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.

 

Reactor #4 Completely Breached

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
reply to post by MindSpin
 


Honestly, if you don't know, don't comment. You said yourself your no nuclear expert.

The spent fuel rods are just as dangerous.




posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
then explain this:

______beforeitsnews/story/489/382/Japan_Nuclear_Crisis_Over.html


Then explain this:

The Japanese government's radiation report for the country's 47 prefectures Wednesday had a notable omission: Fukushima, ground zero in Japan's nuclear crisis. Measurements from Ibaraki, just south of Fukushima, were also blanked out.

www.usatoday.com...

There seems to be lots of conflicting news coming out but thats what ATS is for - to weed through it and get to the guts of it all



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   
archive.greenpeace.org...

Why is s0 Dangerous?

Facts:

Quoted:

" #Danger of Losing Control of the Reactor Is Greater with MOX


Conventional LWRs are designed to decrease the reactivity when
the temperature rises. But when using Pu-239 as fuel, heating of
the core from an increase in reaction rate tends to increase the
reaction rate still further. This is called the positive
temperature coefficient of reactivity, meaning there is a danger
of losing control of the reactor by accelerated chain reaction of
fissioning.(10)


MOX spent fuel contains more fission products than uranium spent
fuel. The important factor in managing spent fuel is the heat
generation caused by the highly radioactive fission products.
Since spent MOX fuel contains much more fission products, the
heat generation from MOX spent fuel is twice as high as that of
spent uranium fuel after 10 years and three times as high after
100 years.(14)

Plutonium does not exist in the natural environment, and is only
produced in nuclear reactors. It is known as one of the most
toxic elements. It emits high energy alpha radiation, and has
harmful biological effects.

Alpha radiation has a very short range but very intense
ionization power. If exposed on the surface of the skin, the
skin works as a shield and will prevent its penetration into the
body, but all of its ionizing power will be focused on the small
spot, causing burns and killing the skin tissue. If inhaled
into the body, the alpha particle will go in through the
respiratory tract, and enter the lung. Due to its long
half-life, it will stay in the body permanently, emitting alpha
radiation, and killing the surrounding tissues by strong
ionization. If plutonium is taken into the body in soluble form
(e.g. plutonium nitrate) through food chain, it will enter the
blood stream, and into the bones, liver and genital organs where
it will be enriched. Alpha radiation leads to reactions in the
cells of living things. It can cause damage to the nucleus and
DNA of the cell, in effect causing genetic damage in descendants,
particularly if germ cells are affected.(15)
#Dangers of Resuspension in the Environment

In the event of a contamination of the environment with
plutonium, the whirling up and inhalation of plutonium particles,
known as resuspension, plays an important role. If there is a
road traffic, building work or cleaning work at the plutonium
contaminated site, plutonium can enter the body through the
respiratory tract. Generally, the more whirled up, the greater
the dose intake per quantity of plutonium on the ground. If
there is fire, and plutonium becomes airborne into fine aerosol
particles, plutonium contamination of the environment will extend
to a far larger scale, landing on ground, contaminating a vast
wider area. Plutonium remains effective over very long periods
affecting the health of the people and the environment.(16)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by shadowland8
reply to post by MindSpin
 


Honestly, if you don't know, don't comment. You said yourself your no nuclear expert.

The spent fuel rods are just as dangerous.


Nobody knows...so really nobody should be commenting



Sorry I'm not joining in the panic and fear mongering that you guys love so much.

Reactor 4 is NOT in meltdown...spent fuel rods are exposed and releasing radiation...this is NOT meltdown. I wouldn't say exposed spent fuel is as dangerous as a full blown meltdown. Which is why spent fuel rods don't have as much containment as the active core does.


But go ahead...keep fear mongering and trying to hype up every little threat.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours
 


Funny...no where in that article do I see "One particle means death". Not even one mention of "death" in that whole article.


So yes...you are fear mongering...congrats.
edit on 17-3-2011 by MindSpin because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours
 


One particle of plutonium could never kill someone. Ignore this ill informed panic making troll k tx



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by MindSpin
Reactor #4 isn't even a live reactor, it was defueld before the earthquake.

If that is so, why is its containment building wreckage? You know it overheated and exploded?

2nd line.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by MindSpin
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours
 


Funny...no where in that article do I see "One particle means death". Not even one mention of "death" in that whole article.


So yes...you are fear mongering...congrats.
edit on 17-3-2011 by MindSpin because: (no reason given)


Come on i said i was looking on an article on this. Its the closest i found. I am fearmongering??


If inhaled into the body, the alpha particle will go in through the respiratory tract, and enter the lung. Due to its long half-life, it will stay in the body permanently, emitting alpha radiation, and killing the surrounding tissues by strong ionization. If plutonium is taken into the body in soluble form (e.g. plutonium nitrate) through food chain, it will enter the blood stream, and into the bones, liver and genital organs where it will be enriched. Alpha radiation leads to reactions in the cells of living things. It can cause damage to the nucleus and DNA of the cell, in effect causing genetic damage in descendants, particularly if germ cells are affected.(15)


This piece says enough, but indeed not the death part. I heard it yesterday, and it was an warning from an scientist.
Why do you attack me, about fearmongering.? Reallity sucks at this moment. You turn around, and make sure you tell yourself to relax.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit

Originally posted by MindSpin
Reactor #4 isn't even a live reactor, it was defueld before the earthquake.

If that is so, why is its containment building wreckage? You know it overheated and exploded?

2nd line.



Because spent fuel is still very HOT. They used seawater to try to keep the cooling pool filled, which created hydrogen. Pressure built..they had to release it...and you get a big explosion when hydrogen meets oxygen.

I thought this was common knowledge by now about this disaster.


Reactor 4 WAS NOT ACTIVE...no sources are disputing this...it is only the spent fuel rods in reactor 4 that is a problem. And like I said...I don't think spent fuel can "meltdown" because they are not in active nuclear reaction...they are COOLING DOWN so they can be stored.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by MindSpin
 


A meltdown indicates that fuel rods are physically melting. Used fuel like that in storage at the reactor remain hot for years and can indeed meltdown.

The issue currently with reactor 4 isn't the reactor at all, it's the fuel storage pond above it which requires FLOWING WATER. It's not enough to sit under water, the water has to flow or the rods boil it off (and create a hydrogen explosion like the one that started this whole mess.)

These rods, if they can not regain control of the pumping system, will heat up, once they boil the water off and become exposed to the air they oxidize and weaken. They are also concerned that due to the nature of the fuel, if this scenario plays out, the rods could indeed start a nuclear reaction, not a bomb, but a reaction much like that inside the core, except fully exposed.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours
 



Why do you attack me, about fearmongering.?



Because when you use a statement like "one particle means death".....YOU ARE FEAR MONGERING.


And it does nobody any good...you are potentially making a bad situation worse by spreading FALSE information and trying to incite panic.

I find that behavior disgusting, and I will call you on it.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


I would love to see a source that spent fuel can start an active nuclear reaction if they get too hot.

I have never heard that before.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by MindSpin
 


I know reactor 4 was at the least shut down, however, I was under the impression it was still fueled.

Even when it is shutdown it still requires cooling. The water is half of the moderation, so lose the water (or ability to circulate cold water) and it will start warming up again.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by MindSpin
 





People do know.

It's known that spent fuel rods are just as dangerous when it comes to outputting radiation.


I don't know about that one death particle thing the other guy is talking about, what I do know is the radiation is just as much of a threat with this spent fuel rods.


It's not fear mongering, it's informative.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by MindSpin
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours
 



Why do you attack me, about fearmongering.?



Because when you use a statement like "one particle means death".....YOU ARE FEAR MONGERING.


And it does nobody any good...you are potentially making a bad situation worse by spreading FALSE information and trying to incite panic.

I find that behavior disgusting, and I will call you on it.


So if i find the article that backs what i simply just past on, then i am okey?

Here i found something very close

"If you absorb one microgram of plutonium in your organism for sure you will get cancer," says Sortir du Nucleaire (Phasing Out of the Nuclear Age) coordinator Anne-Laure Meladeck.


But thats still not the article i mean, so sorry if i cant find the death word

To make sure One microgram = one particle in my eyes. Because that is what i ment
edit on 17-3-2011 by TribeOfManyColours because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by shadowland8
reply to post by MindSpin
 





People do know.

It's known that spent fuel rods are just as dangerous when it comes to outputting radiation.


I don't know about that one death particle thing the other guy is talking about, what I do know is the radiation is just as much of a threat with this spent fuel rods.


It's not fear mongering, it's informative.


Yes, which is why I said in my very first post in this thread that the problem in reactor 4 is the spent fuel rods. Maybe you should know what I said before commenting on it.

The OP said that reactor 4 was in COMPLETE MELTDOWN...which I call BS on.

Others are claiming spent fuel can re-start a nuclear reaction and go into meltdown...but no one has given a source that this is possible.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Isotopes and compounds of plutonium are dangerous due to their radioactivity. Contamination by plutonium oxide (spontaneously oxidized plutonium) has resulted from a number of military nuclear accidents where nuclear weapons have burned.[85] Based on chemical toxicity alone, the element is less dangerous than arsenic or cyanide and about the same as caffeine.[86][87]

The alpha radiation plutonium emits does not penetrate the skin but can irradiate internal organs when plutonium is inhaled or ingested.[32] The skeleton, where plutonium is absorbed by the bone surface, and the liver, where it collects and becomes concentrated, are at risk.[31] Plutonium is not absorbed into the body efficiently when ingested; only 0.04% of plutonium oxide is absorbed after ingestion.[32] What plutonium is absorbed into the body is excreted very slowly, with a biological half-life of 200 years.[88] Plutonium passes only slowly through cell membranes and intestinal boundaries, so absorption by ingestion and incorporation into bone structure proceeds very slowly.[89][90]

Plutonium is more dangerous when inhaled than when ingested. The risk of lung cancer increases once the total dose equivalent of inhaled radiation exceeds 400 mSv.[91]
********The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that the lifetime cancer risk for inhaling 5,000 plutonium particles, each about 3 microns wide, to be 1% over the background U.S. average.*********
[92] Ingestion or inhalation of large amounts may cause acute radiation poisoning and death; no human is known to have died because of inhaling or ingesting plutonium, and many people have measurable amounts of plutonium in their bodies.[87]

The "hot particle" theory in which a particle of plutonium dust radiates a localized spot of lung tissue has been tested and found false – such particles are more mobile than originally thought and toxicity is not measurably increased due to particulate form.[89]

However, when inhaled, plutonium can pass into the bloodstream. Once in the bloodstream, plutonium moves throughout the body and into the bones, liver, or other body organs. Plutonium that reaches body organs generally stays in the body for decades and continues to expose the surrounding tissue to radiation and thus may cause cancer. [93] "Radiation Protection, Plutonium: What does plutonium do once it gets into the body?". U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. www.epa.gov...

Several populations of people who have been exposed to plutonium dust (e.g. people living down-wind of Nevada test sites, Hiroshima survivors, nuclear facility workers, and "terminally ill" patients injected with Pu in 1945–46 to study Pu metabolism) have been carefully followed and analyzed.

These studies generally do not show especially high plutonium toxicity or plutonium-induced cancer results.[89] "There were about 25 workers from Los Alamos National Laboratory who inhaled a considerable amount of plutonium dust during the 1940's; according to the hot-particle theory, each of them has a 99.5% chance of being dead from lung cancer by now, but there has not been a single lung cancer among them.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours
 


You shouldn't make statements you can't back up.


Just admit it, you are fear mongering and you will never find a source that says "one particle of plutonium means death". Not even getting cancer means death. Please stop with your overreaction and fear mongering.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by PureET
 


Thanks for that because I thought it was unbelievable myself......

I'll wait until Alex Jones tells us the coast is all clear......

That will be a VERYYYYYY long wait.



posted on Mar, 17 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by MindSpin
 


Actually it's MOX thats DEADLY and yes one tiny particle and you are dead within 5 minutes



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join