|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Zachstar
   |
Posted - 2011.03.12 22:16:00 -
[1]
The reactor situation may have finally been averted but it is obvious now just how bad things got. Opinion from my understanding.
The Earthquake hit the sensors triggered an automatic SCRAM which shuts down the reactor. However the heated rods still produce heat that requires coolant for days or weeks depending on reactor.
However the unthinkable happened. The wave breeches the walls and flooded ALL 10 of the diesel electric backup generators. This forced them to use backup battery power which lasts for 8-10 hours. That quickly passed.
The state of road conditions forced them to use air transport to bring in anything to help the situation however the pressure and heat continued to build. Even a controlled release failed to get things under control. In my opinion this MAY have been due to the pumps being damaged after the quake and shutdown this is why they had the large explosion this morning.
However it is now known they have resorted to the most costly measure short of allowing a full meltdown. They have flooded the ENTIRE reactor system with seawater. I have to hand it to them for making this decision because this means that the reactor is gone. Everything that seawater touches will likely rust so badly the reactor will have to be completely scrapped. Also some are saying there was a partial meltdown. (Which means the rods were likely starting to lose cohesion and will bond to the reactor but not a breech of the uranium. Which means it was hours away from a full meltdown in my opinion had the measure not been taken.
This is not a "Failure of nuclear design" or man made fault. This is what happens when you get hit with an earthquake witch is the equivalent of 20 THOUSAND nuclear bombs AND have a major disaster just hours after that.
|
Zachstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.12 23:44:00 -
[2]
There has been a confirmed partial meltdown on a fuel rod. this happened when the reactor boiled away too much water and the rod was exposed. Without coolant it melted.
What is 99 percent means in my opinion is that #1 Reactor will never run again. Most likely it will be taken apart slowly or buried.
|
Zachstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.13 00:16:00 -
[3]
Can we keep talk of Chernobyl out of this. COMPLETELY different reactor designs and safety margins. Also the people at the event were unskilled and made terrifying mistakes during the test leading up to the incident. This is completely mother nature and the people risking their lives (Not from radiation but from pressure accident such as the explosion today) are are skilled as you can get for these situations.
Another thing. Stop the damn Godzilla references. This isn't a frakking movie! People are suffering and many more will suffer in the event of a meltdown. The Godzilla references are extremely insulting to them! |
Zachstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.13 01:18:00 -
[4]
#1 Is being filled with Seawater. #3 is hot but no seawater yet. And no even at worst this cant be worse than even Three mile Island.
|
Zachstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.13 02:15:00 -
[5]
Bad news. The official is not ruling out the possibility that #3 has also melted down. If this has happened this means that the plant will have lost 2 major reactors and a good amount of its total power generation ability. Bad news for the economy of Japan.
Notice how I am more worried about economic damage than stupid worries over radiation. You get MUCH more exposure from a a long flight and MANY times more just standing outside than whatever this reactor could do outside of the local area.
|
Zachstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.13 04:57:00 -
[6]
There was a partial meltdown. The same where TMI was a partial meltdown except this is obviously far less.
The word is that the water level got too low and likely one or more rods got partially exposed. That would be enough for a partial meltdown. Nothing too serious but guarantees that the #1 and now possibly #3 reactors will never be used again.
Flooding with highly corrosive seawater is a last ditch measure for a loss of coolant event. The reactor even if the rods are perfectly intact is ruined. Also its very likely they had no time to do any serious filtering of the seawater anyway and put boron in as a reaction poison. There is no way they will attempt to repair it. They will just likely accelerate building of one or more of the ABWR planned for the plant. But that will leave them with a serious electrical generation shortage for years.
|
Zachstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.13 06:44:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Selinate
Originally by: Zachstar
There was a partial meltdown. The same where TMI was a partial meltdown except this is obviously far less.
The word is that the water level got too low and likely one or more rods got partially exposed. That would be enough for a partial meltdown. Nothing too serious but guarantees that the #1 and now possibly #3 reactors will never be used again.
"The word is"... Is this coming from a credible source, or is this just speculation?
Also, what melted? The fuel? Containment vessel?
NHK News who have so far been quite reliable for info. Being the first to announce the reactor ruining seawater pumping as well as the issues with #3 Also the official doing the press conference has been very forthcoming and is not trying to hide the facts in my opinion.
Most likely what melted is the tops of the fuel rods which starts with the metal coating. This introduces fission products into the reactor and eventually outside through the pressure venting. Cessium detection is normally a dead giveaway there is atleast a partial meltdown.
Containment vessel is holding. TMI held while the top parts of the fuel rods completely melted due to a far more serious loss of coolant. What I am reading is these are results of "brief" exposure to air meaning partial reactor ruining but not serious risk events.
It's starting to seem more and more that #3 suffered a similar issue meaning it too will have to be decommissioned. At 784 MW that is going to hurt quite a bit more than #1 in the long term power production.
Thankfully 4-6 are far more powerful and that will help but only until they have to be turned off for maintenance.
|
Zachstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 05:00:00 -
[8]
I don't know what to say other than prayer at this point. What do they mean with fire at the #4 reactor BTW? IT has been shutdown for maintenance for a long time now. (No decay heat)
The issue is with the pools damaged its almost a straight shot to the reactor meaning containment is breached. With only 50 people there now there is no way they can contain a major radiation release and with only the fire department pumps working to pump seawater into the cores they are likely constantly having to run outside (Likely now fully clothed in radiation suits) to fuel them.
To be clear here these men and women are heroes the explosions are what is destroying pumps and damaging the containment.
|
Zachstar
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 05:10:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Hoya en Marland
If I understood well, they cannot pump seawater into the reactor(s) any more because of the extremely high pressure built up inside. And making a vent breach in containers is too risky because of the presence of explosive hydrogen?
At this point they seem to be accepting that the exposed part of all the rods will melt down. My guess is they are willing to risk damage to avert the potential for complete exposure if the vessel blows. Remember with each hour the decay heat lessens. Normally after 48 hours in normal operation a reactors decay heat lessens to a point where steam pressure pumps have to be augmented with AC motors running from grid power because the rods are too cool to generate much energy. Atleast that is what I am hearing.
This is more than likely to become a 6 out of 7 on the scale.
|
|
|
| |
|