BS: Japan Nuclear plant disaster, 2011

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 01:10 PM

Charley, I want you to know that I agree with you about the possible death toll of a nuclear meltdown, and the severity of that worldwide. I've been with you since about 1965. The issue does get people heated, myself among them. With you, I hope you're wrong. No apology--profuse or otherwise--will be necessary. I was wrong--but let's hope I'm right.

Thank you, Charley.

Bruce

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Charley Noble
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 01:16 PM

josepp-

As someone who has "worked in" nuclear power plants, you have never heard of "fuel rods"? What was your job there? (sputter, sputter) The nuclear fuel is composed as cylindrical pellets, inserted into nickel alloy fuel rod and then with its brothers and sisters installed within the reactor vessel. The steam would be generated from the coolant heated by the reaction taking place within the fuel rods.

"Stop causing needless alarm"?

You're correct that an atomic explosion as with a bomb would be unlikely at this nuclear reactor. What happened at Chernobyl, however, was bad enough to be "alarmed" at, don't you think? There the nuclear fuel rods melted down, caught fire, and there was a plume of highly radioactive gas which devastated the surrounding downwind area, and dispersed radiation worldwide. You say that is "unlikely to happen" with a 40 year old Japanese nuclear reactor. I don't think anyone should be reassured by your statement. But I could be wrong. I hope so.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Charley Noble
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 01:30 PM

Bruce-

I'd ordinarily send this via PM but as you're a "guest" that is not an option.

Our disagreement is a minor ripple compared to what folks seem to be facing in and around the Fukushima nuclear plant, not to mention the other nuclear plants in Japan which are also having problems but which we've gotten less info.

My parents raised questions about the siting of the Maine Yankee nuclear power plant prior to its construction beginning in 1968. It was a tough time to raise questions about the safety of nuclear power and they didn't win that battle. I didn't get involved until after Three-Mile Island in 1979. And it wasn't until 1982 that I returned to Maine and began working with the Maine Nuclear Referendum Committee to attempt to shut the plant down. There were actually three statewide shut-down referenda, and they all failed to harvest more than 48% of the vote. The last one took place in 1987 in the wake of the Chernobyl disaster. We raised almost a million dollars and thought we were sure to win this round, but, no, we hardly did any better. Ten years later the owners of Maine Yankee decided to shut it down ten years before its license was to expire because of escalating maintenance problems. But we like to think we helped persuade them to make the right decision. Maybe so. Maybe not.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 01:37 PM

I'll throw out an idea and watch it get shot to hell.

If the venting to reduce the pressure causes a decrease in the level of heavy water which leads to the exposure of some of the rods which in turn causes a temperature rise (and this will accelerate with subsequent temperature rise) thereby allowing the nickel to melt and the ??? (can't recall the name of that stuff) to ignite which in turn ignites the hydrogen separated from the heavy water by the extreme temperatures causing a massive explosion which expels radioactive material into the atmosphere... why not pull the drain plug and remove the explosive fuel from equation? Is it because it's better to expel the radioactive material into the atmosphere than have it melt into the earth?

Start shootin.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 01:42 PM

Bravo Charley.

Now, could Canada interest you in a CANDU? >;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 01:53 PM

However, Naoto Sekimura, a professor at Tokyo University, insisted there was little chance that Japan came close to experiencing a Chernobyl-style meltdown. "No Chernobyl is possible at a light water reactor," he said. "Loss of coolant means a temperature rise, but it also will stop the reaction. Even in the worst-case scenario, that would mean some radioactive leakage and equipment damage, but not an explosion.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Jack Campin
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 01:59 PM

Is it because it's better to expel the radioactive material into the atmosphere than have it melt into the earth?

Groundwater. Steam explosion blowing the entire reactor into the sky.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: josepp
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 02:03 PM

////As someone who has "worked in" nuclear power plants, you have never heard of "fuel rods"?////

No. I've heard of fuel plates. These have to arranged in a very specific way inside the reactor. The rods are made of hafnium and when they are inserted, they absorb the neutrons that cause fission thereby squelching the fission process which, it turn, shuts down the reactor if the all the rods are fully inserted simultaneously, i.e. a reactor scram. But even the shutdown has to be carefully monitored for some 30 hours or so due to what is called a build up of "poisons". Now, I haven't worked in a nuclear plant since the 80s and so there might be new designs but I haven't heard of any until now.

////What was your job there?////

I ran the electric plant.

////(sputter, sputter) The nuclear fuel is composed as cylindrical pellets, inserted into nickel alloy fuel rod and then with its brothers and sisters installed within the reactor vessel///

As I said, that may be a new design but every plant I worked in used fuel plates. These plates are very thin. Pellets? You're sure about that? The plates have to be very, very thin. You can't just have a big glob of fission material. And then they're encased in nickel, you say? How does the moderator get to them? What is the moderator?? Maybe they've had some technological breakthroughs since the 80s. First time I've heard of it though.

The rods I know of were hafnium and were necessary to control the rate of fission. I know of one plant that used water instead of rods but I never worked there and am not sure how that worked (I knew several people that did work there).

///The steam would be generated from the coolant heated by the reaction taking place within the fuel rods.///

But how is the reaction taking place, that's what puzzles me. You have to have a moderator and I don't know what that would be in the case of pellets encased in nickel. How are the neutrons getting to the fuel to trigger the fission??? Then the moderator heats up and then is carried along via huge pumps to a set of tubes into what is called a pressurizer which is heated by steam. There is water surrounding the tubes and the heat is transferred to this water of what is called the secondary. This is the water that becomes steam that powers the turbines that turned my generators. That can't let the primary water do that because, obviously, it's been inside the reactor.

////You're correct that an atomic explosion as with a bomb would be unlikely at this nuclear reactor.////

It would be impossible. It would be like two cars colliding into the shape of a huge cannon and balls and the chemicals in the cars' various systems forming a volatile substance that causes the cannon to go off and blow down a building or two. It's literally that remote of a possibility.

///What happened at Chernobyl, however, was bad enough to be "alarmed" at, don't you think?////

Yes, but you're talking about the Russians. Who would you trust to build a better plant? The Russians or the Japanese? I'm not saying this isn't a catastrophe athat can't get worse. An 8.9 earthquake? God knows what is still waiting to happen. But I am saying there won't be any nuclear explosions unless someone sets off a nuclear bomb.

////There the nuclear fuel rods melted down, caught fire, and there was a plume of highly radioactive gas which devastated the surrounding downwind area, and dispersed radiation worldwide.////

How could a cloud of gas disperse radiation? Radioactivty I could see. I mean, I suppose there might be ways but none I know of offhand.

I've never read about what caused the Chernobyl disaster but I would assume if the "fuel rods" melted it would less of a catastrophe than if the hafnium rods melted thereby not allowing the reactor to shutdown so that the fission rate balloons out of control.

///You say that is "unlikely to happen" with a 40 year old Japanese nuclear reactor./////

I'm saying it can't happen. A nuclear plant, no matter how old it is, cannot cause a nuclear explosion because it is not set up like a nuclear bomb. A meltdown is not a nuclear explosion.

////I don't think anyone should be reassured by your statement. But I could be wrong. I hope so.////

You have to be wrong or all my training was bullshit. I'm not saying a meltdown can't happen and wouldn't be catastrophe but I am saying a nuclear explosion simply cannot happen in a nuclear plant unless someone sets off a nuclear bomb inside it.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 02:13 PM

Chernobyl was a graphite reactor that stopped radiation like little soldid walls..
3 Mile Island was a water reactor like the ones at Fukashima.
Uranium inside control cylinders of a metal designed to stop most radiation, is cooled by water. Water reactors do not use walls of graphite. Liquid sodium is used instead of water in some reactors but while it is more efficient in and accident if it leakds sodium burns a bit like Magnesium if it gets wet.


Could 3 Mile Island have gone critical and have had a huge explosion?
yes yes and yes.o

Did it?
no

It was amazingly close. It is said to have ben within a few degrees and perhaps only 50 pounds of additional melted uranium to obtain a chain reaction criticality.

One reason it did not blow up was that the specially coated floor of the reactor sloped away with the center poking up like a cone. The melted fuel flowed away from a central catching point and dispersed in a ring rather than a clump. Engineering prevented a full blwon atomic blast.






Yes gnu is right.

Cesium is a sign that some or all of the fuel has melted. How it flows and distributes on the floor is important for the reasons stated above.

Everything I have written here is from memory past and my current source3 is CNN IN - special earthquake tsunami edition.

If no Cesium was reported found in the air I too would have taken hope.

IF the pumps had worked I too would have taken hope.

I will take any valid hope. I welcome it.

Boric acid and seawater is at this moment flowing into one or more reactors. I called this procedure a band aid but ti is more like giving heroin to a terminal patient. It will settle the patient down but is not liekly of offering a cure. from contamination.

It is a last ditch effort to avoid criticality.


Can melted Uranium melt through concrete? r3einforced with rebar?

yes, unfortunetly this is one of those pesky design flaws in nuclear power plants.

Will it certainly melt through concrete?

no.






By the way Saturday Night Live did a sketch on 3 Mile Island.
They gave the job of cleaning up the water and melted fuel to an old black women Garret Morris and Jimmy Carter played by Akroyd was there to determine the cause of the melt down.
Carter discovered it was a Pepsi syndrome of a drink being spilled on the control panel.


At Fukashima once the other reactors were dwon for maintnence and water flooded the back up generators they no loner had a back up for the back up.

Its just one of those things that was sold as being impossible.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 02:17 PM

Thanks Jack.

BTW... just thought of sommat that is kinda thread drift. Years ago I was at the nuke near me as an engineering student. The massive concrete containment walls and dome were touted as one of the "extra" safeguards of the CANDU reactor system. I also recall watching a video (hahaha... movie) of concrete burning in a materials course. As a matter of fact, the 6m thick containment walls degraded to a point where they were considered inadequate by initial design standards twenty odd years after construction.

Also, I phoned a radio talk show years ago and had a chat with Dr. Stanton Freidman in which he chastised me about my trepidation regarding the safety of nuke plants. I asked him how The Ocean Ranger (oil rig) sank... a failure of safety systems perhaps? After they went to commercial I was disconnected.

And, no, I have no support for my statements.

In the long run, I still support our nuke until truly, or at least reasonbly clean, energy production is doable.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 02:24 PM

josepp... pellets... rods... yup. It's all the rage these days.

And, when you post... "No. I've heard of fuel plates. These have to arranged in a very specific way inside the reactor. The rods are made of hafnium and when they are inserted,..." sommat just don't add up???

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 02:24 PM

Gnu points to a problem that has faced us for over 50 years. Why would vested interests in nuclear power worry about other ways to generate electricity when the have the solution wired--as far as the vested interests are concerned.

1) Some things seem clear. If I discovered a cure for cancer, it would put millions out of work.

2) If I discovered a cheap source to use instead of gas, it would put millions out of work.

Etc.

Our paradigm is all wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 02:26 PM

I do not know if this plant has a sloping zircon shield.

IF we found the Fukashima plant designs we would among oursleves know more than what CNN is telling us.

We would know more about the fuel pellets, shielding etc.



joeseph, How is fission being allowed to occur...?

We may not know exactly however if the fuel did not have time to get covered since the earthquake and the tsunami were only about 5 minutes apart, then it is clearly possible that a hot reactor left in such an in between state would suffer runaway heat.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 02:38 PM

Question... why can't they pull the rods?

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: josepp
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 02:38 PM

I'm asking if pellets of Uranium are encased in nickel rods how do neutrons from the moderator reach them since the moderator is making no contact with the fuel? And how is the process of fission controlled in such a system?

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Charley Noble
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 03:54 PM

josepp-

"I'm asking if pellets of Uranium are encased in nickel rods how do neutrons from the moderator reach them since the moderator is making no contact with the fuel? And how is the process of fission controlled in such a system?"

I don't know the answer to that for sure without refreshing my aging tiny brain with research. My understanding is that the fuel rod casings are not impermeable to whatever (gamma rays and alpha and beta particles) are being emitted by the breakdown of the uranium pellets. The boric acid has the capacity to absorb some of these emissions which helps moderate the rise in temperature.

It's also my understanding that the Japanese reactor is a light water reactor rather than a heavy water reactor such as we have festering in New Brunswick, Canada. The fact that it is also a boiling water reactor rather than a pressurized water reactor like most of the reactors in the States is another factor to consider. I'm not sure if it makes the reactor more safe or less safe. Well, any idiot realizes now that the Fukushira reactor is not safe now.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Charley Noble
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 04:35 PM

Here's another good resource for updates, Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), a nuclear power watchdog group headquartered in Washington, DC: click here for update!

Their full-time staff has the training and experience to frankly comment on such events.

I'm disturbed to learn there is also a "spent-fuel pool" in the basement of the destroyed reactor building; "spent-fuel" is actually high-level nuclear waste, old fuel rods, that remain deadly for thousands and thousands of years.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 04:44 PM

Charley... "...such as we have festering in New Brunswick, Canada."

???

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: josepp
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 04:49 PM

///I don't know the answer to that for sure without refreshing my aging tiny brain with research. My understanding is that the fuel rod casings are not impermeable to whatever (gamma rays and alpha and beta particles) are being emitted by the breakdown of the uranium pellets. The boric acid has the capacity to absorb some of these emissions which helps moderate the rise in temperature.////

I just looked up the CANDU system. Totally unlike anything I worked on which were Westinghouse and General Electric plants. But, as I said, I stopped working in nuclear plants in the 80s and i don't know what systems other manufacturers were using.   

////It's also my understanding that the Japanese reactor is a light water reactor rather than a heavy water reactor such as we have festering in New Brunswick, Canada.////

I know light requires enriched uranium but since I never worked at a lightwater facility, I don't know which is better. Heavy is cheaper, I know that.

///The fact that it is also a boiling water reactor rather than a pressurized water reactor like most of the reactors in the States is another factor to consider. I'm not sure if it makes the reactor more safe or less safe. Well, any idiot realizes now that the Fukushira reactor is not safe now.////

I never worked with boiling water reactors. Never heard of it. Every plant I worked at was always pressurized. In fact, I can't see how that could possibly work. Letting the water boil in the plants I worked at would be EXTREMELY dangerous. It wouldn't be allowed. We couldn't even let the water transfer heat through nucleate boiling which is extremely efficient because it was too close to boiling at that point and so was too dangerous to allow.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 05:18 PM

Hmmmm..maybe we could stop the meltdown by pouring all the Bankers and the Bastards down the chimneys, kind of block it all with shit.

Failing that, we could perhaps use all the billions of billions of billions that they've stolen from the world in general and see if that would smother the life out of things...


Failing *that*, we could all go shopping till we're quite literally dropping, with our credit cards (hey we may never have to pay a penny back!) buy 'Hello' magazine and a **very** large latte, then sit down, relax and look forward to the HUGE financial savings that will probably be big enough to wipe out all National Debts around the world, when we finally get to turn off ALL street lights forever, because we've just turned ourselves into a species that Glows in the Dark....

Maybe this is what happened to Glo-Worms...but on a much smaller scale?

It could also be the end of the IMF.....Gee, every cloud has a silver lining then..even the nuclear ones...



Excellent post, Bruce..

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 05:21 PM

Good work Charlie!

the info from that site has some amazing revelations regarding Fukashima.

Spent fuel rods are in the basement of the crippled reactor
Also they seem to be using a mix of unranium and plutonium for fuel.
For lower cost reasons they opted to repair cracks in the containment vessel with patchwork welded plates instead of replacing the whole thing.

I have't found what kind of floor shield is used yet but I will continue to look at the designs.

After reading the lastest bulletines I found that except for the above three findings, everything is on par what with what I have written and suspected so far.












The question that will not be answered in media soundbites is "what is the big deal if meltdowns occur"?.


hold on to your sphincter...


To my knowledge the largest hydrogen bombs probably contain less than a ton of nuclear material. They probably have less than half a ton.

During the decades in which atmospheric, space and underwater detonations of nuclear weapons were "tested", there were various health problems than ensued: childhood leukemmia rose 1000%, cancers of many unusual types rose dramaticly, lung and brain cancers more than doubled...

If each plant in trouble in Japan has between 20 tons of an enriched Uranium Plutonium mix fuel, along with an unknown quantity of old spent fuel stored in the basement and you multiply that by as much as 5 plants there are well more than 200 tons of highly radioactive fissile material, or nearly a quarter million pounds of Uranium with a small amount of plutonium and large amount of spent fuel.

When I ask myself about the amount of all the nukes all nations exploded numbering over 302, is the amount of nuclear fuel at those Japanese plants greater or less than the nukes we already exploded in our atmosphere??

I am guessing the Japanese Nuke plants have more. Way more.



If this is too troubling a question to consider, relax and please refer to FOX NEws who will assure you that radiation levels have gone down at Fukashima.



Charley's Nuke info site stated that the on site radiation monitors are off line as well as not being available for public information release.




_______________________________

What to expect from popular media if the plants melt down catastrophicly:
There will be many reassuring atatements that some radiation will be realsed but that there is no danger from this in the United STates.

We have the situation under control as we "Entomb the shut down reactors in a mountain of concrete.

There is nothing to worry about.

Move alon there is nothing to see here.

Left wing loons are blowing the incident and their self importence out of proportion.

The danger has passed but we should remain vigilant.

We dodged the big one.

We can all take a big sigh of relief.

Thanks to all the heros who battled the nuclear incident....    (this one I happen to agree with)

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 05:56 PM

While sphincter factors are incredibly tight
It really is clear were not here to fight.
This really is as scary as hell
but hope still rings as clear as a bell


Reeling reactors and swirling disasters
are reaching a critical threshold.
How hot it can grow nobody knows
but one day we'll all know what death holds.

Nuclear power is the news of the hour
and Plutonium makes people turn sour
The Fukashima disaster's like WW2
in that few of us know what to do

Like George Carlin said off the top of his head
"I can watch earthquakes destroy the earth safe and snuggled in bed
It seems he was right, but more so.
My ass has just swallowed my torso

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 05:58 PM

ANNOUNCED JUST MOMMENTS AGO


THE FUKASHIMA MELTDOWN IS NOW UNDERWAY.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: GUEST,999
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 06:08 PM

In Japan plant, frantic efforts to avoid meltdown
(AP) – 18 minutes ago
TOKYO (AP) — Inside the troubled nuclear power plant, officials knew the risks were high when they decided to vent radioactive steam from a severely overheated reactor vessel. They knew a hydrogen explosion could occur, and it did. The decision still trumped the worst-case alternative — total nuclear meltdown.
At least for the time being.
The chain of events started Friday when a magnitude-8.9 earthquake and tsunami severed electricity to the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear complex 170 miles (270 kilometers) northeast of here, crippling its cooling system. Then, backup power did not kick in properly at one of its units.
From there, conditions steadily worsened, although government and nuclear officials initially said things were improving. Hours after the explosion, they contended that radiation leaks were reduced and that circumstances had gotten better at the 460-megawatt Unit 1. But crisis after crisis continued to develop or be revealed.
Without power, and without plant pipes and pumps that were destroyed in the explosion of the most-troubled reactor's containment building, authorities resorted to drawing seawater in an attempt to cool off the overheated uranium fuel rods.
Robert Alvarez, senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies and former senior policy adviser to the U.S. secretary of energy, said in a briefing for reporters that the seawater was a desperate measure.
"It's a Hail Mary pass," he said.
He said that the success of using seawater and boron to cool the reactor will depend on the volume and rate of their distribution. He said the dousing would need to continue nonstop for days.
Another key, he said, was the restoration of electrical power, so that normal cooling systems can be restored.
Officials placed Dai-ichi Unit 1, and four other reactors, under states of emergency Friday because operators had lost the ability to cool the reactors using usual procedures. Local evacuations were ordered.
Officials began venting radioactive steam at Unit 1 to relieve pressure inside the reactor vessel, which houses the overheated uranium fuel.
Concerns escalated dramatically Saturday when that unit's containment building exploded.
It turned out that officials were aware that the steam contained hydrogen, acknowledged Shinji Kinjo, spokesman for the government Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency. More importantly, they also were aware they were risking an explosion by deciding to vent the steam.
The significance of the hydrogen began to come clear late Saturday:
—Officials decided to reduce rising pressure inside the reactor vessel, so they vented some of the steam buildup. They needed to do that to prevent the entire structure from exploding, and thus starting down the road to a meltdown.
—At the same time, in order to keep the reactor fuel cool, and also prevent a meltdown, operators needed to keep circulating more and more cool water on the fuel rods.
—Temperature in the reactor vessel apparently kept rising, heating the zirconium cladding that makes up the fuel rod casings. Once the zirconium reached 2,200 degrees Fahrenheit (1,200 Celsius), it reacted with the water, becoming zirconium oxide and hydrogen.
—When the hydrogen-filled steam was vented from the reactor vessel, the hydrogen reacted with oxygen, either in the air or water outside the vessel, and exploded.
A similar "hydrogen bubble" had concerned officials at the 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear disaster in Pennsylvania until it dissipated.
If the temperature inside the Fukushima reactor vessel continued to rise even more — to roughly 4,000 degrees Fahrenheit (2,200 Celsius) — then the uranium fuel pellets would start to melt.
According to experts interviewed by The Associated Press, any melted fuel would eat through the bottom of the reactor vessel. Next, it would eat through the floor of the already-damaged containment building. At that point, the uranium and dangerous byproducts would start escaping into the environment.
At some point in the process, the walls of the reactor vessel — 6 inches (15 centimeters) of stainless steel — would melt into a lava-like pile, slump into any remaining water on the floor, and potentially cause an explosion much bigger than the one caused by the hydrogen. Such an explosion would enhance the spread of radioactive contaminants.
If the reactor core became exposed to the external environment, officials would likely began pouring cement and sand over the entire facility, as was done at the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident in the Ukraine, Peter Bradford, a former commissioner of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said in a briefing for reporters.
At that point, Bradford added, "many first responders would die."

AP National Writer Jeff Donn reported from Boston.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Charley Noble
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 06:24 PM

999-

And that's the good news, but thanks for the update.

Peter Bradford was chair of our Public Utilities Commission here in Maine after he left the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. We respected his knowledge and experience, although we certainly debated him rigorously on a wide range of nuclear related issues. But he's no fool.

I haven't much to add at this point.

I could score some points with josepp above on "boiling water reactors." But I won't except to repeat that Vermont Yankee is the only operating boiling water reactor in the States, over 40 years old, and quite similar to the old reactor at Fukushima which evidently is experiencing meltdown. In fact, according to Wkipedia, all the reactors at Fukushima are "boiling water" reactors. Please check it out if you're unfamiliar with this type and are interesting in the question.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 06:29 PM

Well that sucks.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Jack Campin
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 06:31 PM

This looks like a reliable source:

http://uvdiv.blogspot.com/2011/03/some-links-on-fukushima-daiichi-1.html

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: bobad
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 06:44 PM

As of 6:26 EST

"Tokyo (CNN) -- A meltdown may be under way at one of Fukushima Daiichi's nuclear power reactors in northern Japan, an official with Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency told CNN Sunday.

"There is a possibility, we see the possibility of a meltdown," said Toshihiro Bannai, director of the agency's international affairs office, in a telephone interview from the agency's headquarters in Tokyo. "At this point, we have still not confirmed that there is an actual meltdown, but there is a possibility."

Though he said engineers have been unable to get close enough to the core to know what's going on, he based his conclusion on the fact that they measured radioactive cesium and radioactive iodine in the air Saturday night.

"What we have seen is only the slight indication from a monitoring post of cesium and iodine," he said. Since then, he said, plant officials have injected sea water and boron into the plant in an effort to cool its nuclear fuel.

We have some confidence, to some extent, to make the situation to be stable status," he said. "We actually have very good confidence that we will resolve this."

A state of emergency has been declared for it and two of the other five reactors at the same complex, he said. Three are in a safe, shut-down state, he said. "The other two still have some cooling systems, but not enough capacity."

From CNN's Tom Watkins

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 06:46 PM

Okay... yet another perhaps stunned question... if a nuke power plant does not "boil water", how does it create enough kinetic energy to move a turbine to create electricity?

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 06:59 PM

There are two distinctly diffrent news announcments regarding Fukashima. The Ambassador from Japan is repeating in even tones that he has no evidence of a meltdown and that all relief efforts are beng carried out on schedule. His language is cloaked in terms that he may not be accused of lieing. "I have not seen///" "I have not been given reason to believe..."

The announcment in Japan from nuclear plant officials that a meltdown is underway is a courageous and honest approach that honors any volunteers who march into the jaws of hellish death to do what they can to save the other reactors.

Honesty is always the best policy except for individuals who would collapse under its weight.


The two tiered media announcments of this nuclear disaster is wise in that it allows people who would fall apart to have something to cling to while smart people still get the information they need.

At minimum people who did not evacuate yet will be motivated to move now.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 07:03 PM

That is al a fancy nuke plant is gnu, a big kettle to make steam to run a turbine surrounded by magnets to create electicity.

These bad reactors are whistling steam like crazy until someone takes it off the stove.

Cup o tea dearie?

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 07:14 PM

Perhaps I asked too soon... "a pressurized water reactor like most of the reactors in the States is another factor to consider" from josepp's post.

I can see (kinda) that if the heavy water was heated to super and funnelled properly it could spin a turbine without gas formation. Seems odd at first thought, to me. Just never thought of it that way... am a silly engineer by trade, not a make-a-nickel engineer.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Jack Campin
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 07:16 PM

A pressurized water reactor uses a heat exchanger to boil the water.

http://www.nucleartourist.com/type/pwr.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: SINSULL
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 07:19 PM

The pictures of terrified toddlers being scanned for radiation are heartbreaking. They are completely traumatized by the earthquake and aftershocks. Now men in odd suits (carefully protecting themselves) are seeing if they are "hot".
Meantime, a coastal town in another part of japan is "missing" about half of its population - 9500 people can't be accounted for.

Ironic isn't it? 50+ years ago we, the United States, reigned nuclear horrors down on these same people. Now we are scrambling to protect them from the same horror.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: SINSULL
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 07:19 PM

Another irony? Rained not reigned.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 07:20 PM

Once again, thanks Jack.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Jack Campin
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 07:48 PM

Now we are scrambling to protect them from the same horror.

...from an American nuclear reactor.

In the late 1950s when the decision to build it was made, Japan would have no choice in taking General Electric's product. The point of the transaction was to boost GE's profits. The fact that the reactor was nowhere near safe enough for Japanese conditions wouldn't have been considered.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 08:15 PM

speaking of irony...satire alert;


Whew, The Ambassador from Japan says everything is fine. Thank goodness we can all breath a big sigh of relief now. Thank God
we have no reason to distrust Japanese Ambassadors.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 08:34 PM

Come now, Donuel. ;-) That's being a bit nasty. The Japanese ambassador in December '41 had been sent a text (in code) specifically worded as an official declaration of war from Japan on the USA. He was instructed to give it to Cordell Hull at a specific time (shortly prior to the attack going in at Pearl Harbour) so that the state of war would officially exist prior to that hostile act. He failed to do so on time, because his incompetent office staff had so much trouble decoding the message and laboriously typing it out a letter at a time that they didn't have it translated in time for him to deliver it on schedule.

This utterly humiliated the Japanese ambassador, and it horrified Admiral Yamamoto when he found out about it, because he knew the American nation would never forgive a "sneak attack" launched prior to the declaration of war. (In fact, they'd never have forgiven any kind of major attack like that, but Yamamoto, like all Japanese, had a rather medieval concept of honor, so it was a major concern to him at least.)

I don't see how any of the above translates to the Japanese ambassador being untrustworthy. He did what his job required, and it was not his intention to deceive the USA regarding Japanese intentions, but to deliver that message as ordered to...and on time.

The attack was scheduled to occur about half an hour after delivery of the message, but the message didn't get translated on time.

The Japanese ambassador was a man put in an impossible position by his own government and his poorly trained office staff, and he should not be blamed for what happened. (In any case, both the American and Japanese governments knew darned well that war was coming between them...and very soon. And the military on both sides knew it too. There was really no doubt of it. The only question was, on which day would it happen? Only....the general public in both countries was not informed about that.)

You could say that the people who were tricked were the ordinary citizenry.   In both countries. They (and the ordinary servicemen on the Allied side) were the ones who got blindsided.

None of that was the Japanese ambassador's fault.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: josepp
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 08:50 PM

///Okay... yet another perhaps stunned question... if a nuke power plant does not "boil water", how does it create enough kinetic energy to move a turbine to create electricity?///

In the types of plants I worked in, the water in the reactor that heats up and is moved by pumps through a pressurizer and steam generator was never allowed to boil. The pressuirzer prevented that. The water then passes through heat exchange tubes in the steam generator and back to the reactor. This system is called the primary.

On the other side of the tubes is a different, unconnected system of water that received the heat energy from the primary. It is called the secondary. It DOES allow the water to boil inside the steam generator (which is basically a boiler) and that steam is superheated and moving through pipes at a high rate of speed. It must be very dry when it enters the turbine. Very small droplets in the steam will tear up the turbine blades so there must not be any droplets. The spinning turbine then turns the generators to generate power which goes to a power distribution switchboard which is what I operated and oversaw for a number of years.

I take it that in a boiling reactor, there is no secondary system. The water must leave the reactor as steam and go directly to the turbines. That sounds dangerous as hell to me but it is what it is.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 08:59 PM

Thank you again josepp. Pressure does supress boiling. In space you can boil water at 100 below zero.

Also a heat exchanger does seem to be an inefficient link in the chain don't you think? Do they use that for safety reasons or protect the pipes from extremely high pressures that steam produces?


The floor of this reactor does not seem to be as advanced as 3 Mile Island. So far it looks like it is just concrete with two big valves at the bottom.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 09:06 PM

jeez I even gave you a satire alert.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: josepp
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 09:07 PM

////None of that was the Japanese ambassador's fault.////

While I pity the sailors killed at Pearl Harbor because of the incompetence of their superiors, I have no overall sympathy for the US. The planes were spotted a number of times and reported and nobody did anything. That is unforgiveable. I am a 6-year veteran of the United States Navy and I was trained that first you get feedback and make observations before assuming the watch--a pre-watch tour, it's called. Then you get a turnover from the watch you are relieving. it is your responsibility to make sure what he tells you gibes with the info you gathered on your pre-watch tour. If it does not, you refuse to take that watch until he gives your a correct turnover.

Then anything that appears out of the ordinary on your watch you must investigate, report and monitor. If anything bad happens on your watch--YOU are responsible--YOU ARE. I remember a guy went to mast because a steam pipe ruptured on his watch. A valve was closed that had no business being closed. Turns out the previous watch closed for a reason no one knows. The other guy came down and took over the watch and the pipe burst on his watch. He insisted it wasn't his fault. "Did you take a pre-watch tour and make sure all the right vales were opened and closed?" he was asked. "No." "Then you're responsible for what happened because you were on watch." He was reduced a step in rank. The Navy was very pissed at him. What happened to the other guy? Nothing.

So with Pearl Harbor, someone who had the duty that morning dismissed reports of unidentified planes and so he is responsible for the attack on Pearl Harbor by military standards. That's way military responsbility was exercised on me and my fellow sailors and that's the way I, in turn, exercise it on every other person in the military. A report was made to you on our watch, you failed to investigate it, an attack occurred as a direct result, therefore you are responsible for it happening and should be punished accordingly.

It was his job to watch for invaders, he didn't do his job. If that is how a nation trains its soldiers then tough shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 09:27 PM

Yes, Donuel, I know...but I just can't avoid talking about history. I love it. ;-)

josepp - You are correct that one man failed to pass along a message from the radar station about a large incoming group of unidentified aircraft. That was because he assumed that they were a group of (unarmed) American B-17s coming in from California. On the one hand, it was not too surprising an error...on the other hand, he should have checked into it more carefully before making a snap judgement!!!

A Japanese midget sub was spotted in restricted waters very near the harbour awhile before the attack too, and it was sunk by an American picket destroyer! Yet no one followed that up by issuing a general alert.

These were cases of considerable carelessness.

I have plenty of sympathy for all the people who died (or were injured) on both sides at Pearl Harbour and after Pearl Harbour. They were all doing the job they'd been trained to do and doing the very best they could, but they were among the millions of victims of power politics who have fallen in war. They just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Sort of like the Japanese at this moment, after the earthquake.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 09:30 PM

NHK bulletin

The Nuclear energy official said they are pumping sea water on both #1 reactor and #3 reactor. I hope they have Doug Flutie spraying the sea water.


When the spokesman for the N plants said there was no radiation high enough to be immediately harmful to human health, I saw him lick his lips and take a deep breath at the end of that sentence.
He also explained that wind direction may be the cause for such a wide varience in observed radiation levels.


Clearly this is a job for McGruber.
Actually it almost sounds as though he is in charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 09:32 PM

OK you soldiers, stop it.

No one here is going to refight WW 2,
We have a meltdown to fight.

Do I have any volunteers?

















Anyone,

?anyone at all?

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 09:41 PM

You Soldier, yes you. Whats your name?

Private Jose Immenez

Very well Private Immenez, get in there and clean up that reactor.

Sir? How do I do that sir?

Just get a mop and bucket and get to it.

Yes sir, where do I empty the water sir?

In the sea soldier

Sir where sir?

the sea

Si?

Yes

Yes sir?







I'll get me hat

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Charley Noble
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 09:45 PM

It's time to hunker down in the basement if you haven't already evacuated.

There is a theory that suggests that "boiling water" reactors such as Vermont Yankee and the Fukushima (I won't disclose why I am able to spell this word correctly on a public forum) are actually safer than pressured light water reactors. But it never made sense to me. I liked the concept of a totally secondary systems of pipes coming in to collect heat, exit, and then boil steam to run the turbines. Of course the secondary steam tubes tended to clog up after a while...

This is so much like some terrible flashback to Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.

I'm not sure I'll dare to watch the news tomorrow.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: number 6
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 10:49 PM

doesn't look good ..

"We are assuming that a meltdown has occurred" at a quake-damaged nuclear reactor, Japan's chief Cabinet secretary says. "


biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Nuclear plant disaster looming
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Mar 11 - 10:50 PM

Yes sir, Donuel, sir! Copy that.

I am well stocked up on iodine. You never know when it might come in handy.