What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Meltdown in Japan's Reactors (1 Viewer)

David Dodds

Administrator
http://e.nikkei.com/e/fr/tnks/Nni20110312D12JFF03.htm

TOKYO (Nikkei)--The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) said Saturday afternoon the explosion at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant could only have been caused by a meltdown of the reactor core.

The same day, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501), which runs the plant, began to flood the damaged reactor with seawater to cool it down, resorting to measures that could rust the reactor and force the utility to scrap it.

Cesium and iodine, by-products of nuclear fission, were detected around the plant, which would make the explosion the worst accident in the roughly 50-year history of Japanese nuclear power generation.

An explosion was heard near the plant's No. 1 reactor about 3:30 p.m. and plumes of white smoke went up 10 minutes later. The ceiling of the building housing the reactor collapsed, according to information obtained by Fukushima prefectural authorities.

 
OK, so what does this mean? What are the repercussions for Japan, and for the world? What's going to happen now?

And do you guys think this will kill the idea of more nuclear plants here, as we've been discussing?

 
Here are the reactors in question:

Fukushima I-1 General Electric Mark I BWR 439MW March 1971

Fukushima I –2 General Electric Mark I BWR 760 MW July 1974

Fukushima I - 3 General Electric Mark I BWR 760 MW March 1976

Fukushima I - 4 General Electric Mark I BWR 760 MW October 1978

Fukushima I - 5 General Electric Mark I BWR 760 MW April 1978

Fukushima I - 6 General Electric Mark II BWR 1067 MW October 1979

http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/accidents/Fukushimafactsheet.pdf#-

 
It's been mentioned in the earthquake/tsunami thread but there are actually two nuclear power plants where there have been varying degrees of leaks. The government has declared both areas a State of Emergency and ordered evacuations for 6 miles around the plants. Some scientists have said a "potentially serious amount of radiation" has been leaked.

 
And do you guys think this will kill the idea of more nuclear plants here, as we've been discussing?
Absolutely.
Agreed. And the question is, is it just? Nuclear is the future, and it feels like a magic bullet, but there are no delete buttons for this sort of catastrophe when something goes wrong. And being that these plants are designed for humans, there is no guarantee nothing will go wrong. You live with a certain amount of acceptable risk in this world, but, well, this is a question worth debate.
 
http://e.nikkei.com/...312D12JFF03.htm

TOKYO (Nikkei)--The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) said Saturday afternoon the explosion at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant could only have been caused by a meltdown of the reactor core.

The same day, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501), which runs the plant, began to flood the damaged reactor with seawater to cool it down, resorting to measures that could rust the reactor and force the utility to scrap it.

Cesium and iodine, by-products of nuclear fission, were detected around the plant, which would make the explosion the worst accident in the roughly 50-year history of Japanese nuclear power generation.

An explosion was heard near the plant's No. 1 reactor about 3:30 p.m. and plumes of white smoke went up 10 minutes later. The ceiling of the building housing the reactor collapsed, according to information obtained by Fukushima prefectural authorities.
We still aren't near a worst-case scenario. The improbable worst case would be the reactor hit by a large meteorite after an earthquake and tsunami followed by a small typhoon spreading the leaking radioactive material over a metropolitan area - but I'm not talking that. The worst case is a containment breach with the wind blowing concentrations of radioactive material into a populated area. We have to remember that standards for radiation exposure are set real low relative to actuarial risk.

I'm not hearing other agencies conforming this could only be caused by a meltdown, but I am hearing that the containment vessel is still intact.

Right now, the media reaction to this event may be generating more fear than warranted. If there is a containment breach, then we have issues. Right now, even though a red alert has been called, I think a lot of what is being done is precautionary. Declaring a red alert and issuing iodine tablets are necessary precautions.

We are likely to have a TMI event when all is said and done here, but no deaths have ever been attributed to TMI. Chernobyl type event is extremely unlikely, as that reactor had no containment vessel and no way to stop a reaction once out of control.

As an investor, I'm going to be watching the price of uranium stocks over the next few days to see how they react to this crisis.

 
And do you guys think this will kill the idea of more nuclear plants here, as we've been discussing?
Absolutely.
I hear BP wants to get in the business of building Nuclear reactors near the San Andreas fault. Seems sound to me.
We already have one nuclear plant near the fault. It's built to withstand a 7.5 earthquake.ETA link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_Canyon_Power_Plant

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And do you guys think this will kill the idea of more nuclear plants here, as we've been discussing?
Absolutely.
Agreed. And the question is, is it just? Nuclear is the future, and it feels like a magic bullet, but there are no delete buttons for this sort of catastrophe when something goes wrong. And being that these plants are designed for humans, there is no guarantee nothing will go wrong. You live with a certain amount of acceptable risk in this world, but, well, this is a question worth debate.
I think it's tragic. I'm all for nuclear plants but depending how severe things get in Japan, this kills that idea for at least the next decade.
 
Japan Officials saying this was caused by a failed pump... I think this registered a 100 on the BS meter. Watch that explosion again.

 
I'm not so sure about that. A few scientists have said the steam buildup could cause that explosion. And we've known about the steam buildup problem since yesterday. It seems wholly plausible to me.
 
http://e.nikkei.com/...312D12JFF03.htm

TOKYO (Nikkei)--The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) said Saturday afternoon the explosion at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant could only have been caused by a meltdown of the reactor core.

The same day, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501), which runs the plant, began to flood the damaged reactor with seawater to cool it down, resorting to measures that could rust the reactor and force the utility to scrap it.

Cesium and iodine, by-products of nuclear fission, were detected around the plant, which would make the explosion the worst accident in the roughly 50-year history of Japanese nuclear power generation.

An explosion was heard near the plant's No. 1 reactor about 3:30 p.m. and plumes of white smoke went up 10 minutes later. The ceiling of the building housing the reactor collapsed, according to information obtained by Fukushima prefectural authorities.
We still aren't near a worst-case scenario. The improbable worst case would be the reactor hit by a large meteorite after an earthquake and tsunami followed by a small typhoon spreading the leaking radioactive material over a metropolitan area - but I'm not talking that. The worst case is a containment breach with the wind blowing concentrations of radioactive material into a populated area. We have to remember that standards for radiation exposure are set real low relative to actuarial risk.

I'm not hearing other agencies conforming this could only be caused by a meltdown, but I am hearing that the containment vessel is still intact.

Right now, the media reaction to this event may be generating more fear than warranted. If there is a containment breach, then we have issues. Right now, even though a red alert has been called, I think a lot of what is being done is precautionary. Declaring a red alert and issuing iodine tablets are necessary precautions.

We are likely to have a TMI event when all is said and done here, but no deaths have ever been attributed to TMI. Chernobyl type event is extremely unlikely, as that reactor had no containment vessel and no way to stop a reaction once out of control.

As an investor, I'm going to be watching the price of uranium stocks over the next few days to see how they react to this crisis.
Bueno, let's pretend I'm a total idiot about this sort of stuff (actually, we don't really need to pretend.) What is "TMI"? What other events have had "TMI"? What "issues" could result from a containment breach? Use simple words. Remember, I'm an idiot.

 
1. Pump fails.2. Temperature rises.

3. Gets so hot water circulating into the reactor breaks down into hydrogen and oxygen.

4. Hydrogen goes boom.

You need a new bs meter.

 
http://e.nikkei.com/...312D12JFF03.htm

TOKYO (Nikkei)--The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) said Saturday afternoon the explosion at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant could only have been caused by a meltdown of the reactor core.

The same day, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501), which runs the plant, began to flood the damaged reactor with seawater to cool it down, resorting to measures that could rust the reactor and force the utility to scrap it.

Cesium and iodine, by-products of nuclear fission, were detected around the plant, which would make the explosion the worst accident in the roughly 50-year history of Japanese nuclear power generation.

An explosion was heard near the plant's No. 1 reactor about 3:30 p.m. and plumes of white smoke went up 10 minutes later. The ceiling of the building housing the reactor collapsed, according to information obtained by Fukushima prefectural authorities.
We still aren't near a worst-case scenario. The improbable worst case would be the reactor hit by a large meteorite after an earthquake and tsunami followed by a small typhoon spreading the leaking radioactive material over a metropolitan area - but I'm not talking that. The worst case is a containment breach with the wind blowing concentrations of radioactive material into a populated area. We have to remember that standards for radiation exposure are set real low relative to actuarial risk.

I'm not hearing other agencies conforming this could only be caused by a meltdown, but I am hearing that the containment vessel is still intact.

Right now, the media reaction to this event may be generating more fear than warranted. If there is a containment breach, then we have issues. Right now, even though a red alert has been called, I think a lot of what is being done is precautionary. Declaring a red alert and issuing iodine tablets are necessary precautions.

We are likely to have a TMI event when all is said and done here, but no deaths have ever been attributed to TMI. Chernobyl type event is extremely unlikely, as that reactor had no containment vessel and no way to stop a reaction once out of control.

As an investor, I'm going to be watching the price of uranium stocks over the next few days to see how they react to this crisis.
Bueno, let's pretend I'm a total idiot about this sort of stuff (actually, we don't really need to pretend.) What is "TMI"? What other events have had "TMI"? What "issues" could result from a containment breach? Use simple words. Remember, I'm an idiot.
Sorry - TMI is Three Mile Island.
 
http://e.nikkei.com/...312D12JFF03.htm

TOKYO (Nikkei)--The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) said Saturday afternoon the explosion at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant could only have been caused by a meltdown of the reactor core.

The same day, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501), which runs the plant, began to flood the damaged reactor with seawater to cool it down, resorting to measures that could rust the reactor and force the utility to scrap it.

Cesium and iodine, by-products of nuclear fission, were detected around the plant, which would make the explosion the worst accident in the roughly 50-year history of Japanese nuclear power generation.

An explosion was heard near the plant's No. 1 reactor about 3:30 p.m. and plumes of white smoke went up 10 minutes later. The ceiling of the building housing the reactor collapsed, according to information obtained by Fukushima prefectural authorities.
We still aren't near a worst-case scenario. The improbable worst case would be the reactor hit by a large meteorite after an earthquake and tsunami followed by a small typhoon spreading the leaking radioactive material over a metropolitan area - but I'm not talking that. The worst case is a containment breach with the wind blowing concentrations of radioactive material into a populated area. We have to remember that standards for radiation exposure are set real low relative to actuarial risk.

I'm not hearing other agencies conforming this could only be caused by a meltdown, but I am hearing that the containment vessel is still intact.

Right now, the media reaction to this event may be generating more fear than warranted. If there is a containment breach, then we have issues. Right now, even though a red alert has been called, I think a lot of what is being done is precautionary. Declaring a red alert and issuing iodine tablets are necessary precautions.

We are likely to have a TMI event when all is said and done here, but no deaths have ever been attributed to TMI. Chernobyl type event is extremely unlikely, as that reactor had no containment vessel and no way to stop a reaction once out of control.

As an investor, I'm going to be watching the price of uranium stocks over the next few days to see how they react to this crisis.
Bueno, let's pretend I'm a total idiot about this sort of stuff (actually, we don't really need to pretend.) What is "TMI"? What other events have had "TMI"? What "issues" could result from a containment breach? Use simple words. Remember, I'm an idiot.
Too Much Info :shrug:

 
And do you guys think this will kill the idea of more nuclear plants here, as we've been discussing?
Probably for uranium. I do hope this spurs more action toward looking at thorium. While radioactive, thorium radiation can't penetrate skin, you can safely hold it in your hand. And the waste products are safe, not like plutonium.
 
We'll see. I think the spin on this event is at record levels so far. They have now moved people 12 miles away. That sounds worse than microscopic levels of leaking radiation (that pose no harm to humans).
 
Three questions:1. You're accusing them of not simply being wrong, but deliberately lying in order so that people won't freak?

2. Do you generally believe that governments of free people (such as ourselves or Japan) lie about stuff like this?

3. Do you think the government has a responsibility to lie if it will serve to avoid panic?

 
And do you guys think this will kill the idea of more nuclear plants here, as we've been discussing?
Probably for uranium. I do hope this spurs more action toward looking at thorium. While radioactive, thorium radiation can't penetrate skin, you can safely hold it in your hand. And the waste products are safe, not like plutonium.
I think the chances of that are slim. People will hear radioactive and lump it in the same category. Though I sometimes underestimate people, I can't imagine politicians will want to make this their fight anytime soon.
 
And do you guys think this will kill the idea of more nuclear plants here, as we've been discussing?
Probably for uranium. I do hope this spurs more action toward looking at thorium. While radioactive, thorium radiation can't penetrate skin, you can safely hold it in your hand. And the waste products are safe, not like plutonium.
I do not think that is entirely true. Alpha radiation won't penetrate skin, but alpha radiation is the product of radioactive decay - not of fission.
 
http://e.nikkei.com/...312D12JFF03.htm

TOKYO (Nikkei)--The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) said Saturday afternoon the explosion at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant could only have been caused by a meltdown of the reactor core.

The same day, Tokyo Electric Power Co. (9501), which runs the plant, began to flood the damaged reactor with seawater to cool it down, resorting to measures that could rust the reactor and force the utility to scrap it.

Cesium and iodine, by-products of nuclear fission, were detected around the plant, which would make the explosion the worst accident in the roughly 50-year history of Japanese nuclear power generation.

An explosion was heard near the plant's No. 1 reactor about 3:30 p.m. and plumes of white smoke went up 10 minutes later. The ceiling of the building housing the reactor collapsed, according to information obtained by Fukushima prefectural authorities.
We still aren't near a worst-case scenario. The improbable worst case would be the reactor hit by a large meteorite after an earthquake and tsunami followed by a small typhoon spreading the leaking radioactive material over a metropolitan area - but I'm not talking that. The worst case is a containment breach with the wind blowing concentrations of radioactive material into a populated area. We have to remember that standards for radiation exposure are set real low relative to actuarial risk.

I'm not hearing other agencies conforming this could only be caused by a meltdown, but I am hearing that the containment vessel is still intact.

Right now, the media reaction to this event may be generating more fear than warranted. If there is a containment breach, then we have issues. Right now, even though a red alert has been called, I think a lot of what is being done is precautionary. Declaring a red alert and issuing iodine tablets are necessary precautions.

We are likely to have a TMI event when all is said and done here, but no deaths have ever been attributed to TMI. Chernobyl type event is extremely unlikely, as that reactor had no containment vessel and no way to stop a reaction once out of control.

As an investor, I'm going to be watching the price of uranium stocks over the next few days to see how they react to this crisis.
Bueno, let's pretend I'm a total idiot about this sort of stuff (actually, we don't really need to pretend.) What is "TMI"? What other events have had "TMI"? What "issues" could result from a containment breach? Use simple words. Remember, I'm an idiot.
Sorry - TMI is Three Mile Island.
Damn! Thought it meant Tim Might Implode
 
Spin? We're not dealing with the Soviet Union here. I'm confident that Japan's government won't be blowing smoke up everyone's asses.
 
Go back and read the news that was coming out of TMI. They lied and lied and then lied some more. 20 years after the incident we got most of the truth. This is scary technology. They will do everything they can to put this into damage control so they can control the fear / panic.

 
This is my point. There is a balance between being cautious and causing panic. Japan is walking that tightrope.Right now the problem is likely heat - my assumption is that the reactors have been shut down in terms of producing fission reactions, but dissipating the heat is the big issue now - which is why they have resorted to using seawater (which will ruin the reactor).

The explosion could have been steam (and most likely was) or related to dissociated water. If it were nuclear, people would be dying.

 
I was in the uranium mining industry during TMI - they didn't lie so much as the media generated a fear frenzy.
 
Amazing how there aren't hundreds of thousands dead. That right there in my view is a testament to how well prepared Japan was for this.

 
I worked for a couple years modeling these exact types of nuclear emergency cooling scenarios.

This is a BWR plant, all the plants I worked with were PWRs. PWRs are inherently more safe than BWRs. As I understand it, here is what happened:

1. Seismic event automatically triggered shutdown of all reactors within seismic event range.

2. Two reactors fail to shut down properly and / or are damaged

3. Power grid is lost

4. Diesel powered generator (backup electricity) fails, cannot start cooling water pumps

5. Battery backup is triggered on, but has limited capacity (<8 hrs, I am guessing half that)

6. Insufficient cooling causes water in core to rise, pressure to rise.

7. Pressure doubles, Japanese workers have choice of controlled release (vent of radioactive steam / H2) or uncontrolled explosion. They vent off to reduce pressure

8. Explosion, likely caused by hydrogen. Reactor containment building likely damaged

9. Decision is made to flood the reactors with seawater. This is a critical decision as you now will have to scrap everything due to corrosion (obviously you don't want to consider economics at a time like this, but this is a decision followed by at least 8 zero's).

And here we are. So confirmed release of radioactive gases into the environment, and likely loss of containment into the earth. Can't really speculate beyond that.

 
Okay, I've watched the explosion again. Why couldn't it be attributed to a failed pump? What do you attribute it to?
 
Japan has a history of covering up / hiding its nuclear accidents, FYI. I expect nothing different here

 
Relative to the explosion being caused by a failed pump...I am not sure everyone is on the same page.

An explosion is caused by something combustible being combusted. As for the fuel source, in my mind it is highly likely to be hydrogen. They were trying to start the diesel generators, but diesel burns, not explodes. The hydrogen was generated due to a failed pump, so in this sense that is correct. And the ignition source could be a lot of things...

 
I worked for a couple years modeling these exact types of nuclear emergency cooling scenarios. This is a BWR plant, all the plants I worked with were PWRs. PWRs are inherently more safe than BWRs. As I understand it, here is what happened:1. Seismic event automatically triggered shutdown of all reactors within seismic event range. 2. Two reactors fail to shut down properly and / or are damaged3. Power grid is lost4. Diesel powered generator (backup electricity) fails, cannot start cooling water pumps5. Battery backup is triggered on, but has limited capacity (<8 hrs, I am guessing half that)6. Insufficient cooling causes water in core to rise, pressure to rise.7. Pressure doubles, Japanese workers have choice of controlled release (vent of radioactive steam / H2) or uncontrolled explosion. They vent off to reduce pressure8. Explosion, likely caused by hydrogen. Reactor containment building likely damaged9. Decision is made to flood the reactors with seawater. This is a critical decision as you now will have to scrap everything due to corrosion (obviously you don't want to consider economics at a time like this, but this is a decision followed by at least 8 zero's).And here we are. So confirmed release of radioactive gases into the environment, and likely loss of containment into the earth. Can't really speculate beyond that.
That's a pretty fair assessment. Note that you said damaged, which is different than breached. The question becomes whether the vented gases to date represent a substantial health risk or not. Any comments on that? Contaminated ground isn't going anywhere and can be cleaned up when the crisis is over.
 
Relative to the explosion being caused by a failed pump...I am not sure everyone is on the same page.An explosion is caused by something combustible being combusted. As for the fuel source, in my mind it is highly likely to be hydrogen. They were trying to start the diesel generators, but diesel burns, not explodes. The hydrogen was generated due to a failed pump, so in this sense that is correct. And the ignition source could be a lot of things...
That's the page I'm on, but the pump didn't have to fail - could have been that the batteries just ran out of power.
 
Wilked - BWR and PWR?
BWR is Boiling Water Reactor. Basically, water is fed over and through the nuclear rods, which heat the water and convert it to steam. This same steam then is routed to a turbine, where it spins the turbine and makes electricity. The steam is then condensed and used again. The water and steam are both 'dirty' (radioactive).PWR is Pressurized Water Reactor. At very high pressures (couple thousand PSI) water is fed over and through the nuclear rods, and exits as extremely hot, high pressure water. It then enters a Steam Generator (big heat exchanger), and gives up its heat to 'clean' water, which turns to steam, and turns the turbine to generate electricity.One big safety difference is that PWRs are self-limiting, ie do not have the tendency to 'run away' during emergency scenarios like this. On the other hand BWRs are very susceptible to that runaway temperature / pressure buildupAlso, the new reactor designs are much safer than both of these, and are apples and oranges... I am very much pro-nuclear
 
I worked for a couple years modeling these exact types of nuclear emergency cooling scenarios. This is a BWR plant, all the plants I worked with were PWRs. PWRs are inherently more safe than BWRs. As I understand it, here is what happened:1. Seismic event automatically triggered shutdown of all reactors within seismic event range. 2. Two reactors fail to shut down properly and / or are damaged3. Power grid is lost4. Diesel powered generator (backup electricity) fails, cannot start cooling water pumps5. Battery backup is triggered on, but has limited capacity (<8 hrs, I am guessing half that)6. Insufficient cooling causes water in core to rise, pressure to rise.7. Pressure doubles, Japanese workers have choice of controlled release (vent of radioactive steam / H2) or uncontrolled explosion. They vent off to reduce pressure8. Explosion, likely caused by hydrogen. Reactor containment building likely damaged9. Decision is made to flood the reactors with seawater. This is a critical decision as you now will have to scrap everything due to corrosion (obviously you don't want to consider economics at a time like this, but this is a decision followed by at least 8 zero's).And here we are. So confirmed release of radioactive gases into the environment, and likely loss of containment into the earth. Can't really speculate beyond that.
That's a pretty fair assessment. Note that you said damaged, which is different than breached. The question becomes whether the vented gases to date represent a substantial health risk or not. Any comments on that? Contaminated ground isn't going anywhere and can be cleaned up when the crisis is over.
I really don't know much about health effects and radioactive emissions. My work was in keeping cooling water flowing during the emergency.
 
Wilked - BWR and PWR?
BWR is Boiling Water Reactor. Basically, water is fed over and through the nuclear rods, which heat the water and convert it to steam. This same steam then is routed to a turbine, where it spins the turbine and makes electricity. The steam is then condensed and used again. The water and steam are both 'dirty' (radioactive).PWR is Pressurized Water Reactor. At very high pressures (couple thousand PSI) water is fed over and through the nuclear rods, and exits as extremely hot, high pressure water. It then enters a Steam Generator (big heat exchanger), and gives up its heat to 'clean' water, which turns to steam, and turns the turbine to generate electricity.One big safety difference is that PWRs are self-limiting, ie do not have the tendency to 'run away' during emergency scenarios like this. On the other hand BWRs are very susceptible to that runaway temperature / pressure buildupAlso, the new reactor designs are much safer than both of these, and are apples and oranges... I am very much pro-nuclear
Interesting stuff. Thanks for sharing. It's clear you and bueno both are experts compared the rest of us, but we like to follow what's going on and learn stuff. Thanks for speaking in simple and clear terms. :thumbup:
 
Relative to the explosion being caused by a failed pump...I am not sure everyone is on the same page.An explosion is caused by something combustible being combusted. As for the fuel source, in my mind it is highly likely to be hydrogen. They were trying to start the diesel generators, but diesel burns, not explodes. The hydrogen was generated due to a failed pump, so in this sense that is correct. And the ignition source could be a lot of things...
That's the page I'm on, but the pump didn't have to fail - could have been that the batteries just ran out of power.
Bueno, I am sure you are correct...everything I have read (and my engineering 'sense') says the pumps worked fine, but the plant simply could not keep them energized.
 
I worked for a couple years modeling these exact types of nuclear emergency cooling scenarios. This is a BWR plant, all the plants I worked with were PWRs. PWRs are inherently more safe than BWRs. As I understand it, here is what happened:1. Seismic event automatically triggered shutdown of all reactors within seismic event range. 2. Two reactors fail to shut down properly and / or are damaged3. Power grid is lost4. Diesel powered generator (backup electricity) fails, cannot start cooling water pumps5. Battery backup is triggered on, but has limited capacity (<8 hrs, I am guessing half that)6. Insufficient cooling causes water in core to rise, pressure to rise.7. Pressure doubles, Japanese workers have choice of controlled release (vent of radioactive steam / H2) or uncontrolled explosion. They vent off to reduce pressure8. Explosion, likely caused by hydrogen. Reactor containment building likely damaged9. Decision is made to flood the reactors with seawater. This is a critical decision as you now will have to scrap everything due to corrosion (obviously you don't want to consider economics at a time like this, but this is a decision followed by at least 8 zero's).And here we are. So confirmed release of radioactive gases into the environment, and likely loss of containment into the earth. Can't really speculate beyond that.
That's a pretty fair assessment. Note that you said damaged, which is different than breached. The question becomes whether the vented gases to date represent a substantial health risk or not. Any comments on that? Contaminated ground isn't going anywhere and can be cleaned up when the crisis is over.
I really don't know much about health effects and radioactive emissions. My work was in keeping cooling water flowing during the emergency.
In either scenario, the turbines are not in the containment vessel, correct? I am assuming that there is a fail safe that would shut down circulation as well, or is there? Could you be more specific about that?I know a lot about reactors, but probably not as much as you do.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top