Solutions to assist Japan. FROM OUT OF BOX THINKERS.

reply to post by 1cem4n


Notice the choppers that are dumping water are at a distance, even though they have been fitted with lead underbellies?

The reason it wouldn't work is because you are dealing with radiation. Radioactive heat would melt the electronics of the RC choppers by causing rapid decay in the metals of the device.
They are working on these devices though:
Radiation hardening is a method of designing and testing electronic components and systems to make them resistant to damage or malfunctions caused by ionizing radiation (particle radiation and high-energy electromagnetic radiation)

One thing i have foremost in mind is the thousands of people who have been advised to stay in their homes throughout this nuclear disaster. I just read a post by a fellow member referencing the mayor of one town close to the plant and how he feels the government have abandoned his people, and in essence "left them to die".

I would like to propose something... but unfortunately all i can think off is a petition. Basically i would like the make the Japanese government aware that i perceive their advice to their citizens as massively ignorant. And that the result of their "advice" will be the genocide of thousands of people ordered to die in their homes. They must action some form of evacuation now, or forever be held responsible for the death of these people.

But who am i to do such a thing, i have no weight or voice loud enough to shake the walls off their government. i think that perhaps if we made enough noise as a community that we could perhaps be heard. It was certainly the first thing i thought of when the earthquake originally took place. And i suspected that people would be ignored, and left to die as a result of the nuclear catastrophe that ensued.

What do you think ATS..... should we make some NOISE!!!!!

Switch from water to a slurry containing borax + sand + calcium silicate... Diatomaceous earth/clay and/or volcanic ash in the mix might also be useful as a binder for some of the volatiles. (How well? Who knows? But the idea is to keep it bound and buried for the duration of its half-life rather than seeping out and getting in the air.) Oh and some remote controlled dump-trucks or helicopters to unload it over the hot-spots considered too dangerous for people to get near. It's past the stage of doing much in the way of recovery it seems, so now it's just time to bury it and seal it off. If the mix is done right, it'll form a sort of ceramic or glass as well as a cement that will keep most of the reaction products contained. Still I have a feeling that the pros probably have a better idea of what works when it comes to stuff like this than we would.

As for those who volunteered already? In addition to running lines and keeping things cool for the meantime, put up some retaining walls so when it comes time to fill it in - things should go quicker. This would also be the time to place various monitoring equipment in perimeter areas, so that the effectiveness of the sealing operation can be studied in full. (Knowing the Japanese, they're probably already on it.)

Maybe they should be asking the Russians and Ukrainians for advice too. They have had a bit more experience in this regard with Chernobyl (sealing off an uncontrolled reaction), since Three Mile Island was kept contained and never had the full system failure in comparison to the situation now at hand.

When you say out the box, I thought why not construct a temporary, light-weight box to surround the reactor buildings. They can be constructed of acrylic, and have boron and iodine coating on the inside in order to negate radioactivity at the structural walls. They could be air lifted and placed directly over top of each reactor building. Creating a containment barrier between the reactor and the environment, this would provide protection to working crews around the buildings. Once in place a two - three stage system of ventilation could be put in place to circulate and filter out radioactive material. Ventilation would be able to release steam pressure from the boiling water as well.

In order to deal with the mounting threat of meltdown, a cooling system could be installed on each temporary structure. The cooling system would drop the temperature within the structure well below zero. This would essentially create a man made arctic environment, which would cool the reactors rapidly. While this temperature drop was taking place a large amount of sea water would have to be dumped continuously into the reactor in order to prevent the reactor rods from vaporize the cooling water instantly. As more and more water is added, ice and cold water would begin to take its toll, thus cooling the reactors and freezing radioactive material in ice. Once the situation is under control, the temperature can be slowly brought back up, and the radioactive water could be drained appropriately and safety into a containment vessel. It's a rather large and crazy idea but I thought it could be a start. If any of this is scientifically inaccurate, I apologize; I’m not a science major.

Loved reading your ideas, keep an open mind all.


Link to Acrylic Radiation Shielding:
www.professionalplastics.com...

How is this for a radical idea.

Nuke it.

Now before you laugh, think about it. It's just like when they use explosions to control fires. A nuke can be controlled in shape and size. It will disperse the PU stopping the meltdown. You can place the fallout at whatever altitude you want, so it will disperse safely. More importantly, it will save lives. The problem will be solved.

reply to post by Ophiuchus 13


Liquid Nitrogen won't work, it's already in an excited state, you don't want to apply one reactive state to another, you'd get a nasty chain reaction when it went from a solid to a gas... The last thing Japan needs is a Hydrogen Bomb.

Originally posted by woghd
How is this for a radical idea.

Nuke it.

Now before you laugh, think about it. It's just like when they use explosions to control fires. A nuke can be controlled in shape and size. It will disperse the PU stopping the meltdown. You can place the fallout at whatever altitude you want, so it will disperse safely. More importantly, it will save lives. The problem will be solved.

edit on 18-3-2011 by woghd because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-3-2011 by woghd because: (no reason given)

Look, they want to minimize the spread of Nuclear Fallout, why do you think Nuclear tests have been mostly underground, or far away from populated areas...

reply to post by woghd


That would multiply the fallout exponentially!

I read a few pages of suggestions but one has to realize the reactors were constructed with water cooling, and a different cooling method means a different reactors, so a whole new plant! Other suggestions to contain the fallout simply wont work physically, fiscally and remember, the place was flooded, so logistics were near non existent or at least would require the whole of their national defense to even attempt such logistical nightmares. Also remember the rods are INSIDE the reactors, which were cut off of any circulation due to the loss of power, they had 3 stages of redundancy already in place, their 3rd level was diesel generators that failed due to flooding.

ONE good thought I heard was to have their 3rd level of backup power remote from a higher altitude but you see these kinds of hindsight ideas make the operation and construction of such a facility's expenses too high to be competitive in the marketplace.

This was an old facility and as we heard it storing spent rods on-site near a working reactor should gives me the impression that the Power company was getting a bit lax at their safety measures and looking more at cutting operational expenses. That power company should be held liable to compensate all parties effected by this and striped of their license to continue in nuclear power generating.

Wont fix the problem but that problem occurred in the first hour the tsunami hit.

I know this sounds like a bad idea.

That said, if the part of the problem with the rods/melted rods/etc is that they are too close to each other (and interacting) why not separate them? Forcefully.

I'm not talking about going in there by hand and lifting the mass of molten metals/uranium etc out, but using high explosives in a controlled burst. The plants will have to come down and be buried anyways, and if the material is separated enough the criticicality could be potentially contained. (Since I do not know how much mass a criticality event needs to sustain itself, I'm going to say only potentially.)

Yes this would make the area a bit more contaminated, 'a bit' being a relative term.

Currently we have 4 potential criticality events going on, we all know the odds are firming up to where we are looking at 99:1 odds that the mess will melt through all containment.

Since it is technically easier to clean a radioactive mess up at the surface/ground level, from a controlled explosion, than it would be once the rods/fuel/etc melt through the concrete under-barrier and hit the water table.
(In that the explosion from the water table & radioactive-mass would be uncontrolled and completely unpredictable. )

An' you can bet it will hit the water table sooner rather than later given that the plant is -right- on the ocean.

A controlled explosion would spread the mass out at best 500 meters, at worst 1k. Allowing for scrape and bury tactics to be used. (Much better to lose 6-10k of land than to lose 10-100-10000 times more.)

While this idea isn't a fantastic save everything sort of plan, it would keep the bulk of the radiation/meltdown confined -above- the water table. (Or at least buy time for a better plan to be implemented.)

Yes it would be risky, yes it would increase radiation released. At least this way the controlled explosive force can be projected, plotted and above of else controlled to some extent.

Where as the explosive release from the melt hitting the water table under the plant won't be controlled by anything but random chance.

Yes the idea is not a great one, and it would create a bigger overall mess.

However, the odds are that if the melt burns down through the concrete under-layer, the explosion from the mass hitting the water table won't be predictable, much less easier/possible to contain.

Yes this would be a very dirty 'event', yes it will put lives at risk.

However it would be more controlled than the inevitable ground water + radioactive melt burst would be.

Which is where things likely are heading.

Gods help us all, but some times the answer is high explosives.

M.

Originally posted by arcanewings
When you say out the box, I thought why not construct a temporary, light-weight box to surround the reactor buildings. They can be constructed of acrylic, and have boron and iodine coating on the inside in order to negate radioactivity at the structural walls. They could be air lifted and placed directly over top of each reactor building. Creating a containment barrier between the reactor and the environment, this would provide protection to working crews around the buildings. Once in place a two - three stage system of ventilation could be put in place to circulate and filter out radioactive material. Ventilation would be able to release steam pressure from the boiling water as well.

In order to deal with the mounting threat of meltdown, a cooling system could be installed on each temporary structure. The cooling system would drop the temperature within the structure well below zero. This would essentially create a man made arctic environment, which would cool the reactors rapidly. While this temperature drop was taking place a large amount of sea water would have to be dumped continuously into the reactor in order to prevent the reactor rods from vaporize the cooling water instantly. As more and more water is added, ice and cold water would begin to take its toll, thus cooling the reactors and freezing radioactive material in ice. Once the situation is under control, the temperature can be slowly brought back up, and the radioactive water could be drained appropriately and safety into a containment vessel. It's a rather large and crazy idea but I thought it could be a start. If any of this is scientifically inaccurate, I apologize; I’m not a science major.

Loved reading your ideas, keep an open mind all.

Link to Acrylic Radiation Shielding:
www.professionalplastics.com...

edit on 18-3-2011 by arcanewings because: Added Link.

They don't have months, this isn't Star Trek... We don't have replicators yet.
The only solution is to get the Reactors back under the best shield nature has which is Water...

It's natural ability to displace heat and it's amazing density are the whole reason why we're at this point with Japan... It's the most logical step in the process of creating Nuclear Reactors.

reply to post by kroms33


i agree that radiation and electronics dont mix and i remember when they tried to use "radiation hardened" robots at chernobyl with little success. These helecopters can lift quite a bit of weight (it can lift a 1 litre (1kg)bottle of coke), maybe if they used the hardened electronics and say .. a lead casing maybe it would last long enough to get some close up photos ? if not maybe separate the electronics and run the thing on a long wire ?

i beleve any attempt to do somthing when you dont have a full picture of what is going on is futile. especally with somthing as tricky as this.

Japan and China are the worlds main manafacturer of electronics, surely its within their capability ?

reply to post by Illustronic


Yeah, the reactors were built more than 20 years ago, and in that 20 years they have never had a problem... 20 Plus years ago they thought about a problem, but never this series of perfect disasters. They just never notice this when the benifits outway the rare possibility that like you said 3 levels of redundancy fail...

reply to post by Brainiac


Putting the reactors in water does little to help cool the rods INSIDE the reactor, the outside getting hot isn't the problem, it's the rods inside. When the speak of containment, it literally means to contain, and not open them up!

Ironic a power plant loses it's redundant power generating capability, isn't it.

I wonder if a battery bank power storage for electrical backup power would fail in water?

They only needed the power to run the water pumps, not to run the plant, just simply circulating water is all they needed. A battery storage unit on a roof would have survived, and why wasn't the diesel generators up high in one of the buildings there? I mean they are right on a shore, didn't some kind of flood enter their minds?

Originally posted by Brainiac

Originally posted by woghd
How is this for a radical idea.

Nuke it.

Now before you laugh, think about it. It's just like when they use explosions to control fires. A nuke can be controlled in shape and size. It will disperse the PU stopping the meltdown. You can place the fallout at whatever altitude you want, so it will disperse safely. More importantly, it will save lives. The problem will be solved.

edit on 18-3-2011 by woghd because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-3-2011 by woghd because: (no reason given)

Look, they want to minimize the spread of Nuclear Fallout, why do you think Nuclear tests have been mostly underground, or far away from populated areas...

Incorrect. Underground explosions increase fallout. A small surface nuke will vaporise all of the troubled rectors and stop the meltdown process. Yes there will be more radio activity, but only from the extra nuke, remember we already have multiple meltdowns going on. The amount of material in a small tactical nuke is far less than even one reactor. The main point is that we will be in control of the explosion. We can size and shape the cloud how we want, and under whatever weather conditions we choose, so that the fallout disperses the way we want it to. This will save lives. Just like using dynamite to put out a forest fire.

reply to post by pauljs75


Hi Paul. Yeah, well we just don't have the technical capability to do that sort of thing, your thinking futuristically. As you know we've slowly advanced in the area of heavy technology, in fact we're going backward, Micro Electronics, Nano_Technology Advances, smaller compact power sources... Etc... Etc...

We are unfortunately advanced in the areas of no benifit to these types of problems...

Where are Japans Battle Mechs?

What they could really use is a GIANT HUMAN ROBOT that could just pluck the Nuclear Reactor up and drop it in the Ocean...

Yeah way out of the box, but you see how bad the problem is, humans are too fragile to be in radiation, and our technology is not advanced when it comes to heavy technology. Our construction equitpment for example is really the same design from the 60's and 70's...

Now I wonder if they could have hooked up a power cable to a nuclear sub or battleship, do you realize how much power a mobile city like an aircraft carrier generates? Sounds like a cheap way of quickly restoring the power necessary in the days leading up to the meltdown, the explosive meltdown, they had time and they are on a waterway. This means they don't have to maintain all of their redundant power backups and just before hand, devise a way to transfer the power from one of the military's huge water craft power plants (we so affectionately call, warships).

reply to post by woghd


When the device being tested is buried at sufficient depth, the explosion may be contained, with no release of radioactive materials to the atmosphere.

A tactical Nuclear bomb on the Reactors would not do anything but spread Nuclear Debris all over Japan...

Originally posted by Moshpet
I know this sounds like a bad idea.


However it would be more controlled than the inevitable ground water + radioactive melt burst would be.

Which is where things likely are heading.

Gods help us all, but some times the answer is high explosives.

M.

You are correct. I don't think people understand what a shaped charge can do. I would use your plan, except I'd go one step better and use a small field-level nuke. Only because the plants really need to be vaporised, and not just blown apart.

reply to post by Illustronic


Folks, this has to be a feasible emergency solution to keep the water circulating. It can be done, it can be done with the right linkage to the point of simply 'plugging their emergency military adapters in'.