posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 06:44 AM
Funny how the internet makes experts out of everyone.
I had to do this before, and I'll I guess have to do it again, a Nuclear Power Primer.
1) Meltdowns (that produce Corium) can only occur in the "core" hence the name Corium given to the outcome. This is the most dangerous thing that
could happen if that liquid lava goes "China Syndrome" we are however past that point.
2) The cooling pools contrary to popular mythology cannot melt down. It however can catch on fire, yes it can but.. conditions must be met and it's
not an Earth Changing/Life Ending event.
2A) Cooling Pool Basics: The Cooling Pool or Spent Fuel Pool is an area of the plant that they keep, what now, spent fuel, that's Uranium pellets
that are no longer able to produce enough reactions to be converted to electricity. However these rods are still very hot, somewhere in the
neighborhood of about 2500 degrees when they come out. The cooling pool is a body of rapidly agitated water that is kept at or under 120 degrees F.
2B) Cooling Pool Usage: The Cooling pool is used, you guessed it, to cool down the rod assemblies. It takes about 10 years for the assemblies to be
cool enough to be moved without being in the water. If there was some sort of accident that let the water out through just drainage or even boiling
off, the rods, upon reaching 700 degrees would burst into flame, hence a cooling pool fire.
Everyone seems to overstate this as a life threatening event for the planet. We are past the worst part of this disaster, the core meltdown, which is
generally widely accepted as having had happened. As seen by Chernobyl the lava produced (Corium) remains somewhat vicious for many years after the
incident and in Chernobyl the stuff hit the water table. The lesson there was that after the initial 2 or so years of very very high amounts of
radiation in the exclusion zone, plantlife returned and now animal life has returned, in droves. If the cooling pool were to catch on fire, you would
have a month of burning followed by a 5 or do mile dead zone around the plant, but that dead zone would be reclaimed by nature relatively soon after
the incident (5-8 years, not 500-800 as one site put it, they added a few zeroes.. )
As for a species ending event? hardly. Nature has shown in the face of an accident like this, a high rate of survival even when we humans are
scrambling for our tails.
Is anyone saying that a meltdown is good? Not on your life, it's a disaster, it makes a nice area uninhabitable for people for a long time after the
event (Pripyat is technically habitable again but the buildings would take so much to get rid of it's best to just keep it an exclusion zone)
Is anyone saying there arent' consequences? hardly. But you need to be a little more objective about it, it's not such an even that all life on
Earth will die, or the pacific Ocean will die, or we're all doomed, it's an event, it's awful and there are consequences, but, life will continue
on this rock, Even a Nuclear War waged with 98% enriched uranium bombs (as opposed to the 4% used in fuel rods) and every ICBM on the planet launched
would be survivable by the species, granted there would be a lot less of the species but it's survivable as a species (Not something I would want to
see mind you but nonetheless it's important to note this)
I need to find the study it was done for LAP (a series on History Channel) that stated that even if the world power grid failed, and every plant IN
THE WORLD had a cooling pool fire, the planet would still be inhabited by animal life and people for many many years to come...
Do some research on the Exclusion Zone around Chernobyl, paying particular interest to the forests and the city of Pripyat itself to see the long term
effects... then you will see that all of this doom porn saying we're going to kill the ocean and therefore all life on Earth is just that, Doom