Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

how bad is the meltdown? 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

delagina

Structural
Sep 18, 2010
1,008
i dont trust the news much coz of them exaggerating things. so guys here, worst case scenario "meltdown" happens.. how bad is this?
i assume this is absolutely nowhere near as bad as US droping the bomb in hiroshima, no?
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

I don't whether you have read the other threads on this topic but a nuclear expert involved with consulting with the Fukushima presented at a physics institute (link is in the other threads) but his information is that the spent fuel rods at Fukushima Reactor have collapsed (melted) obviously without nuclear explosion or significant fission (which would be too much their current cooling effort) so no worry about that. However their cooling effort is going have to go on long time as one the reactor is real mess (salts, broilled sea biological matter, broken reactor parts) and two they can't get close to top safely to clean it up and put a permanent cover. Just accidentally I found out that the Chinese construction giant Dany is sending the world's biggest/longest reach concrete supplying crane to Fukushima for free so they can direct a great flow of water right into the reactors quickly and efficiently.
 
There is a summary of radiation levels in surrounding areas below (see “download the slides”)

One caveat I would mention is that we need to be careful not to focus exclusively on radiation levels when there is also potential for breathing/ingesting contamination, which can deliver higher dose to certain organs over a period of time even after a person leaves the area.

=====================================
(2B)+(2B)' ?
 
If there is no water, then fission cannot be sustained (subcritical).

Decay heat is not sufficient to "...melt or burst its way through the pressure vessel" [unlike Chernobyl which became prompt-critical and blew up the fuel (deflagration), setting the graphite moderating rods on fire]

Like TMI, the fuel should be contained within the RPV and within the primary containment. [I haven't seen any reports stating that the earthquake actually broke something open]

There are four fission product barriers; the fuel rods, the RPV, the primary containment, and the secondary contaiment (blew up).

Once the 1st & 4th barriers failed, there are many ways for long lived isotopes to get out of the RPV & primary containment.

The fate of the nuclear industry stands on their success in containing the long lived fission products.

The fact that fuel rods may have been damaged in the spent fuel pool is very very serious threat to the public.
 
Its good questions as to whether complete structural analysis including NDT was done on Fukushima Daiichi between the earthquake and reactor destabilizing.
 
At least she admits she's a lawyer- even American knows their big-headed morons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor