JWong
Member
(03-17-2011, 04:50 PM)

JWong's Avatar

Originally Posted by FlashFlooder:
They're still gonna need the money in 3 months, right when everyone forgets about this.
Repairing infrastructure is going to be key to rebuilding.
AVclub
Junior Member
(03-17-2011, 04:52 PM)

AVclub's Avatar

Posted yet?

http://youtu.be/5sakN2hSVxA

(Japanese "Nuclear Boy" explanation of events)
NomarTyme
(03-17-2011, 04:53 PM)

NomarTyme's Avatar

Originally Posted by JWong:
Repairing infrastructure is going to be key to rebuilding.
Yep. Need them power!
Giriath_89
Member
(03-17-2011, 04:55 PM)

Giriath_89's Avatar

Originally Posted by FlashFlooder:
With the kind of water pressure we're talking about, those would have to be some pretty heavy duty robots. Maybe they could use that Gundam statue.

And not to scare you but this facility actually has 7 fuel pools, and all but 1 have spent fuel in them.
Yes, I knew there are 7 fuel pools; one in each reactor building above the reactor containment and another, whatever it was called, I forgot. I didn't know there's one without any fuel in it, which one is that?

I agree that robots wouldn't be useful in this scenario, except maybe for vision if that's a necessity.
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 04:56 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by Giriath_89:
Yes, I knew there are 7 fuel pools; one in each reactor building above the reactor containment and another, whatever it was called, I forgot. I didn't know there's one without any fuel in it, which one is that?

I agree that robots wouldn't be useful in this scenario, except maybe for vision if that's a necessity.
The extra is a common pool. From what I've gathered, one of the pools was drained and it's rods relocated to one of the other pools when the disaster struck. I have no way to confirm this, or even remember how I came to this conclusion.
Giriath_89
Member
(03-17-2011, 04:57 PM)

Giriath_89's Avatar

Quote:
FLASH: Two Democratic senators ask NRC to review capacity of all U.S. nuclear facilities to withstand disasters
I wonder what they will have to say about the Mark 1 designs and spent fuel pools which AFAIK have no containment except for the building itself at any nuclear plant.
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:00 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by Giriath_89:
FLASH: Two Democratic senators ask NRC to review capacity of all U.S. nuclear facilities to withstand disasters

This cracks me up because this is exactly what my job has been... For the past 10 years. BREAKING NEWS!!!!
Majine
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:00 PM)

Majine's Avatar

Metal Gear would've been the perfect vehicle for these situations.
mclaren777
Banned
(03-17-2011, 05:00 PM)

mclaren777's Avatar

Originally Posted by Giriath_89:
I wonder what they will have to say about the Mark 1 designs and spent fuel pools which AFAIK have no containment except for the building itself at any nuclear plant.
As far as I understand, the spent fuel pools are well contained in other buildings around the site.

The current issue at Fukushima is with the transfer pools near the reactors. They are much smaller and contain much less fuel.

Last edited by mclaren777; 03-17-2011 at 05:07 PM.
Giriath_89
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:01 PM)

Giriath_89's Avatar

Originally Posted by FlashFlooder:
The extra is a common pool. From what I've gathered, one of the pools was drained and it's rods relocated to one of the other pools when the disaster struck. I have no way to confirm this, or even remember how I came to this conclusion.
Maybe it's one of the no.5 or no.6 pools that have the additional rods. Which would be good since the water level seems quite stable there. Bad if it drops significantly, but I think they have water pumping there already, and the power line is on the way so they should be able to restore primary cooling if things get worse there.
Hari Seldon
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:02 PM)

Hari Seldon's Avatar

You guys weren't kidding when you were talking about Kaku going pretty alarmist.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...30567#42130567


He says to use the Chernobyl option and entomb the entire site
Dreams-Visions
I'm mad as hell but this sandwich is delicious
(03-17-2011, 05:05 PM)

Dreams-Visions's Avatar

Originally Posted by Giriath_89:
I wonder what they will have to say about the Mark 1 designs and spent fuel pools which AFAIK have no containment except for the building itself at any nuclear plant.
I get the strong feeling that Dems will be the principle force in the suppression of future nuclear footprint in the United States.

It's fucking depressing.
Dilly
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:06 PM)

Dilly's Avatar

Kaku is being such a sensationalist, really didn't expect that from him.
Giriath_89
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:06 PM)

Giriath_89's Avatar

Originally Posted by mclaren777:
As far as I understand, the spent fuel pools are well contained in other buildings around the site.

The current issue at Fukushima is with the transfer pools near the reactors. They are much smaller and contain much less fuel.
I don't think the fuel pools are located in other buildings. Maybe the dry casks where they are stored after they have been cooled sufficiently in the pools. I suppose those may even be stored off-site.

Could you give us some insight into this Flood? Where are the spent fuel pools located in your plant, and in other plants operating in the US?
Last edited by Giriath_89; 03-17-2011 at 05:15 PM.
mclaren777
Banned
(03-17-2011, 05:10 PM)

mclaren777's Avatar

Quote:
There is a small fuel transfer pool in the reactor building at each of these GE BWRs, near the top of the reactor pressure vessel, that is used for the temporary transfer of used nuclear fuel during refueling. However, the longer-term storage of the used nuclear fuel is done in a pool elsewhere on the site. Those storage pools, outside the reactor buildings, are seismically hardened and defended-in-depth, just like the reactors themselves, and there are no indications of any problems with them. Since there was no refueling going on at the damaged reactors at the time of the earthquake, there is little or no fuel in the fuel transfer pools.
Source
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:10 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by Giriath_89:
I don't think the fuel pools are located in other buildings. Maybe the dry casks where they are stored after they have been cooled sufficiently in the pools. I suppose those may even be stored off-site.

Could you give us some insight into this Flood? Where are the spent fuel pools located in your plant, and in other plants operating in the US?
Most of the plants I've dealt with have spent fuel pools in the reactor building (containment). However, they have a multitude of redundant cooling mechanisms.

The Mark I is really not a very safe design, IMO. In fact it was banned in the US shortly after they started building them.
JWong
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:11 PM)

JWong's Avatar

Originally Posted by mclaren777:
As far as I understand, the spent fuel pools are well contained in other buildings around the site.

The current issue at Fukushima is with the transfer pools near the reactors. They are much smaller and contain much less fuel.
Whoa? Are they really that close to the pools? Or is that an old reference picture?
speculawyer
clairvoyancy is no excuse for trollin'
(03-17-2011, 05:11 PM)

speculawyer's Avatar

Originally Posted by Hari Seldon:
You guys weren't kidding when you were talking about Kaku going pretty alarmist.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...30567#42130567

He says to use the Chernobyl option and entomb the entire site
Well isn't that pretty much a given at this point? I don't see them re-opening it as a power plant. What else are you going to do? Open up a sea side resort there?
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:12 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by mclaren777:
There is a small fuel transfer pool in the reactor building at each of these GE BWRs, near the top of the reactor pressure vessel, that is used for the temporary transfer of used nuclear fuel during refueling. However, the longer-term storage of the used nuclear fuel is done in a pool elsewhere on the site. Those storage pools, outside the reactor buildings, are seismically hardened and defended-in-depth, just like the reactors themselves, and there are no indications of any problems with them. Since there was no refueling going on at the damaged reactors at the time of the earthquake, there is little or no fuel in the fuel transfer pools.[/URL]

That article is wrong. 3 of the 6 units were in a refueling outage at the time, one of them was also switching to recycled fuel. I would bet a paycheck that there are rods in those pools.
Unless they're not counting Units 4,5,6 as "damaged" reactors. Which, at that point, is just playing with words.
JWong
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:13 PM)

JWong's Avatar

Originally Posted by speculawyer:
Well isn't that pretty much a given at this point? I don't see them re-opening it as a power plant. What else are you going to do? Open up a sea side resort there?
Dismantle the site and rebuild a new plant?
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:14 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by speculawyer:
Well isn't that pretty much a given at this point? I don't see them re-opening it as a power plant. What else are you going to do? Open up a sea side resort there?
No, it's not a given. No one knows how much contamination occured.
mclaren777
Banned
(03-17-2011, 05:14 PM)

mclaren777's Avatar

Originally Posted by FlashFlooder:
That article is wrong. 3 of the 6 units were in a refueling outage at the time, one of them was also switching to recycled fuel. I would bet a paycheck that there are rods in those pools.
"There is a small fuel transfer pool in the reactor building at each of these GE BWRs, near the top of the reactor pressure vessel, that is used for the temporary transfer of used nuclear fuel during refueling."

Aren't you two saying the same thing?
speculawyer
clairvoyancy is no excuse for trollin'
(03-17-2011, 05:17 PM)

speculawyer's Avatar

Originally Posted by JWong:
Dismantle the site and rebuild a new plant?
Even if the completely cleaned the site out, do you think it would be politically possible to put another one right there? The site has been proven to have some drawbacks.
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:18 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Quote:
Since there was no refueling going on at the damaged reactors at the time of the earthquake, there is little or no fuel in the fuel transfer pools.
Just pointing out that this sentence, in particular, is very misleading. Reading this would lead you to believe there is nothing in those pools.

That's not the case, at least for units 4,5,6.
Giriath_89
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:18 PM)

Giriath_89's Avatar

Originally Posted by FlashFlooder:
This cracks me up because this is exactly what my job has been... For the past 10 years. BREAKING NEWS!!!!
Breaking news indeed. Isn't it one of the core responsibilities of the NRC to evaluate the safety of the nuclear plants operating in the US, in order to prevent disasters?

Those politicians should know that, and they probably do. Saying it will just make them look responsible in the eyes of the ignorant and frightened. I wish politics had a more scientific approach to social concern, but then it probably wouldn't be politics, just science. If this were done, I believe it would be much easier to observe and discern what creates profit in safety and health, and what creates profit in money. Instead we measure health in revenue streams...
LuCkymoON
Banned
(03-17-2011, 05:20 PM)

LuCkymoON's Avatar

Has this been posted yet?

US Pacific Fleet's Flickr: Operation Tomodachi
Garcia
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:20 PM)

Garcia's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dilly:
Kaku is being such a sensationalist, really didn't expect that from him.
He lost all credibility with me after the BP disaster. He was extremely sensationalist back then.
teruterubozu
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:20 PM)

teruterubozu's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dilly:
Kaku is being such a sensationalist, really didn't expect that from him.
eh, it's expected. He's an expert on what-if physics.
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:22 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by Giriath_89:
Breaking news indeed. Isn't it one of the core responsibilities of the NRC to evaluate the safety of the nuclear plants operating in the US, in order to prevent disasters?

Those politicians should know that, and they probably do. Saying it will just make them look responsible in the eyes of the ignorant and frightened. I wish politics had a more scientific approach to social concern, but then it probably wouldn't be politics, just science. If this were done, I believe it would be much easier to observe and discern what creates profit in safety and health, and what creates profit in money. Instead we measure health in revenue streams...
Yep, they're just trying to grab some headlines. I would even go as far as saying the NRC's SOLE responsibility is evaluating the safety of our nuclear program. Not just the plants, but everything in between.
ElectricBlue187
USA schools learnt me up something good
(03-17-2011, 05:22 PM)

ElectricBlue187's Avatar

Originally Posted by LuCkymoON:
Yup good stuff. Strong case for foreign aid to continue.
Hari Seldon
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:24 PM)

Hari Seldon's Avatar

Originally Posted by speculawyer:
Well isn't that pretty much a given at this point? I don't see them re-opening it as a power plant. What else are you going to do? Open up a sea side resort there?
Yeah I kind of agree with him. Why aren't they doing this now?
Leonsito
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:25 PM)

Leonsito's Avatar

I'm pretty sure they could have started covering the whole place with concrete days ago, so I suppose they are trying to save the majority of the plant for economics reasons, a huge risk imo, maybe they didn't expect this problems when the first building exploded.
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:26 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by Hari Seldon:
Yeah I kind of agree with him. Why aren't they doing this now?

Opening a seaside resort? It's a little soon for that.
mclaren777
Banned
(03-17-2011, 05:26 PM)

mclaren777's Avatar

Used Nuclear Fuel Storage at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
(Last updated 3/16/11)

Key Facts
􀂃 Used nuclear fuel at the Fukushima-Daiichi plant is stored in seven pools (one at each reactor and a shared pool) and in a dry container storage facility (containing nine casks.)

􀂃 Sixty percent of the used fuel on site is stored in the shared pool, in a building separated from the reactor buildings; 34 percent of the used fuel is distributed between the six reactor fuel storage pools, and the remaining 6 percent is stored in the nine dry storage containers.

􀂃 Used fuel pools are robust concrete and steel structures designed to protect the fuel from even the most severe events. Pools are designed with systems to maintain the temperature and level of the water sufficient to provide cooling and radiation shielding.

􀂃 The water level in a used fuel pool typically is 16 feet or more above the top of the fuel assemblies.

􀂃 The used fuel pools at the Fukushima Daiichi reactors are located at the top of the reactor building for ease of handling during refueling operations.

􀂃 The used fuel pools are designed so that the water in the pool cannot drain down as a result of damage to the piping or cooling systems. The pools do not have drains in the sides or the floor of the pool structure. The only way to rapidly drain down the pool is to have structural damage of the walls or the floor. As of mid-day March 15, there is no evidence to date that this has occurred.

What Could Happen During an Accident?
􀂃 The systems that cool and maintain water levels in the pools are designed to withstand severe events. If these systems are unable to function, the heat generated by the used fuel would result in a slow increase in the temperature of the spent fuel pool water. The operating temperature of the pools is typically around 40 degrees C or 100 degrees F (the boiling point for water is 100 C or 212 F). This slow increase in temperature will result in an increased evaporation rate. Rapid evaporation of the water will not occur.

􀂃 Exact evaporation rates would depend on the amount of used fuel in the pool and how long it has cooled. The rate at which the pool water level would decrease (due to evaporation or mild boiling) in the absence of cooling system function would not be expected to lower water levels by more than a few percent per day. Given that there is approximately 16 feet of water above the used fuel assemblies, operators would have a few weeks to find another way to add water to the pools before the fuel would become exposed. For example, water could easily be added using a fire hose.

􀂃 If the water level decreases below the top of the fuel assembly, oxidation of the zirconium cladding could occur. This oxidation could result in some hydrogen generation. The rate of hydrogen generation depends on the temperature of the fuel assembly, with hotter temperatures leading to higher hydrogen generation rates. However, only the fuel assemblies with the least cooling time would be susceptible to this oxidation and the temperature of the fuel assemblies decreases exponentially with cooling time.

􀂃 Even if the water level in the pools was to decrease sufficiently so that the fuel were exposed to air, the same level of overheating that can occur in a reactor accident would not occur in the used fuel pool because the used fuel assemblies in the pool are cooler than the assemblies in the reactor. It is highly unlikely that used fuel temperatures could reach the point where melting could occur, although some damage to the cladding cannot be ruled out. The likelihood of cladding damage, as with hydrogen generation, decreases substantially with temperature and cooling time.

􀂃 There has been some speculation that, if the used fuel pool were completely drained, the zirconium cladding might ignite and a “zirconium fire” might occur. At the surface of the used fuel pool, the gamma dose rate from radiation emanating off the used fuel assemblies typically is less than 2 millirem per hour. If the water level decreases, the gamma radiation level would increase substantially. This increase would be noticed at the radiation monitors near the reactor buildings.
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:27 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by Leonsito:
I'm pretty sure they could have started covering the whole place with concrete days ago, so I suppose they are trying to save the majority of the plant for economics reasons, a huge risk imo, maybe they didn't expect this problems when the first building exploded.
You can't just carpet bomb the place with concrete and make the problem go away. I'm sure they'd rather NOT have 6 reactor cores melt down and potentially seep into the ground under there. What they are doing makes sense.

^
Quote:
34 percent of the used fuel is distributed between the six reactor fuel storage pools
a far cry from "little to none" from the other article. Please note, I'm not trying to slam you. Just saying the source is questionable.
scotcheggz
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:27 PM)

scotcheggz's Avatar

Originally Posted by LuCkymoON:
Armed forces saluting, American flag waving wistfully in the background... Glad to see the great things they're doing to help of course, but I will forever find these kind of pictures strange. The british equivalent would make me wretch I think lol.
teruterubozu
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:28 PM)

teruterubozu's Avatar

Originally Posted by Leonsito:
I'm pretty sure they could have started covering the whole place with concrete days ago, so I suppose they are trying to save the majority of the plant for economics reasons, a huge risk imo, maybe they didn't expect this problems when the first building exploded.
Well, it takes power and resources to do that too, while the rest of the nation is engaged in other emergency relief activities. The country is just overwhelmed. Spraying down the site with already limited water resources can't be good.
Hari Seldon
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:29 PM)

Hari Seldon's Avatar

Originally Posted by LuCkymoON:
What does Tomodachi mean in Japanese?

Those pictures and captions are amazing.
mckmas8808
Sony is POO
(03-17-2011, 05:29 PM)

mckmas8808's Avatar

Originally Posted by davepoobond:
also, people are freaking out over cell phones giving you brain cancer when visable light has more radiation than the microwaves being sent out from your phone.

Serious question.

But what about microwaves (radiation) being sent out from actual microwaves?
Leonsito
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:29 PM)

Leonsito's Avatar

Originally Posted by FlashFlooder:
You can't just carpet bomb the place with concrete and make the problem go away. I'm sure they'd rather NOT have 6 reactor cores melt down and potentially seep into the ground under there. What they are doing makes sense.
Yeah, I too think this was the only option, cooling everything, but after so many problems I'm starting to wonder if burying the entire thing was a better option :lol
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:30 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by mckmas8808:
Serious question.

But what about microwaves (radiation) being sent out from actual microwaves?
deflected by that thin metal grating inside the glass.
JWong
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:30 PM)

JWong's Avatar

Originally Posted by LuCkymoON:
Wait, I thought they said they weren't allowed 80km near Japan, or maybe it was just the plant.
Originally Posted by FlashFlooder:
deflected by that thin metal grating inside the glass.
Which makes me worried everytime someone opens the microwave while it's still running. Yeah it shuts off, but there's a reason why it beeps for a bit after it's finished.
Fireye
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:31 PM)

Fireye's Avatar

Originally Posted by Hari Seldon:
What does Tomodachi mean in Japanese?

Those pictures and captions are amazing.
Tomodachi is friend in japanese.

Originally Posted by JWong:
Wait, I thought they said they weren't allowed 80km near Japan, or maybe it was just the plant.
I believe the suggestion to evacuate was limited to the area surrounding the Nuclear Plant. So, 80km away from the Plant. Even with that recommendation, I don't think it would stop the US relief effort, were it required that they come closer than 80km, as long as they're adaquately prepared and protected.
BronzeWolf
(03-17-2011, 05:31 PM)

BronzeWolf's Avatar

Originally Posted by kamorra:
All security measures won't help when you don't install them (like in the case of many eastern european plants) or have incompetent personal working at plants. Yes, in theory modern plants can be very safe. But as long the human factor comes into play nuclear power will never be safe enough for my taste. I have confidence in the technology but not in the companys.
When you take human factor, ANY power plant is dangerous. Some renewable source are even more so.

My state runs out of geothermic energy. I worked there. The security risks for the population are immense!
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:32 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by JWong:
Wait, I thought they said they weren't allowed 80km near Japan, or maybe it was just the plant.

Which makes me worried everytime someone opens the microwave while it's still running. Yeah it shuts off, but there's a reason why it beeps for a bit after it's finished.
Haha... allow me to fuel your paranoia a bit more then. Those waves will continue to bounce around in there UNTIL you open the door.
RiZ III
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:33 PM)

RiZ III's Avatar

Originally Posted by Hari Seldon:
What does Tomodachi mean in Japanese?
Friend.
Priz
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:33 PM)

Priz's Avatar

Originally Posted by LuCkymoON:
Yeah, but it might have been overlooked/lost in the traffic.

I like the picture with the random canned goods, as if they held a quick canned food drive before they left or a bunch of the troops just threw together some cash and hit the commissary. I'm glad we're (the US) able to provide some help in all this.

Same friend who linked me to the flickr set randomly the other night went door to door in his neighborhood and got people to donate $120 to JP red cross (by giving them the url, not taking the cash himself).
teruterubozu
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:33 PM)

teruterubozu's Avatar

Originally Posted by Hari Seldon:
What does Tomodachi mean in Japanese?

Those pictures and captions are amazing.
Cool pics, but the rah-rah USA stuff is a bit unnecessary.
zoku88
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:33 PM)

zoku88's Avatar

Originally Posted by JWong:
Wait, I thought they said they weren't allowed 80km near Japan, or maybe it was just the plant.

Which makes me worried everytime someone opens the microwave while it's still running. Yeah it shuts off, but there's a reason why it beeps for a bit after it's finished.
I'm sure there's a case to be worried even though people have been using microwave ovens since the 50s (I believe?)
FlashFlooder
Member
(03-17-2011, 05:33 PM)

FlashFlooder's Avatar

Originally Posted by BronzeWolf:
When you take human factor, ANY power plant is dangerous. Some renewable source are even more so.

My state runs out of geothermic energy. I worked there. The security risks for the population are immense!

I wish more people realized this. I'd rather live near a nuke plant than ANY chemical, coal, or even your geothermic plant.