Unmanned Drone Shots of Fukushima

[Shakespear]

Re: Unmanned Drone Shots of Fukushima

Looks like the Norwegians are also keeping an eye on things and making the info public

http://transport.nilu.no/browser/fpv...;region=DMANC1

[big67]

Re: Unmanned Drone Shots of Fukushima

Looks like the Norwegians are also keeping an eye on things and making the info public

http://transport.nilu.no/browser/fpv...;region=DMANC1

This article explains why they are keeping an eye on Fukushima:
http://www.glgroup.com/News/TEPCO-Da...t-2-53751.html

Looks like Iodine131 levels are overincreasing due to sustained criticalities

[c1ue]

Re: Unmanned Drone Shots of Fukushima

Looks like Iodine131 levels are overincreasing due to sustained criticalities

Let's first understand what criticality means: critical mass is the mass at which a fissionable material achieves a stable rate of fission.

Fissionable materials are constantly decaying, the rate of fission can increase or decrease depending on a number of factors besides mass.

Thus subcritical masses still have nuclear fission/decay, it is just that the neutron from any particular fission/decay doesn't itself propagate more decays/more neutrons.

In contrast supercritical means any given decay results in proportionately increasing numbers of decays as the neutron released from any given fission/decay causes multiple more fissions/decays.

The temperatures in Fukushima #1 are still above ambient (room) temperature as they would be even were successful 'cold' shutdown to occur.

Given that it looks increasingly likely that at least some fuel meltdown occurred inside one of more of the Fukushima #1, reactors 1 to 3, then fission has been occurring and will occur until all of the uranium 235 has decayed. The more fuel has melted, the more likely a greater mass of fuel has accumulated than would be normal and the greater the levels of fission. Since temperatures aren't increasing, and masses aren't increasing, then criticality levels (amount of fission) aren't increasing.

So to review:

1) Fission would be occurring no matter what in Fukushima #1, Reactor 1 to 3 even were 'cold shutdown' state were to be achieved

2) If there is melted fuel, then the amount of fission would be higher than in 'cold shutdown' state

3) As there is a lot of fuel, and water is being pumped into the reactors still, and fission is still occurring, then I131 would still be getting created. Said I131 would then get released into the water and then pumped out as water gets pumped in.

As for measurements of I131 - an examination of the actual document:

http://www.tepco.co.jp/cc/press/betu...es/110503o.pdf

shows a series of graphs in which 1 out of 6 sabudoren (groundwater catchments) - specifically Reactor 3 - shows an increase from 10 Bq/cubic centimeter to 80-ish Bq/cubic centimeter. Given that there is still fresh water being pumped into the reactors (with corresponding outflow), not clear why exactly this should be a shocker.

Compare with the Reactor 4 sabudoren - Reactor 4 doesn't even have fuel in it.

Reactor 4 had 30 Bq/cubic centimeter up until around 4/19 at which time levels started dropping and are now 0.01 Bq/cubic centimeter for I131 and 0.1 Bq/cubic centimeter for Cs137.

Note also that once control rods are inserted and/or fuel melt occurs, the only way to then try and decrease the natural reduction of fission is to reduce the temperature. It is quite possible then that Tepco is increasing the rate of pumped fresh water into the reactors - on the one hand this theoretically should dilute the I131 concentrations, but on the other hand it could mean the water is carrying out I131 much faster.

Given the high speed of I131 decay, it is quite possible that the decreased transit time more than offsets the increased volume.

[Starving Steve]

Re: Unmanned Drone Shots of Fukushima

Hydrogen is stripped off of water molecules at a temperature over 800C. For a while, those cores could strip H2 off of water because at least one reactor was 1100C hot. So, seawater plus heat generated H2 explosions from the H2O. That is what did the damage, along with the force of the tsunami.

As for damage on the wrong side of buildings, please look at the damage to boats done by the tsunami once it reached California waters. Quite interesting, Santa Cruz Harbour was decimated on the north side of Monterey Bay. The tsunami came in from the north-west and wrapped itself around the Bay, and Santa Cruz Harbour was destroyed by the tsunami coming in from the south or south-east.

If anything proves nuclear power safe, it is Fukushima after the 9.0 earthquake and associated 35-foot tsunami.

[big67]

Re: Unmanned Drone Shots of Fukushima

Nuclear power is obviously safe... that's why all those Japanese were evacuated: the government does not want them to have all that fun! They are a serious country full of serious, workaholic people: they prefer to evacuate people rather than give them a chance to enjoy all that funny radioactive fallout and blue beams at night.... hey, we are in Japan, not at the disco! But you should really go there. Take a walk on Fukushima beach at night. Enjoy the silence in that (now) solitary place. You can even play with some radioactive abandoned dog on the beach (better if you feed the dog, first). If you are lucky, you can even find some glowing piece of exausted fuel rod to throw around! And breath deeply. Iodine is good for your health, you know.

[Shakespear]

Re: Unmanned Drone Shots of Fukushima

Looks like the Japanese parents are not aglow with happiness over the government's attempts to "normalize" the situation. They know who will be picking up the bill in the future when the kids grow up.

http://newsgram.com/2011/05/fukushim...iation-levels/


http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/04/87835.html

[c1ue]

Re: Unmanned Drone Shots of Fukushima

Nuclear power is obviously safe... that's why all those Japanese were evacuated: the government does not want them to have all that fun!

What an idiotic statement.

Replacement of Fukushima #1 with coal electricity generation plants would generate even more radioactivity than is being seen now, only forever.

EJ's comment about gigantic masses of fuel being dangerous if there is an alternative where the fuel mass is low - i.e. PBWR reactors - that is sensible.

But to say that Japan should scrap 30% of its electricity generation capability despite its oldest facility surviving a practically direct hit by a 9.0 earthquake plus a 14 meter tsunami - a combination which incidentally also took down 7 coal, oil, and natural gas electricity generation plants - all without a viable alternative... that's lunacy.