Is there a single story that shows any hot spots are caused by Fukushima Daiichi?
Only one hot spot was supposedly caused by the paint. Those are multiple hot spots some in different cities. The 20 in Tokyo are not because of paint. They are all caused by Fukushima, aside from the "paint". Actually try reading and understanding. This is your most feeble attempt to distort the truth yet. Anyone can read the paint article and understand it doesn't apply to the rest of the hot spots near and in Tokyo. Next you are going to try to say is natural background radiation.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 10-15-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:21 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
Leaked TEPCO report: 120 billion Becquerels of plutonium, 7.6 trillion Becquerels of neptunium released in first 100 hours — Media concealed risk to public
A wacko site, enenews, reports a wacko site, Fukushima Diary reports that the press knew about this months ago and the press conspired with Tepco to concealed this information.
quote
Mochizuki says this report was made by Tepco for a press conference on June 6 and the media knew and “kept concealing the risk for 7 months and kept people exposed”.
IP: Logged
11:28 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
We all know you are quite loose with the facts Dennis_6
So here is the question again
Is there a SINGLE story, from a credible site, and that doesn't include your wacko mind, that reports that these hot spots came from Fukushima?
Or is it that you are just making up stories again
and again
and again.
and again.
quote
Originally posted by dennis_6:
Only one hot spot was supposedly caused by the paint. Those are multiple hot spots some in different cities. The 20 in Tokyo are not because of paint. They are all caused by Fukushima, aside from the "paint". Actually try reading and understanding. This is your most feeble attempt to distort the truth yet. Anyone can read the paint article and understand it doesn't apply to the rest of the hot spots near and in Tokyo. Next you are going to try to say is natural background radiation.
[This message has been edited by phonedawgz (edited 10-15-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:30 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
We all know you are quite loose with the facts Dennis_6
So here is the question again
Is there a SINGLE story, from a credible site, and that doesn't include your wacko mind, that reports that these hot spots came from Fukushima?
Or is it that you are just making up stories again
and again
and again.
and again.
Read the New York Times story or any of the others. Anyone who reads the stories will see exactly what you are doing here. Its really sad, you are truly insane. Maybe next you will say the hot spots are created by leaking microwaves.
From the New York TImes story
"TOKYO — Takeo Hayashida signed on with a citizens’ group to test for radiation near his son’s baseball field in Tokyo after government officials told him they had no plans to check for fallout from the devastated Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. Like Japan’s central government, local officials said there was nothing to fear in the capital, 160 miles from the disaster zone. A baseball stadium in Tokyo was found to be contaminated with radioactive cesium. There have been calls for broader testing.
Then came the test result: the level of radioactive cesium in a patch of dirt just yards from where his 11-year-old son, Koshiro, played baseball was equal to those in some contaminated areas around Chernobyl. The patch of ground was one of more than 20 spots in and around the nation’s capital that the citizens’ group, and the respected nuclear research center they worked with, found were contaminated with potentially harmful levels of radioactive cesium.
It has been clear since the early days of the nuclear accident, the world’s second worst after Chernobyl, that that the vagaries of wind and rain had scattered worrisome amounts of radioactive materials in unexpected patterns far outside the evacuation zone 12 miles around the stricken plant. But reports that substantial amounts of cesium had accumulated as far away as Tokyo have raised new concerns about how far the contamination had spread, possibly settling in areas where the government has not even considered looking."
You see the mention of Fukushima?
But not everyone was convinced. Some Tokyo residents bought dosimeters. The Tokyo citizens’ group, the Radiation Defense Project, which grew out of a Facebook discussion page, decided to be more proactive. In consultation with the Yokohama-based Isotope Research Institute, members collected soil samples from near their own homes and submitted them for testing.
You see where they are working with a research institute? If you actually read the article it does not imply the radiation came anywhere but from Fukushima. If you read the other articles they also imply or even state it came from Fukushima. Plutonium, Cesium and the like do not come from aerosol cans, where do you think it came from? lol Phonedawgz, you may just want to admit the truth, people are seeing what you are doing here, and you are digging your hole deeper, you will just continue to lose credibility with the more "wacko" your claims are.
I guess credible source = Tepco, or some other Nuke industry insider. Since the New York TImes, must be a tabloid to you.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 10-15-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:39 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
What I am looking for is the facts. What is happening with these hot spots haven't been found out, except the one that was shown to be from the paint. The others haven't been examined yet.
You are just a wacko who wants to prove how bad nuclear power is. It is clear that facts are not needed by the stories you post. All that is needed is anything that looks like it might be something against nuclear power.
But that matches up with your still wacko statements that you support nuclear power.
Facts don't mean anything to wacko who is only intent on telling a story.
IP: Logged
11:50 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
What I am looking for is the facts. What is happening with these hot spots haven't been found out, except the one that was shown to be from the paint. The others haven't been examined yet.
You are just a wacko who wants to prove how bad nuclear power is. It is clear that facts are not needed by the stories you post. All that is needed is anything that looks like it might be something against nuclear power.
But that matches up with your still wacko statements that you support nuclear power.
Facts don't mean anything to wacko who is only intent on telling a story.
So you are saying its more likely all the hot spots outside the exclusion zone are created by old stored paint, rather than 3 meltdowns? lmao Come on you can do better than that, your game is being exposed. I am not anti nuclear power, I am anti corporate cover ups and down playing. Thorium reactors show promise and I found the technology rather interesting. I am not so impressed with 40 year old breeder reactors. I am also impressed with modular mini reactors.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 10-15-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:55 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
I said we need to actually find out what is happening. You are the one who wants to again and again and again make up facts. If you want to make up facts don't put my name to them. You are the idiot who makes up 'facts'.
quote
Originally posted by dennis_6:
So you are saying its more likely all the hot spots outside the exclusion zone are created by old stored paint, rather than 3 meltdowns? lmao I am not anti nuclear power, I am anti corporate cover ups and down playing. Thorium reactors show promise and I found the technology rather interesting. I am not so impressed with 40 year old breeder reactors. I am also impressed with modular mini reactors.
IP: Logged
11:58 PM
Oct 16th, 2011
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
I said we need to actually find out what is happening. You are the one who wants to again and again and again make up facts. If you want to make up facts don't put my name to them. You are the idiot who makes up 'facts'.
Slandering me is only hurting your cause. How many of the 20+ hot spots in Tokyo alone is caused by sources other than Fukushima?
"Robert Alvarez, a nuclear expert and a former special assistant to the United States secretary of energy, echoed those calls, saying the citizens’ groups’ measurements “raise major and unprecedented concerns about the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear disaster.” "Edwin Lyman, a physicist at the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, said most residents near Chernobyl were undoubtedly much worse off, surrounded by widespread contamination rather than isolated hot spots. But he said the 37,000 figure remained a good reference point for mandatory cleanup because regular exposure to such contamination could result in a dosage of more than one millisievert per year, the maximum recommended for the public by the International Commission on Radiological Protection." "Kaoru Noguchi, head of Tokyo’s health and safety section, however, argues that the testing already done is sufficient. Because Tokyo is so developed, she says, radioactive material was much more likely to have fallen on concrete, then washed away. She also said exposure was likely to be limited." Evidently other people, people with a better education than you, think it was from Fukushima, are they wacko? The quotes are from the NYT article.
IP: Logged
12:04 AM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
You have yet to post an article that states that any of the localized hot spots were found to come from Fukushima.
You have posted one that stated that a particular localized hot spot did not come from Fukushima.
You however continue to make up facts in your own mind.
And that Dennis_6 is why I continue to call you out on this.
No, you can't read an article and extend the facts stated into something you think it must be.
When you do that, it shows your lack of intelligence.
When you do that again and again and again, it makes people think you are an idiot.
Any questions?
The New York TImes article does state it. Just because you repeat a lie and slander me does not make it true. You either have no reading comprehension or you care more for nuclear power than you do people. I suspect the latter. Don't worry everyone sees what you are doing here. They all know phonedawgz, even a person with a IQ of 30 could see what you are doing here. Repeating a falsehood does not make a truth. You are the one making up facts here. To you none of the articles have anything to do with 3 meltdowns, no matter how unreasonable it has to be some other source. Remember we reap what we sow.
BTW, the new york times article references Fukushima 6 times. Everyone sees that, and then they see the claims you are posting. Fukushima is in the other articles too. You truly are delusional, I pity the person that turns to you for advice in a nuclear accident.
I seriously do believe you are getting a paycheck from the nuclear industry, only a shill would resort to arguments like yours.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 10-16-2011).]
You mean the fact that I have little respect for discussion opponents who can't or just won't think logically?
Yep, you got me on that one.
Residents in the greater Tokyo metropolitan area, the world's most populous with about 33 million people, have taken radiation monitoring into their own hands. They are making some unexpected discoveries following the March tsunami damage to the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant.
Uninformed parents
Just meters from where a hot spot of radioactive cesium was confirmed days before by a private laboratory, a Little League baseball game was underway Sunday.
Interesting how the leftists use numbers from the nuclear power industry when they want to but dismiss them when they don't like what they say.
Yep - standard liberal tactics. Believe any wacko who says what you want to hear but ignore science.
btw, from what I have seen the surveying has been done by the government, not the industry. But I doubt that makes any difference to you.
I already listed names of scientist who did not dispute the fact the hot spots were from Fukushima, they disagreed over the implications, but not the source. All you have at this point is name calling, and slandering anyone who disagrees with you.
See even the governments admit there are hot spots outside of Fukushima, and if you read the article they are implying areas outside the exclusion zone... "But local and central government officials say the isolated hot spots outside Fukushima are not a cause for alarm because no one spends such an extended period of time at such spots to absorb doses that would harm their health. " http://www.voanews.com/engl...Spot--131944218.html
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 10-16-2011).]
IP: Logged
03:00 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
Fukushima nuclear disaster as bad as Chernobyl according to Nuclear expert 14 mars, 2011 By Torbjörn Sassersson
Fukushima nuclear disaster as bad as Chernobyl according to Nuclear expert 14 mars, 2011 By Torbjörn Sassersson 6 Comments
fukushima nuclear plant satellite
Frigyes Reisch is one of the leading experts on nuclear safety in the world. He worked for 27 years at the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate, SKI. He has worked for the IAEA and with nuclear scientists on know how to judge nuclear incidents. Now he says – in an exclusive interview for Aftonbladet – the accident in Fukushima is as severe as Chernobyl. The release of radio activity is most likely in lethal doses.
Source: Aftonbladet 2011 March 14. Translation: Google Translate. Editor: Torbjorn Sassersson.
The Japanese authorities classifies the disaster as a four on the seven Ines-scale, which means ”an accident without significant risk to the environment”. Reisch dismisses this as a cover-up:
- They have economic interests. This is a seven. During my years at SKI, I would not have talked, but now I’m retired and can speak freely.
- This is absolutely comparable with Chernobyl. It’s about the impact on a large area with many people and local release of radioactive material that is likely to be the case of lethal doses,” he says, Aftonbladet reports.
Frigyes ReischINES scale is set by the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, and based on how a nuclear accident may cause risks to human health and the environment. The scale is logaritmic, meaning every step of the scale is about ten times worse than the previous.
The most serious nuclear accident in the world – the one in Chernobyl in 1986 – was classified to a seven. Since the earthquake and tsunami last Friday, four nuclear power plants in northeastern Japan reported damage. Most serious damage appear to be in the Fukushima Daiichi complex where a meltdown or ”partial meltdown” has been found in Unit 1 and 3. ”The accident should be classified as the worst on the scale - Fukushima is as serious as Chernobyl”
Frigyes Reisch, 78, is associate professor of nuclear safety at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH). Over 27 years, until 1997, he worked for the Nuclear Power Inspectorate, SKI. In 1993 he worked a year for the IAEA as an international educator in the INES scale, including in Russia and the Czech Republic. Frigyes Reisch believes that the Japanese authorities blinds the dangers of Fukushima to keep people quiet – but there is also a national scope:
- There is tremendous commercial interest in this. The entire world’s nuclear industry is Japanese.
As an example, he mention the second global nuclear power giant, General Electric Hitachi Nuclear Energy, has Japanese majority ownership.
- Given all the rescue workers who worked closely with the affected units and inhaled radioactive steam, it´s in reality impossible to not die of radiation. It’s not good. I do not know how many people who live north of Fukushima, but I guess it is so densely populated that there are a few million,” said Frigyes Reisch.
So far, winds have been westerly and blowing out the radioactivity of the Pacific Ocean. But according to forecasts, they will during the day today to turn around and start blowing north – with the chance of precipitation. How far the radioactive particles can be spread is due to local conditions. After the Chernobyl accident Gavle, 1000 km from Chernobyl, had most radioactive precipitation in Sweden.
Another alarmist wacko, because everyone knows phonedawgz 6 months in a nuclear power plant makes him the world expert on all things nuclear. His voice is beyond reproach.
IP: Logged
03:26 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
Yeah the guy who said on March 14th "Given all the rescue workers who worked closely with the affected units and inhaled radioactive steam, it´s in reality impossible to not die of radiation."
and considering that none of them died of radiation, I think that well qualifies him as a wacko.
IP: Logged
04:12 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
Yeah the guy who said on March 14th "Given all the rescue workers who worked closely with the affected units and inhaled radioactive steam, it´s in reality impossible to not die of radiation."
and considering that none of them died of radiation, I think that well qualifies him as a wacko.
He never said when they would die. I do think some of them will have their lives shortened due to exposure, but maybe by 5-10 years. He may have meant the same.
IP: Logged
04:35 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
Yep - standard liberal tactics. Believe any wacko who says what you want to hear but ignore the facts.
So your 6 months is greater than his 27 years? I mean he did work for the IAEA. Did you? Tell your bosses to start sending me checks and I will shut up. lol
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 10-16-2011).]
IP: Logged
06:55 PM
Oct 17th, 2011
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
Radiation dose is still high in the Unit 1 building October 15, 5:06 minutes tweet on twitter (Click to leave the site NHK) TEPCO after examining the robot inside the Unit 1 reactor building at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, the radiation dose was measured extremely high 4700 millisievert per hour. 。 In Unit 1 of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the "melt down" and the other was believed to damage the reactor containment vessel and, in the basement of the reactor building has accumulated a large amount of high concentration of polluted water. 。 TEPCO reactor building of Unit 1, in order to re-examine the first floor near the southeast side of the steam had come out from underground in the June survey, 13, put a radio-operated robot, radiation looked at the amount. As a result, in June 4000 was millisievert per hour at most, a survey by the 13th, still has a very high-value measures the amount of radiation 4700 mSv Meanwhile, the steam was out in the June survey is that it was not confirmed. 。 4700 mSv, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in the building will be second only to the high value of 5000 mSv was measured at the second floor of Unit 1 in August. TEPCO, this high dose, to watch that is water vapor erupted because contaminated water trapped in the basement, future research also are considering the polluted water in the basement.
"High levels of radiation have been found at a public elementary school in Adachi Ward, Tokyo, near the end of a drainpipe that collects rainwater from the roof of a machine room for the school's swimming pool, a ward official said Tuesday. The reading of 3.99 microsieverts per hour translates into 21 millisieverts a year, higher than the government limit of 20 millisieverts a year. The ward's standard, 0.25 microsieverts, is equivalent to 1 millisievert a year."
Guess what, the Nuclear Industries still have found paint cans to blame these hot spots on, and believe me if there was anything, but fukushima they could blame it on, they would. You ready to admit you were wrong phonedawgz? Maybe a apology for calling me a idiot? Nah, didn't think so.
IP: Logged
09:24 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
You still are an idiot. That hasn't changed. Remember you were the one trying to convince us that the toxicity of plutonium was the toxicity of polonium, even after it was pointed out to you the two elements were different?
You still insist you are pro-nuclear power even though your actions clearly show you are not.
Stop saying and doing idiotic things and I will stop calling you an idiot. ----- Rather than look at everything as 'us' against 'them', why don't you just look for the real truth? Not everyone in business is corrupt. The government is generally not in doing things that are against the population.
What I have said before, and what I am still saying, is instead of being like you and feeling the need to jump to some conclusions, my thoughts are that what needs to be done is to let actual scientists confirm or deny what is happening. Then the proper actions need to be made.
A somewhat high reading at the end of a downspout (where rainwater drain off sediment has collected) is much more plausible than a random high reading in the middle of some baseball field however.
[This message has been edited by phonedawgz (edited 10-18-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:22 PM
Oct 19th, 2011
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
You still are an idiot. That hasn't changed. Remember you were the one trying to convince us that the toxicity of plutonium was the toxicity of polonium, even after it was pointed out to you the two elements were different?
You still insist you are pro-nuclear power even though your actions clearly show you are not.
Stop saying and doing idiotic things and I will stop calling you an idiot. ----- Rather than look at everything as 'us' against 'them', why don't you just look for the real truth? Not everyone in business is corrupt. The government is generally not in doing things that are against the population.
What I have said before, and what I am still saying, is instead of being like you and feeling the need to jump to some conclusions, my thoughts are that what needs to be done is to let actual scientists confirm or deny what is happening. Then the proper actions need to be made.
A somewhat high reading at the end of a downspout (where rainwater drain off sediment has collected) is much more plausible than a random high reading in the middle of some baseball field however.
I said the toxicity of Polonium was similar to Plutonium, as they were similar in properties, meaning they would affect the body in similar ways. You know this, you just have to twist things around so you can be right. I am pronuclear and very interested in Thorium reactors. Private lab has been confirming the hot spots, I guess they aren't "real scientist" though.
IP: Logged
08:02 AM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
It's a good place to do vet your ideas before posting them.
If you do so with Plutonium and Polonium, you will find out that both they are not similar in properties and they are not similar in toxicity. Every time you try to make the assertion that they are, you just look more and more foolish.
Here is what wikipedia states about the toxicity of plutonium
quote
Several populations of people who have been exposed to plutonium dust (e.g. people living down-wind of Nevada test sites, Hiroshima survivors, nuclear facility workers, and "terminally ill" patients injected with Pu in 1945–46 to study Pu metabolism) have been carefully followed and analyzed. These studies generally do not show especially high plutonium toxicity or plutonium-induced cancer results.
Here is what wikipedia states about the toxicity of polonium
quote
By mass, polonium-210 is around 250,000 times more toxic than hydrogen cyanide (the actual LD50 for 210Po is about 1 microgram for an 80 kg person compared with about 250 milligrams for hydrogen cyanide). The main hazard is its intense radioactivity (as an alpha emitter), which makes it very difficult to handle safely: one gram of Po will self-heat to a temperature of around 500 °C (932 °F). Even in microgram amounts, handling 210Po is extremely dangerous, requiring specialized equipment and strict handling procedures. Alpha particles emitted by polonium will damage organic tissue easily if polonium is ingested, inhaled, or absorbed, although they do not penetrate the epidermis and hence are not hazardous if the polonium is outside the body.
Simply put, your repeated insistence that they two are similar in toxicity after you have been told the fact that they are not, is one of the things that makes you a typical liberal wacko.
[This message has been edited by phonedawgz (edited 10-19-2011).]
It's a good place to do vet your ideas before posting them.
If you do so with Plutonium and Polonium, you will find out that both they are not similar in properties and they are not similar in toxicity. Every time you try to make the assertion that they are, you just look more and more foolish.
Here is what wikipedia states about the toxicity of plutonium
Simply put, your repeated insistence that they two are similar in toxicity after you have been told the fact that they are not, is one of the things that makes you a typical liberal wacko.
Not even remotely liberal, thanks. If I remember correctly it was between Polonium 210 and Plutonium 239, they are both alpha emitters, and they are both toxic even without the radioactive issues. Plutonium is much more harmful inhaled versus ingested, hence why your so called studies found it not that toxic. The fact that they are both alpha emitters and toxic outside of their radioactive properties shows some degree of similarity. I never said they were interchangeable. As far as wacko, you were the one claiming there is no proof Fukushima is responsible for the 20+ hot spots. Thats pretty wacko.
IP: Logged
07:05 PM
PFF
System Bot
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
phonedawgz is this a real scientist or is he a liberal wacko like everyone else that disagrees with you? Like geiger counters not actually measuring decays per second. LMAO. You have been wrong about so very much, you have only fooled the people that wanted to hear what you were saying and not the truth.
Tokyo, Oct. 18 — “In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Masaharu Nakagawa, Japan’s minister of education and science, addresses the alarming issue of recently discovered radioactive ‘hot spots’ in Tokyo and other areas far from the Fukushima nuclear plant,” reports Marketwatch, a part of the Wall Street Journal digital network.
Summary
* We will check outside Fukushima now… We need to see how far beyond Fukushima we must go… * Fukushima medical university hospital to be turned into radiation research center… * Gov’t ministry will work on new equipment for cancer treatment… * People will be monitored so they can be handled properly when issues arise… http://enenews.com/watch-ws...from-fukushima-video
IP: Logged
07:12 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
TV: “We don’t want to create a panic, but it’s good to know” — Radioactive tsunami debris coming to Hawaii “much earlier” than predicted (VIDEO)
HONOLULU, Oct. 18 — KITV Honolulu is reporting on the first official discovery of tsunami debris from Japan nearing Hawaii.
And the debris, possibly contaminated with radiation from the Fukushima meltdowns, is coming to Hawaii “much earlier” than the two years researchers expected it would, according to KITV.
“We have a rough estimate of 5 to 20 million tons of debris coming from Japan… Hawaii is just in the path,” said University of Hawaii computer programming researcher Jan Hafner.
Soon after passing the Midway Islands on Sept. 22, a Russian ship hit the edge of the tsunami debris.
“We projected it would hit Midway in spring of next year, but based on the [Russian's] finding, the debris seems to be moving faster. We don’t want to create a panic, but it’s good to know it’s coming,” said Hafner.
Just curious, do you think it's possible to be liberal and not be "whacko"?
Or conservative and "whacko?"
Maybe a Tea-bagger whacko?
BTW, I'm not pro-nuclear, not pro-coal(even though my cousin is a coal miner), and not pro-natural gas (though it's better than the first two). I'm pro-"clean/ renewable" energy and pro-conservation. I'm also a realist that understands that my vision doesn't match the current state of reality. But, I see no reason to continue down the road that has brought us where we are. Yep, I'm a whacko. Just not a conservative whacko nor a liberal whacko.
[This message has been edited by carnut122 (edited 10-19-2011).]
IP: Logged
08:00 PM
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
This was in regards to your question about built in safety features but it also applies to the puddle on the bottom. With no water between the fuel, the nuclear reaction won't continue. Again you still have to deal with the decay heat. It just doesn't 'stop'
I wonder why recriticality has been happening if no water = nuclear reaction won't continue and only decay heat is a problem?
quote
Originally posted by phonedawgz: Brad - So after fully inserting the control rods in the reactor it takes some time for the reactions to slow down and for the core to cool. The initial power drop is quick but remember a reactor that puts out 1.5mW in electricity actually puts out 4.5 mW in heat. Bring that down by 95% and you are still kicking out a huge amount of heat. The cooling systems need to stay online during this time. At Point Beach power plant here in Wisconsin we could use power from the grid, power from generators (diesel generators started by compressed air) and batteries to circulate cooling water. btw, some here seem to think you 'fill' the core with water. What you do is circulate water much like an engine in your car.
An exposed core will overheat and melt. The fuel rods that hold the fuel can melt. That melted metal of course would collect in the bottom of the reactor. No that pool of metal would not start producing more power because it's a single mass. The residual heat production would continue however. Will it melt through the containment vessel? Most likely not, Will it 'burn' as stated earlier in this thread? No. Will it be transported into the atmosphere via burning graphite as in Chernobyl? Nope - no graphite. Can it be used by Rodan to incapacitate Godzilla - Yes.
Just curious, do you think it's possible to be liberal and not be "whacko"?
It is possible, however from my point of view, the liberal movement has always seemed to attract and retain some of the weakest thinkers.
I find that many liberal leaders the way I see it exploit that weakness of their following. Just listen to public radio for a while and you hear some of these way off the wall people leading the sheep.
In the Fukushima cluster f of mind numb individuals who feel the need to re-post wacko stories - I think that is just an orgy of wackies with no apparent leader. Just 'copy and post'ers dredging for anything.
[This message has been edited by phonedawgz (edited 10-20-2011).]
IP: Logged
09:35 PM
phonedawgz Member
Posts: 17091 From: Green Bay, WI USA Registered: Dec 2009
Fukushima units on target for cold shutdown 18 October 2011 Units 1 to 3 at the Fukushima Daiichi plant are all on track to be declared in cold shutdown by the end of the year, in line with the schedule set in the restoration roadmap, according to plant owner Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco).
The reactor building cover is now in place at unit 1 (Image: Tepco)
Cold shutdown, Tepco said, would be declared once the temperature at the bottom of the pressure vessel of each reactor is being effectively maintained at below 100ºC and the release of radioactive materials from the units is "under control and public radiation exposure by additional release is being significantly held down." These conditions - the goal of the second phase of Tepco's roadmap for stabilisation - have now almost been met.
According to Tepco, the temperature at the bottom of the reactor pressure vessels (RPVs) of units 1 and 3 have stabilized below100ºC: as of 17 October, the temperatures were 73.7ºC and 72.8ºC, respectively. The temperature of the RPV of unit 2 remains slightly higher, at 82.3ºC. However, Tepco said, "By changing the water injection volume on a trial basis, it has been verified that unit 2’s RPV bottom temperature can stabilize below 100ºC." The company said that it is currently injecting water into the units at a volume of some 3.7 cubic metres per hour (m3/h) at unit 1, about 10.4 m3/h at unit 2 and around 10.2 m3/h at unit 3.
Generation drops
The amount of electricity generated in Japan during the first half of fiscal 2011 was 8.1% down from a year earlier, according to data from the Federation of Electric Power Companies.
Some 456.06 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity were generated by Japan's ten electricity utilities between April and September 2011. Nuclear generation fell 46.2% to 73.98 TWh as a result of extended reactor shutdowns following the Fukushima Daiichi accident. In turn, the capacity factor of Japan's power reactors fell 67% to just 34.9% during the six month period.
The reactor shutdowns led to a 12.6% increase in output from thermal (gas and oil) power plants, to 267.52 TWh. Tepco has now installed a system that enables various parameters of the damaged reactors to be centrally monitored from the main anti-earthquake building on the Fukushima Daiichi plant site. The system can monitor such parameters as the water injection volume, injection pressure, buffer tank water level and the operational status of the accumulated water treatment system.
With regards to the release of radioactive materials from the damaged reactors, Tepco said that these are now estimated to be eight million times lower than at the height of the accident. By measuring the airborne radioactivity levels in the upper parts of the reactor buildings as well as in the sea, the company estimates that the current maximum total release rate is some 0.1 billion Bq/h, compared with the 800 trillion Bq/h estimated on 15 March.
Tepco announced on 14 October that it had completed building a cover over the damaged reactor building of unit 1 in order to reduce the dispersion of radioactive materials from it. The company aims to complete the installation and testing of water injection pipes for the unit’s spent fuel pool, near the top of the reactor building, by the end of October. Work to clear debris from the top of the damaged reactor buildings of units 3 and 4 has already begun in preparation of the construction of similar covers for those.
Tepco has been working towards a target of reducing radiation exposure at the site boundary to no higher than 1 millisievert per year (mSv/y), excluding the effect of the radioactive materials already released up until now. Readings from monitoring points around the plant indicate that the radiation exposure at the site boundaries is 0.2 mSv/y.
A total of some 128,140 tonnes of contaminated water from the tsunami itself, the injection of water to cool the reactors and from heavy rains has now been treated. Tepco said that the accumulated water level is being maintained at the present target level, which it says is sufficient to withstand further heavy rains as well as long-term processing facility outages.
Tepco said that it would ensure that cold shutdown conditions are met by "carefully assessing the reactor pressure vessel bottom temperatures, current release rate of radioactive materials from primary containment vessels, together with the radiation exposure due to this release and the securement of the mid-term safety of the circulating cooling system."
Researched and written by World Nuclear News
IP: Logged
09:42 PM
Oct 20th, 2011
dennis_6 Member
Posts: 7196 From: between here and there Registered: Aug 2001
