A much better and clearer image of the ruins of reactor building #3.
A clear picture of the RPV, or rather what is left of it.
This was a thermal image taken of Reactor #3, NOTE: There is no significant heat source left in the position of where the reactor should be.
ALSO NOTE: the heat image shadow of the spent fuel pool, which IS intact, and holding both water and hot rods.
1- If the reactor core was intact, present and contained, there would be a complete thermal glow similar to the structure of the reactor. Not just odd
hot spots. The reactor would be identifiable. It's not there as a definable heat source or even close. I can tell you right now, that any significant
heat source will make a 'ghost' image of its containing structure.
1b- If you doubt that, get on the web and search for ' Thermal images,' and use additional key words, houses, tanks, MILITARY, winter, summer, planes,
and any other heat source you can think of.
2- The RPV's lid is -gone-, both the concrete outer access shell and the reactor cap itself. That much us mad bombers firmly agree on.
2a- If the cement lids / and or caps are gone and the core was largely intact the heat source would be centered in the circle. NOT melted blobs or
bits off to the edge of it.
2b- The heat source while it would be smaller than the pool would be -much- hotter than the pool, if the core was present and not blown sky high /
melted into the bedrock. Simply due to a -lack of cooling-.
2b.1 - Google Thermite, Lava, and super hot materials burning through metals and industrial structures. You could also look up shaped charge munitions
for additional information. A core melt is proven to be hotter than thermite.
2c- Since there is no large heat source greater than the pool, as shown in the thermal image, and centered in close proximity to where the core should
reside, the core is 1- not intact, 2- likely in chunks all over the place and what remained followed the path of least resistance. Though what was
left in containment structure and RCV, melted down into the bedrock. Since TEPCO is not trying to cool the reactor with water, but are trying to keep
what is left in the pool cool; the reactor remnants itself does contain any fuel rods, thus no heat source.
2c.1 ITS ALL GONE BYE-BYE. (It's late and I think it makes the point really clear.)
2c.1a- QED: If TEPCO isn't trying to cool the reactor remains, it is an admission that the reactor remnants are scrap metal; and there is nothing they
can do to cool what remains of the fuel there. Also it shows that the melted fuel isn't where they could cool it with water. (Even if they wanted
2d- Since we don't have complete and solid data from what the conditions were 'exactly' at the time of the violent catastrophic failure(s). Us
mad-bombers, as we were colloquially tagged, make the best analysis we can of the materials we can obtain.
2d.1- Visual and auditory evidence in the vids, mark several violent moments in the 'blast.'
2d.2- Stage 1 was similar to reactor #1's catastrophic event. (Likely identical to #1's hydrogen explosion.)
2d.3- Stage 2 was likely the concrete external shell of the containment structure popping, 1'st high pressure event.
2d.4- Stage 3 was likely where the flame come from, an incomplete violent burn of a second hydrogen release. Either from the torus being damaged and
out-gassing hydrogen or from a rupture in the reactor itself out-gassing 'moments' prior to the next event. The time frame is so narrow as to when it
likely happened, it could have been both sources.
2d.5- Stage 4 was the reactor containment vessels guts violently converting from a solid to a gaseous form. (Likeliest fuel for this was a superheated
yet violently mixed steam/hydrogen vapor.... Of which I may concede some criticality events may have added to the mixture, but even then, it was not a
nuclear explosion. But it was a very 'dirty' event.)
2d.5.a- Due to design of the containment shell and its hardened structure, compared to the 'cap', the path of least resistance was focused entirely
upwards. It was also more confined than the hydrogen explosion in #1.
2d5.b- This confinement accelerated the release and is where the blast pulls the debris from the first few stages up an into the vacuum it left behind
in its violent upward escape. Giving it its more distinctive 'shaping.'
2d.6- Stage 5 of the violent pressure events was the remains of the core likely going into the area under the vessel that had been flooded due to the
tsunami. Fuel source was the super heated remains of the reactor that were not converted to gas, and or shrapnel and launched upwards, and sea water /
other chemicals that might have been released in the flooding, in the basement.
2d.6.a- This would account for the building around the reactor being largely demolished as there would be multiple points where the 'fuel' would
escape from. Stairwells, broken plumbing, cooling lines etc, resulting in the outer structure of the building suffering over-pressure damage effects.
(I consider it unlikely anyone can get through the rubble in the 'basement areas' safely and survive atm.)
3- Other events as the melted core material down into bedrock and cooled somewhat for a time afterwards would be hard to define or document.
4- It is unknown to me if there is steam venting from the points were the core melted down into the bedrock. If enough of the core mass survived the
last stage intact enough to melt down to the water table, I'd expect steam from the location were the core melted into the water table. (A violent
steam plume has not been reported, that I am aware of.)
4a.1- If we are very lucky, that the mass of the surviving core material is small enough that the melt through is very slow, very slow and may become
so diluted with other substances, that the heat from it will not cause a violent steam eruption.
4a.2- If we are not so lucky, the melted core material will get ejected back up the path it burned down though to the water table. Where it would land
would be anyone's guess.
4a.3- 2nd worst case event in my book, is that we'll see a radioactive fueled steam geyser that makes Old Faithful seem tame.
4a.4- A volcano could occur, IF and ONLY IF it makes a significant pathway for magma to eventually vent through, and IF and ONLY IF the melt down
reaches a magma chamber. Though this would bury the site under a newly formed volcano. I'd call this both a blessing and a curse sort of event. But
the chances of it are far less than 4a.3-.
5. Several important questions remain:
5a.1- Did a significant portion of the core remain intact to land in the ocean? Or did it land in other locations?
5a.1.a- Did enough of the core survive to land in the ocean as a separate super 'hot' melted blob?
5a.1.b- If a significant part of the core survived to land in the ocean, could it be spotted via thermal imaging? Or searching for a continuous
5a.1.b2- Is the draining from the damaged reactors the only source of additional contamination of the ocean? Or can a possible core structure adding
to that problem?
5a.1.c- If part of the core made it into the ocean, is the drainage an attempt to cover up its continued existence? (I had to add this for all you
conspiracy people... but even then I'm considering it as a possibility.)
5a.2- How much of the core was volatilized?
5a.3- How much of the core remained to melt into the bedrock and later to eventually reach the water table?
I understand the mechanics all too well, the questions I bring up need answers.
If you are not worried yet, you should be.
You may of course feel free to disagree with me. But I feel this is as close as to the events, that people could create an accurate computer model and
test it. I'm not talented in that area.
Those of you who are talented in that area, I'd like to see this in simulation.
Frankly, I am concerned.
Mods please forgive the reposting of my work in another thread, evidently folks are still confused. The Motto of ATS is to deny Ignorance, and I'm
just trying to do my part.
edit on 1-5-2011 by Moshpet because: (no reason given)