BF2S Forums 9.0 Earthquake in Japan (March 11, 2011)

Shocking wrote:

No @ what ? I don't really understand the post.

There is really nothing that can prevent a meltdown if the process has started; i.e. when critical mass has been attained. What you can do is limit the damage by releasing the remaining pressure and not adding water anymore.

The pressure is caused due to them cooling the core to avoid a meltdown, steam is generated which needs to be released. (This is the normal process of the reactor as the steam is used to generate power). Anyhow I suppose the pumping / pressure relief systems have been damaged.

menzo wrote:

US nuclear experts warn that pumping sea water to cool a quake-hit Japanese nuclear reactor is an "act of desperation" that may foreshadow a Chernobyl-like disaster, AFP reports. "The situation has become desperate enough that they apparently don't have the capability to deliver fresh water or plain water to cool the reactor and stabilize it, and now, in an act of desperation, are having to resort to diverting and using sea water," said Robert Alvarez, who works on nuclear disarmament at the Institute for Policy Studies.

BBC

Shocking wrote:

Kmar wrote:

menzo wrote:

US nuclear experts warn that pumping sea water to cool a quake-hit Japanese nuclear reactor is an "act of desperation" that may foreshadow a Chernobyl-like disaster, AFP reports. "The situation has become desperate enough that they apparently don't have the capability to deliver fresh water or plain water to cool the reactor and stabilize it, and now, in an act of desperation, are having to resort to diverting and using sea water," said Robert Alvarez, who works on nuclear disarmament at the Institute for Policy Studies.

BBC

I'm pretty sure that is why they build some of them next to the coast.

My Dad served on Nuclear ships when he was in the Navy. He told me that they had something called a scram, which I had never heard of. The Scram would immediately stop the reaction.

An interesting interview. Recommend.. http://is.gd/3vsSoF

Just read up on it, I had no idea that that was even possible....

Anyhow, by the fact that nuclear meltdown is either imminent or occuring right now, that safety mechanism must've failed. Perhaps there were simply too many delayed neutrons still active.

What's he got to say on the situation?

Hundreds of tons of Japan’s spent nuclear fuel have been moved for reprocessing at the Rokkasho facility. Rokkasho and other facilities are also in danger as aftershocks, blackouts and tsunami warnings remain in effect, impacting the ongoing ability to cool multiple endangered reactors and the spent fuel that once generated power from their cores. Der Speigel reported that Rokkasho is also running on emergency power.

presidentsheep wrote:

Am I just being dense tonight? What's the difference between scram and just using control rods normally? Thought they'd already inserted them into the core to absorb all neutrons and halt the fission process?

Wikipedia wrote:

In PWRs, the control rods are held above a reactor's core by electric motors against both their own weight and a powerful spring. Any cutting of the electric current releases the rods. Another design uses electromagnets to hold the rods suspended, with any cut to electric current resulting in an immediate and automatic control rod insertion. A SCRAM rapidly (less than four seconds, by test on many reactors) releases the control rods from those motors and allows their weight and the spring to drive them into the reactor core, thus halting the nuclear reaction (by absorbing neutrons) as rapidly as possible. In BWRs, the control rods are inserted up from underneath the reactor vessel. In this case a hydraulic control unit with a pressurized storage tank provides the force to rapidly insert the control rods upon any interruption of the electric current, again within four seconds. A typical large BWR will have 185 of these control rods. In both the PWR and the BWR there are secondary systems (and often even tertiary systems) that will insert control rods in the event that primary rapid insertion does not promptly and fully actuate.

presidentsheep wrote:

seeing a lot of places mention iodine in relation to treating people nearby... thought that you couldn't treat radiation poisoning?

Last edited by Karbin (2011-03-12 20:14:20)