Reply With Quote
Most definitely.
Long term they will change more:
Japan has a lot of coastline.
Yes, but it doesn't instantly heat to explosive potential fast enough. You will have a relatively fast ramp in steam pressure, but not an explosive force of it.
Most definitely.
Long term they will change more:
Japan has a lot of coastline.
On the whole "emergency backup" thing, one thing we're forgetting is that most backup systems aren't designed against a "worst-case" scenario, but a "bad case" scenario, due to cost.
Another problem is probably that said backup devices were predicated solely against an earthquake, and not against the probability of an earthquake/tsunami combo, as the article suggests.
Another good point it brings up is whether or not these backup systems are tested. I know in my field of networking, "backup" paths aren't tested as often as they should, because higher-ups don't want to take a chance of something going down, even momentarily. Then you add up poor funding into the mix, and you can't replace failed batteries, end-of-life devices, etc etc.
Dude it doesn't need to explode. Its going to be a radioactive cloud at that point.
I will leave the definition of "high" to the experts. Where is mouse when you need him?
Ba dum tish! I'll be here all week...
Exposure lower than CT scans, air flight
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42075628...h-health_care/
American experts monitoring the situation agreed, saying that reported radiation exposure remains far lower than normal exposure from background radiation in the environment, from medical procedures such as CT scans, or even from transatlantic air flights.
“I haven’t seen anything so far that seems to indicate that people are being exposed to levels of radiation that are acutely dangerous,” said G. Donald Frey, a professor of radiology at the Medical University of South Carolina.
Experts measure exposure to ionizing radiation in several ways, but the most current and accepted is based on the sievert, a unit named after R.M. Sievert, a 20th century Swedish physicist. The average person in the United States is exposed to about 6.2 millisieverts annually, with about half from background radiation and about half from medical sources.
For comparison, some experts refer to rem and millirem as measures of radiation exposure, but they're generally considered to be outdated terms. 1 rem is equal to 10 millisievert.
Using the newer measure, a one-time CT scan can expose a person to between 5 and 10 millisieverts. An X-ray of the spine might expose a patient to an estimated 1.5 millisieverts. A long, cross-country air flight might expose someone to about .03 millisieverts. A person who smokes a pack of cigarettes a day is exposed to 53 millisieverts each year, according to the National Ins utes of Health.
Not sure what you're getting at DarrinS. Most people agree that, right now, it's not a problem. We're looking at the possibility of a much worse scenario, and possible complications from that.
My understanding is the containment vessels -- unlike at Chernobyl -- are designed to withstand heat in excess of what would be generated by a core meltdown.
So, unless the integrity of the vessel has been compromised, there is little chance of an environmental exposure.
Would your understanding of Nuclear Power plants also include that they are not supposed to melt down?
What's your point?
I'm hearing the containment vessels were designed to withstand temperatures in excess of what is achieved by a melt down of the fuel.
So, I guess my understanding is this contingency was taken into consideration during the design of the reactor.
My point? That as these nuclear plants have shown, doesn't always work the way its supposed to. I would have thought that was an obvious point.
Another explosion at one of the plants per CNN just now.
Who says the Nuclear plant didn't perform as expected to a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and resulting tsunami? If the containment vessel holds -- and, there's no indication it won't -- I'd say the nuclear plant worked just the way it is supposed to, given the cir stances.
did the latest explosion explode the way it was supposed to?
first vessel broken. reactor 2 evacuated! higher radiation in Ibaraki...
http://www.tagesschau.de/
When I started this thread, I admitted to a certain amount of concern over how serious the reactor issues would become.
Over the weekend, I've heard commentary from a nuclear physicist familiar with the Japanese plant designs and from one of the designers. Both agreed, that unless the earthquake had compromised the integrity of the vessels, there is virtually no chance of a meltdown escaping the containment vessel. They were emphatic on that point.
They also said that while it was possible the vessels could suffer compromising damage during an earthquake of the magnitude experienced in Japan; since there has not been a catastrophic meltdown of any of the reactors (where fuel actually escapes into the environment) it is unlikely such damage occurred and the vessels should perform as designed and hold.
Look, I don't want to argue with you over the issue. I truly don't know what's going to happen; I was just sharing that my concerns have been considerably alleviated by what I've heard since Friday.
Oh, and they also said the vessels were designed to withstand a direct from a missile and a fully-fueled, fully-loaded commercial airliner. Nor did they believe the hydrogen explosions occurring, that are destroying the outer buildings, would be capable of breaching the vessel.
They spoke with authority and were believable.
They also mentioned something the media is reporting that is a bit misleading. When it is reported that the fuel rods are "exposed," it just means they are not submerged in coolant and, therefore, are susceptible to the increased heat that will melt them. It does not mean they are "exposed" to the environment outside the containment vessel.
"There's nothing to worry about. We had a fire and it's been contained. No radiation has escaped from the plant."
- USSR Scientist, following the Chernobyl explosion.
It's amazing how cynical and hypercritical you are of so many posts to this site, DarrinS, but a person with an obvious agenda and a definite lack of knowledge ("We don't really know what's going on in the core") you take their word as a solemn truth without question.
Japanese designs?
Nuclear experts weigh in on GE containment system
Since General Electric supplied the design four decades ago for all six nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant in northeastern Japan, some regulators and critics have questioned whether the system — which was supposed to be smaller and less expensive than others — can withstand a nightmare scenario.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...N1V_story.html
I would say that this crisis now has the potential to surpass the earthquake/tsunami.
Horrible.
And, right in the middle of my post...
I agree, it could be a complete catastrophe. I was just commenting that after hearing the commentary, I was less concerned than before.
Nowhere did I assert it was "solemn truth without question."
holy
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ap_on_bi_...nuclear_crisis
Radiation is spewing from damaged reactors at a crippled nuclear power plant in tsunami-ravaged northeastern Japan in a dramatic escalation of the 4-day-old catastrophe. The prime minister has warned residents to stay inside or risk getting radiation sickness.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said Tuesday that a fourth reactor at the Fukushima Dai-ichi complex was on fire and that more radiation was released
this is bull . If there is an explosion those vessels can easily be fractured. you stop cooling those rods and nothing can stop them.
If you would have watched Glenn Beck today you probably see what (I think)he's getting at.
It was actually a pretty decent show for the first 20 minutes. Beck did a nice job of explaining what's going on with the reactors using M&M's and cooking pots. And also pointing out how some media is focusing on the worst case scenario for the reactors when they already have a disaster to cover that dwarfs what could happen with the reactors. Then he went on to explain why they were doing this which is best summarized with 3 words...Freakin George Soros!
Good information, Thanks!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
