posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:41 PM
Originally posted by Maxmars
I am not a scientist. Therefore I am about to show my ignorance, so correct me if I am wrong.
If the material gets so hot that it melts, does that mean that a superheated mass of molten material will vaporize anything beneath it, pushing the
super-heated material upwards as a plume of particles?
the wiki article on nucelar meltdown has a pretty readable summary, although I can't vouch for eth accuracy of the science -
Baicially it seems that all Western reactors have a lower containment system designed to contain teh "corium" should it breach the primary containment
there is water in the lower plenum, and that will be heated and turned to steam. whether any of that steam is released, or he corim breaks up and is
expelled by such a steam release, depends upon damage to the plenum.
my understanding ATM is that there is no known damge to the plenum - the problems are all entirely related to the failure of the cooling systems, and
the explosions that have happened have been due to the generation of hydrogen by oxidisation of zircaloy used as cladding for teh fuel rods.
I know that the MSM seems slowly shimmying into the admission that this horrible accident appears to be heading towards an epically tragic
as far as I can see a "tragic ending" is unlikely - at least it seems unlikely there will be any loss of life. The headlines reflect public ignorance
It is certainly true that if a melted core was opened to atmosphere ther would be a lot of radiation released and that might kil many people.
But it is unlikely that will happen.
What still seems much more likely to happen is that any melt down will be contained in a similar manner to Three Mile Island, and any reactors where
that happens will be permanently shut down, covered in concrete, and unable to be demolished for a few thousand yesrs!
The minute it was realized that there was no positive control of the coolant system, they should have immediately begun deploying the kind of
special concrete containment they resorted to in Chernobyl. Is there another way this can end?
no that seems a possible end for 1 or more of the reactors, but your proposed "solutino" was never going to happen - there was this tsunami that got
in the way you see - people were dying everywhere, EXCEPT actually at the reactor!
By waiting, they force a human sacrifice to this horror; as if it weren't bad enough.
Sorry, this has me thinking darkly.
Yes nucelar accidents often seem to do that - despite the lack of casualties!
edit on 16-3-2011 by Aloysius the Gaul because: quotes