie doll. There is only one problem I can see in your assessment, one random dot, not figured into the equation...Mother Nature.

This scenario, might be the only viable option they have at this point. Just hope mama nature stays sleeping during the process.

Kudos to your analogue tempered mind Red. I'll take your observations, over a computer analysis any day.

Des




posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Wertwog

Any steam they do release would continue to be radioactive yes?

Yes, but as long as the corium is kept under 100°C, there would be no steam. Right now, assuming I am correct, it is already below 100°C and solid as a rock, sitting submerged under seawater.


How long would they have to continue doing venting this steam?

Again, no steam to vent if they can keep the temperature down. If they can't, the steam would vent itself, right back through the hole the corium used to submerge itself. And the answer is: until the corium cooled down on its own.

One cannot stop nuclear processes by any means known to man. They can no more make the corium non-radioactive than they can put out the sun.


Would the corium heat up again over time?

Yes. the energy output of the corium as heat will not change; The trick, once the crack is sealed, would be to recycle the water in and out to remove the heat, while keeping (most of) the radiation in place.


Would the concrete erode over time due to radioactivity, saltwater, and heat and would they need to continually flush it? Over how long?

Once cured, I believe the concrete would be in place long enough to allow for a more permanent solution... on the order of years, maybe a couple decades. The proper mixture would be salt-tolerant. Any flushing needed after curing would be there to keep the corium below that magic 100°C temperature so it doesn't produce steam.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon

Crack shown by TEPCO today....

Is that the one mentioned earlier near #2? If it is, that is worrying to me. A crack in the concrete doesn't necessarily mean one in the bedrock, but it could, and they are admitting that it is leaking into the sea.

Of course, this could all be a ruse designed to answer the question of where the seawater radiation levels are coming from without exposing the plan. No one wants to admit that they just dropped a ball of MOX corium into the Pacific! And if this little exercise in patching holes made by Mama Nature fails, Japan has destroyed a large section of the planet. If it succeeds, they can grout over that little crack and announce how they have fixed the leak.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by SFA437

The MK I GE BWR has a poor flange design. An overpressure could have ripped the bolts out releasing whatever was inside under pressure.

Those thuds could have definitely been from bolts popping out of a flange. As a matter of fact, the multiple thuds in succession would seem to lend itself to that theory. As each bolt pops (sending pressure waves through a huge steel vessel that acts like a massive amplifier), it increases stress on the adjacent bolts, causing them to pop, and so on until pressure is sufficiently released.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Sorry, Redneck, you might want to rethink your assertion that steam will only form over 100 centigrade. Around freezing, and low single digits C (like the weather in Fukushima), you will see visible steam from water in the low 30 degree Celsius range, and real huge clouds of steam from around 50 degrees and up. I have pretty much spent my whole life visiting (ironically radioactive) hotsprings, and I can tell you that even in fairly warm weather large amounts of warm water outside will cause a surprising amount of visible steam.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by brocktoon

What you are describing is condensation from evaporation that occurs when the temperature and humidity are such that any water that evaporates also condenses around airborne particles.

Water boils (turns to steam) at 100°C.

Clouds or fog, formed from condensation, occur at lower temperatures.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


YOGN-115 (no name) belongs to Commander Fleet Activities Yokosuka, is 165ft long and 42ft wide. Has a maximum draft (below water line) of 8ft. Fully loaded with crew (3 enlisted members) weighs 1360 tons or unloaded 1115 tons. Delivered for use September 01, 1952.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   
It's the same steam at 99c as it is at 100c. it has nothing to do with condensation on airborne particles. Boiling point should be thought of as the flash point where the temperature and pressure are such that a substance wants to be a vapour more than a liquid. It's still the same vapour, in this case steam, and you have a progressive ramp up of temperature and pressure gradient to where the the liquid wants to change phase, however, due to that gradient, and Brownian motion on a molecular level, it is steaming all the way up from when you first see small wisps, to full-on boiling. Steam is not a sign of boiling, just relatively warm water. (across the same pressure)
edit on 2-4-2011 by brocktoon because: added pressure.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


I just realized...they kinda let the kitten out of the bag, with that diagram, I think Zorgon posted, of the new "rehabilitation plan". The last line makes total sense now...

PLUG LEAK!

God/Goddess...I hope they aren't really thinking of rehabilitating those grave diggers.

Des.



edit on 03/28/2011 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by brocktoon
 


Uhhhh...most hot springs are at higher elevations. Are you factoring the ambient barometric pressure?

Just sayin'

Des



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by SFA437

The MK I GE BWR has a poor flange design. An overpressure could have ripped the bolts out releasing whatever was inside under pressure.

Those thuds could have definitely been from bolts popping out of a flange. As a matter of fact, the multiple thuds in succession would seem to lend itself to that theory. As each bolt pops (sending pressure waves through a huge steel vessel that acts like a massive amplifier), it increases stress on the adjacent bolts, causing them to pop, and so on until pressure is sufficiently released.

TheRedneck


I'm thinking the overpressure for this to happen would need to be massive, and on a short timescale, near instantaneous. The reason is because of the rubber O-ring around the drywell flange. It is designed to fail at around 70 psi. If it was a slow buildup, the drywell flange rubber O-ring would fail, releasing the pressure into the refueling cavity.

See: allthingsnuclear.org Possible Cause of Reactor Building Explosions

I'm having difficulty visualizing the amount of overpressure it would take to blow these bolts, let alone the concrete shield plug.





I guess what I am trying to say is that it seems more likely that a massive pressure buildup happened within the reactor, expanding the reactor tank, which broke the biological shielding walls just outside the reactor, (causing the thuds), and then punched a hole straight up thru the center of the reactor head and concrete shield plug like a bullet, rather than blowing the whole lid off.




edit on 4/2/11 by makeitso because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Update from RSOE indicating maybe it's time to add an 8 to the disaster scale:


Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) said Saturday it had found radioactive water leaking into the sea from a cracked concrete pit at its No.2 reactor in Fukushima. Russian nuclear energy expert Natalia Mironova says that Fukushima disaster is “much bigger than Chernobyl.” The radiation in the pit was measured 1,000 millisieverts per hour, TEPCO said in a statement adding that they were planning to pour concrete into the pit to seal the crack, the Reuters reported. "With radiation levels rising in the seawater near the plant, we have been trying to confirm the reason why, and in that context, this could be one source. We are testing samples of water from the pit and from the sea near the plant, and we cannot really say for certain until we've studied the results," Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency Deputy Director Hidehiko Nishiyama said. Exposure to 500 millisieverts over a short period of time can increase the long-term risk of cancer. Meanwhile the Russian nuclear energy expert has assessed that Japan's unfolding nuclear disaster is "much bigger than Chernobyl" and could rewrite the international scale used to measure the severity of atomic accidents. "Chernobyl was a dirty bomb explosion. The next dirty bomb is Fukushima and it will cost much more" in economic and human terms, Mironova was cited by the agencies. Mironova is a thermodynamic engineer who became a leading anti-nuclear activist in Russia in the wake of the accident at the Soviet-built reactor in Ukraine in 1986. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) called Chernobyl "the most severe in the history of the nuclear power industry" and ranked it a seven on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), and “it had only one reactor and lasted only two weeks. We have now three weeks (at Fukushima) and we have four reactors which we know are in very dangerous situations," she warned. IAEA says the Fukushima is ranked five on the INES scale.


RSOE



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by brocktoon

Ummm.... OK. This argument is about as worthwhile as the guy who I let help me once with an audio generator design. He kept insisting that AC household power peaked at 120V, until I let him blow a handful of capacitors.

Go to your local college and tell the physics professor that steam forms under 1 atm of pressure at temperatures substantially below 100°C. Get back to me when he agrees with you.

Then you can rewrite the physics books.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I'm not buying the "crack' being the source of the radiated ocean water. With levels at 4300x there and 10k in the trenches it's only a dilution of 2 to 1. Maybe the difference is the 4300x is above the acceptable ocean levels and the 10k is that normally found in the reactor? They keep mixing the terms to keep us confused. Does anyone have the actual sievert levels of both? Is it possible for the water in the trenches and conduits to raise the ocean levels that high through a small crack?

They've sprayed hundreds of tons of water on the reactors but admit to only 12,000 in the trenches, maybe the same in the turbine buildings, so where is the rest of the water? We would see a lot more steam if it was all evaporating off, where is the rest of the water? Are the reactors filled as well or is it all finding it's way into the ocean?

The reactor buildings are built partly below sea level, maybe 30-50 feet. If that "basement" area is filled with water what wuold happen if the corium/poolium hits it? I've read comments here about the steam explosion that would occur if it hits groundwater so this concerns me.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Look, steam is steam. I'm just using that as an example of a large body of warm water outside, as an example of how visible steam would be out of doors, and at what sort of water temperatures. I'm not trying to be right, I'm just suggesting that Redneck re think this matter of steam being an indicator of boiling point. It's not.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by makeitso

That is why I am thinking it was seismic shifts that caused the failures. Pressure alone would have probably cracked the shell itself rather than pop bolts. But, if the base that was supporting the RPV were shifted, so that it was sitting in a position that induced internal stress in the steel, that could have overloaded the bolts.

And recall that #4, the first one that gave off those sounds, didn't even have fuel in the core. That means no pressurization whatsoever.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by brocktoon
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Look, steam is steam. I'm just using that as an example of a large body of warm water outside, as an example of how visible steam would be out of doors, and at what sort of water temperatures. I'm not trying to be right, I'm just suggesting that Redneck re think this matter of steam being an indicator of boiling point. It's not.


For someone who is not trying to be right...you sure expend a lot of energy pushing a dead horse uphill....ain't gonna get there Hun.

Des to the forum, please excuse my wasting bandwidth in this reply...I'm done with this topic.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Sorry Redneck, I have plenty of science and engineering experience, and I know what you are saying, but you have steam confused with boiling. You are 100% correct in a closed system, that you are only fully charged with steam for work (like a steam engine) over 100c. But visible water vapour in the air is the exact same steam that you get from boiling. There is a gradient, 100c and 1 BAR is where that gradient changes from "mostly wants to be liquid" to "mostly wants to be vapour", The reason that water does not explode into a cloud of vapor and leave your spaghetti pot as soon as it hits 100 is because of this gradient. Seeing steam is simply not a sign 100c+.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Let me follow a line of reasoning here and see if anyone agrees.

We have a fair amount of structure built below ground level, the reactor and turbine buildings, the "trenches" and pipe/electrical conduits,etc. and who knows how much more. This area gets a fair amount of rain and snow so one would expect they would have a drainage system for diverting water that gets into these areas through rain, seepage, etc. Either there are drains in the floors that operate on gravity or a pump system. Since the water that would get into these areas would not be considered dangerous it would also be reasonable that they are all connected and drain into a central collection sewer and then to a culvert that might drain into the ocean, such as the drain vents we see at 5&6.

If some of the cores are compromised and radiation is flowing into that somewhat standing water in the reactor buildings this would explain why there is highly radiated water in the turbine rooms, trenches, etc., since all these areas are connected by the common drain system. It would also explain why so much radiation is getting into the ocean since that runoff/drainwater is diverted there.

Could Tepco be playing all these games with the radiated water so they don't have to admit to core melt downs and critical RPV and containment vessel breaches...at least yet?
edit on 2-4-2011 by mrbillshow because: space


ADDITION - Has it been confirmed that the level of water in the turbines and "trenches" is the same height say above sea level? If they are and also connected by a simple drain system then it might tell us how high the water is in the reactor buildings...each reactor building. It may also explain why Tepco has not divulged any entries into these buildings or the lower levels, they don't want to reveal that the basements are swamped and the consequences if corium were to drop into it.
edit on 2-4-2011 by mrbillshow because: added



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by brocktoon

I'll try this one more time...

Steam is H2O in a gaseous phase. Steam is invisible.

Water vapor is suspended H2O in the atmosphere due to evaporation. Water vapor is invisible.

Condensate is H2O condensed in micro-droplets in the air. Condensate appears white due to light refraction.

Large amounts of condensate form when the amount of H2O (either steam or vapor) is much greater than the saturation limit of the air.

Boiling produces an excess of steam (gaseous H2O). Evaporation may produce moderate quantities of vapor (suspended liquid H2O).

Either steam or vapor may create condensate, but vapor cannot under normal circumstances produce as much condensate as steam due to the 100°C boiling point of water and the subsequent replacement of one gas (air) with another gas (steam), which super-saturates the air. This is in contrast with the diffusion of suspended liquid particles in the air itself from evaporation of liquid H2O.

The fact that H2O changes from a liquid state (water) to a gaseous state (steam) at 100°C under 1 atm of pressure is one of the most long-standing principles in physics, responsible for the Celsius temperature scale itself.

TheRedneck




top topics



 
513
<< 486  487  488    490  491  492 >>

log in

join