Radiation at Fukushima nuclear plant at unimaginable levels

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Are salmon bottom feeders? Because, unless they are, they aren't going to pick up much radioactive material.

www.adn.com...

originally posted by: Reverbs
a reply to: crappiekat

Well who knows maybe they can make better robots?

That would be a good development in general for all nuclear power in the future. And even space travel.

I think along these lines as well. humans are extremely adaptable. Not only should we come together and deal with this but we should pay attention to the new tech that would come from what it would take to do so. My worry is that we are taking to long to make a plan.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

The h20 molecule does not become radioactive. Its the activated particles in the water. You can filter out the activated particles and contamination. But the filter media is going to concentrate the contamination, and become an almost unmanageable radiation source due to radioactive decay.

Why don't they trench upstream of the reactor and divert the underground water. Humans built the Panama Canal but cannot build a canal around a site?

a reply to: neutronflux

If it was supercritical you've had known as the ball of material tunneled to the water table below it. That is a China Syndrome. It then heats the water supercritical, splits H2O to hydrogen, and the hydrogen ignites. And there has been no ignition.

That would spew radioactive waste all over the surface. Which is what happened during the initial meltdown and caused the explosions... hydrogen ignited.

a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

No, China syndrome was a bad movie. The premise a runaway reactor would melt its way to the core of the earth.

Is the fuel still causing the uncontrolled release of neutrons that triggers an atom to create one or more new nuclides? A reaction causing further melting through containment?

Were is the remainder of the fuel rods? In the reactor vessel? The reactor containment/room? Or in the containment building?

I would guess to say the fuel mass is no longer releasing energy through a chain reaction of new nuclides. The heat is from the radioactive decay of fission products. The mass of fuel is in the reactor containment with little chance of melting through. The containment is leaking cooling water because of physical cracking.

The fission products of nuclear reactions do not produce radiation because of a China syndrome. Spent fuel producers radiation through radioactive decay from atoms with half lives. The ground is filled with very small amounts of uranium undergoing radioactive decay, releasing radiation due to half life, and not because of being a target of a neutron as the thread rolls on. It's the concentration that makes it dangerous.

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Well, it is pretty damned scary.

I wish you would comment on this in more detail. ( I usually rely on you to make me feel better about things.)
Is the Pacific going to continue to be poisoned? Is the worse-case scenario past us?

The seafloor in the Fukushima region will be in a bad way for along time. Beyond that, I'm still catching and eating local fish without concern.

Up and Atom, Radioactive man !!!!!

I'd not be eating anything out of the sea that could have eaten anything else in the sea that fed on anything else in the sea... but I don't fish. Sadly, the SUPER market sells sea food stating it is local, when it is in fact caught god knows where.

But that third arm on my back sure makes scratching those hard to reach spots much easier !!!

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: Reverbs

Thanks guys. All of you. I guess I feel better, about myself and my own circumstances; my countries' circumstances. But the big picture,,, I see the Earth as a living entity. I hate when we do things to make it sick. Blow upon blow, insult after insult.
How much can it take. We don't respect it enough. That's what worries and depresses me.

But your comments were all helpful. Thanks.

Much like when we catch a cold. We blow our noses a lot and eventually we manage to kill off the bug.

The Earth will do the same.

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
a reply to: neutronflux

If it was supercritical you've had known as the ball of material tunneled to the water table below it. That is a China Syndrome. It then heats the water supercritical, splits H2O to hydrogen, and the hydrogen ignites. And there has been no ignition.

That would spew radioactive waste all over the surface. Which is what happened during the initial meltdown and caused the explosions... hydrogen ignited.

exactly..

And those initial explosions..

Sent yuckiness, Cesium mainly, into the air.. HIGH up into the air.. And the wind currents go straight here.

I was on the case right away. And saw the models. I got dosed with radiation. Hopefully not that much. And hopefully I didn't ingest any particulates that could be radiating from my insides out.

I did see the model before it rained and had the thought to not go out side.. But based on the wind currents.. Luckily we are not super close to Japan.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

No, China syndrome was a bad movie. The premise a runaway reactor would melt its way to the core of the earth.

Is the fuel still causing the uncontrolled release of neutrons that triggers an atom to create one or more new nuclides? A reaction causing further melting through containment?

Were is the remainder of the fuel rods? In the reactor vessel? The reactor containment/room? Or in the containment building?

I would guess to say the fuel mass is no longer releasing energy through a chain reaction of new nuclides. The heat is from the radioactive decay of fission products. The mass of fuel is in the reactor containment with little chance of melting through. The containment is leaking cooling water because of physical cracking.

I mostly agree with that. But that is only because they are keeping flowing water on the melted core.
If that water stops....
could re-ignite in a flash.

and as far as my understanding it did melt through the bottom of the containment, but maybe I'm wrong. I'm not exactly a nuclear engineer or anything close to it.

Seems with the water it won't melt any further through the base of the structure.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

That is what I think a lot of people are missing.

You don't have to be eating sea food directly from the affected area. Much like the plastic 'islands' in the ocean gyres, the plastic breaks down into microscopic particles, which are ingested by smaller fish, which are then fed on by larger fish, etc etc, but the toxins are carried over. So it finds it's way into the food chain, and guess who is at the top of that - allegedly. Us.

And as you have said, migratory fish, which are a food source for many other creatures as well as us, I don't see this as anything to remain complacent about.

And with the way the environment is already treated, despite good intentions to affect change, we're copping it from every direction.

Now, all we need is WWIII to start, and viola, Mother Nature will have to hit the reset button again, and in a few hundred thousand years, bipedal homonids may start digging up pepsi bottles and wondering what strange hieroglyphs are embedded in that strange container. Might even consider it a religious thing. and the whole sad show will start all over again.

a reply to: Phage

Adult salmon eat bottom feeders.

originally posted by: savemebarry
a reply to: Phage

Adult salmon eat bottom feeders.

yes but according to his link salmon in Alaska are not positive for radiation from 2014 to 2015 to 2016.

I havn't cross referenced that to be sure of it.

we are the top of the food chain, so we are at a high risk if our food is contaminated.. The concentrations only increase as you go up..

a reply to: Reverbs

When so much Powers that Be marginalization of any worries over Fukushima have already been proven, I have a hard time taking those published test results at face value. That may seem paranoid, but the damaged trust is built on a track record of sugar coated lies.

a reply to: Reverbs

How would it reflash? In some reactors, if there are no control rods inserted to control neutrons, cold water will cause a spike in fissions in a core.

www.scientificamerican.com...

The 3.7-meter-long nuclear fuel used at Fukushima is composed of uranium oxide pellets encased in a zirconium cladding. Though control rods have stopped the uranium fission process that drives normal operation of a nuclear reactor, the byproducts of that continue to split and generate heat. If the fuel rods are no longer being cooled—as has happened at all three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant operating at the time of the earthquake—then the zirconium cladding will swell and crack, releasing the uranium fuel pellets and fission byproducts, such as radioactive cesium and iodine, among others.

The high temperatures that the fuel rods create boil water and continually turn it into steam. If no fresh water is introduced to cool the rods then they continue to heat up. Once the rods reach more than 1200 degrees Celsius, the zirconium will interact with the steam and split the hydrogen from the water. That hydrogen can then be released from the reactor core and containment vessel and, if it accumulates in sufficient quantities—concentrations of 4 percent or more in the air—it can explode, as has apparently occurred at reactors No. 1 and 3, and possibly No. 2 as well. The explosions at reactors No. 1 and 3 destroyed the surrounding buildings but have apparently not damaged the massive steel containment vessel—as much as 20 centimeters thick—that surrounds each reactor's nuclear core.

A fission reactor not critical still needs cooling due to radioactive decay of fission products.

There are usually four layers of contamination.

The uranium fuel pellets in cladding housed in fuel rods is one. Though a neutron and a gamma flux from the core can activate metals and containments in cooling water that generates radioactive contamination.

The reactor vessel housing the fuel is the second line of containment.

Then the reactor housing containing the reactor vessel is the third layer of containment.

Then the building that holds the reactor housing is the fourth.

I kept digging. The fuel still seems to be in the reactor housing outside the reactor vessel.

The problem is the reactor housing is cracked from a physical process, not from melting? Unless you have a source to cite that I didn't find? Which is possible. As noted, the press would rather report on California minnows than a radioactive disaster.

The cooling water which is being pumped into the reactor housing is leaking out of the cracks.

a reply to: neutronflux

Well, you are obviously more knowledgeable about reactors than I am.

So if you could clarify. It seems the fuel has melted through the bottom of the containment.

I don't know how many levels there are, but it's not anywhere close to where they thought it was.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Reverbs

When so much Powers that Be marginalization of any worries over Fukushima have already been proven, I have a hard time taking those published test results at face value. That may seem paranoid, but the damaged trust is built on a track record of sugar coated lies.

I can only suggest you try to find out for your self.
I also have qualms.

But I'm not in Alaska with tools to measure radioactivity in fish.

If there was still uncontrollable nuclear fissions due to a neutrons, they would be trying to poison the reaction by adding a neutron poison to the cooling water?

originally posted by: neutronflux
If there was still uncontrollable nuclear fissions due to a neutrons, they would be trying to poison the reaction by adding a neutron poison to the cooling water?

can you explain that in more detail?

From my angle. We have been lied to a lot about this situation. It's not even easy to know what the truth about it is.