50-50 chance of catastrophic radiation leak?

[utgibbs]

Did I hear them right when it was explained that they kept spent fuel stored outside the reactor but within the larger containment structure? If so would this not explain the cesium and other contaminents?

Defer to TennTrad for the definitive answer, but the short answer is "Yes."

 

[utgibbs]

The biggest sources of confusion have been

1) Irregular or incomplete updates by the operator
2) mixing of terms (secondary containment has been used to describe different things) depending on who is talking.
3) a general lack if understanding by this reporting
4) No good method for tracking events by time/number. When someone reports there has been an explosion, is this a new one or did we already know about it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Indeed. I don't know if the fire in the fourth reactor is new or not anymore.

It's bad. It's bad in a big way.

 

[TennTradition]

Indeed. I don't know if the fire in the fourth reactor is new or not anymore.

It's bad. It's bad in a big way.

This is a new fire. Being reported to be a new fire, but same location as the previous.

 

[NEO]

That is definitely what it seems like is going on. Did you get a chance to run my thoughts on the venting by him?

He does know that you plan on posting this, right? I just want to make sure that it is something that is OK to be posted on a public forum. Sometimes the procedures of how an organization responds to an emergency is protected from general public release. If he isn't OK with that, see if is is OK with sharing it through PM instead.

It's just some MIT guy breaking it down that he says explaind everything.

What was your exact venting question?

 

[NEO]

The spent fuel that is outside of the pool is in a historm which is a helium cast.

He says that this is suppose to be about 2 miles away from the reactor and nowhere near the reactor.

 

[NEO]

He also says this company likes to "bend" rules and when he worked with them he personally saw it happen.

Gee, that's nice to know.

 

[Vols520]

I think 3 is a huge issue. Reporters are attempting to explain complex issues in a very short amount of time.

It's hard for me to really understand or comprehend what the heck is going on.

I just know a nuclear meltdown would not be good. From what I have read, we shouldn't see a chernobyl, but in a worse-case scenario how f'ed would japan be?

The biggest sources of confusion have been

1) Irregular or incomplete updates by the operator
2) mixing of terms (secondary containment has been used to describe different things) depending on who is talking.
3) a general lack if understanding by this reporting
4) No good method for tracking events by time/number. When someone reports there has been an explosion, is this a new one or did we already know about it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[TennTradition]

NEOCON, as to the venting question...

When we were talking yesterday, he was thinking that if they were venting to the secondary containment without filtering, then he thought that might mean there was a primary containment breach because they wouldn't vent to secondary without their air gas handling system in place. As we discussed it further, it seemed like he thought it was possible that they would possibly vent to secondary without filtering if it was the only way they could prevent the reactor for over-pressurizing.

So, that is what led me to go figure out more about how the venting might happen, and so I was attempting to outline my understanding after reading/calling around in that post last night. I was just wondering if there were any gaps or problems with it...just trying to learn more from someone that might know.

 

[NEO]

basically, to summarize the back up plan got knocked offline and the next back up plan isn't keeing up and now they are onto back up plan c which doesn't technically exist.

 

[NEO]

NEOCON, as to the venting question...

When we were talking yesterday, he was thinking that if they were venting to the secondary containment without filtering, then he thought that might mean there was a primary containment breach because they wouldn't vent to secondary without their air gas handling system in place. As we discussed it further, it seemed like he thought it was possible that they would possibly vent to secondary without filtering if it was the only way they could prevent the reactor for over-pressurizing.

So, that is what led me to go figure out more about how the venting might happen, and so I was attempting to outline my understanding after reading/calling around in that post last night. I was just wondering if there were any gaps or problems with it...just trying to learn more from someone that might know.

he says there is a primary hvac system on top but its not meant for casualty situations and apparently the gas treatment went offline and it was suppose to go up the stack but they had so much that they vented wherever they could. he says it appears they were venting directly from the reactor. He says you are pretty much right in everything you say.

he keeps saying every other sentence "they are screwed and just giving it everything they have."

 

[TennTradition]

This situation has progressed far enough that I no longer feel comfortable putting any upper bound on what the impact might be. The long-term effects can still be contained to being fairly local. Unfortunately, I feel like we have to get lucky for that to be the case.

I've seen some people suggest that when the explosion at reactor 2 occurred, paired with the high levels of radioactivity from the fires at 4, all three reactors were lost. They feel that the situation will continue to deteriorate until workers are pulled, leaving the systems to continue on their own.

I'm not ready to concede that yet.

 

[NEO]

He says there will be a primary meltdown in containment but it wont reach outside.

He says there is no primary leak but the radiation is all coming from the venting.

This is based on what he has been told.

 

[NEO]

This situation has progressed far enough that I no longer feel comfortable putting any upper bound on what the impact might be. The long-term effects can still be contained to being fairly local. Unfortunately, I feel like we have to get lucky for that to be the case.

I've seen some people suggest that when the explosion at reactor 2 occurred, paired with the high levels of radioactivity from the fires at 4, all three reactors were lost. They feel that the situation will continue to deteriorate until workers are pulled, leaving the systems to continue on their own.

I'm not ready to concede that yet.

He does believe all the reactors are lost. he says that part is a given. The rest he says he's not sure about yet. He wouldn't want to guess until he sees if the others begin to deteriate.

Here's a link he gave me that said is very good.

You Can Stop Worrying About A Radiation Disaster In Japan -- Here's Why

 

[Daddy Gee]

Will the reactor/primary containment ever reach the point where pressure is not a big issue? They seem to be continuing the flooding of the reactor with sea water - creating steam/pressure. If the reactor goes dry and there is a full meltdown, is the area below the reactor dry (assuming the melted fuel burns through the reactor bottom)?



from neocon's article - hopefully it will successfully contain a meltdown, if it occurs ..

The entire “hardware” of the nuclear reactor – the pressure vessel and all pipes, pumps, coolant (water) reserves, are then encased in the third containment. The third containment is a hermetically (air tight) sealed, very thick bubble of the strongest steel. The third containment is designed, built and tested for one single purpose: To contain, indefinitely, a complete core meltdown. For that purpose, a large and thick concrete basin is cast under the pressure vessel (the second containment), which is filled with graphite, all inside the third containment. This is the so-called "core catcher". If the core melts and the pressure vessel bursts (and eventually melts), it will catch the molten fuel and everything else. It is built in such a way that the nuclear fuel will be spread out, so it can cool down.

 

[NEO]

He believes that at the end of this there will be a meltdown of the reactor vessel but not primary containment as long as they keep venting.

 

[VOLatile]

He does believe all the reactors are lost. he says that part is a given. The rest he says he's not sure about yet. He wouldn't want to guess until he sees if the others begin to deteriate.

Here's a link he gave me that said is very good.

You Can Stop Worrying About A Radiation Disaster In Japan -- Here's Why

That's the same article that I posted last night. I'm not sure why they keep adding sea water. It's gone so far past my limited knowledge and understanding now.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[NEO]

Will the reactor/primary containment ever reach the point where pressure is not a big issue? They seem to be continuing the flooding of the reactor with sea water - creating steam/pressure. If the reactor goes dry and there is a full meltdown, is the area below the reactor dry (assuming the melted fuel burns through the reactor bottom)?



from neocon's article - hopefully it will successfully contain a meltdown, if it occurs ..

It's made with concrete bottom to cool it down because concrete holds water and lime. This helps it cool. They will continue to keep water on it.

It won't melt below that if that's what you're asking?

It's not going to end up in the opposite side of the planet like a China Syndrome.

 

[NEO]

That's the same article that I posted last night. I'm not sure why they keep adding sea water. It's gone so far past my limited knowledge and understanding now.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

They have to keep it cool still and they also have zircaloy burning. And whatever water they place in there turns to steam and the steam carries away the radiation through the vents.

 

[VOLatile]

They have to keep it cool still and they also have zircaloy burning. And whatever water they place in there turns to steam and the steam carries away the radiation through the vents.

I see. Does the Zircolay have to be gone before it melts to the safe zone below? Are they just prepping for meltdown now?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Daddy Gee]

It's made with concrete bottom to cool it down because concrete holds water and lime. This helps it cool. They will continue to keep water on it.

It won't melt below that if that's what you're asking?

It's not going to end up in the opposite side of the planet like a China Syndrome.

I was thinking more about the relationship of the benefits of the water (cooling) vs the drawbacks of the steam (increased pressure) .. it sounds like they're in uncharted territory now, so maybe nobody knows what the answer is ..

I guess as long as they can keep the primary containment from exploding they will have done as well as you could hope ..

 

[NEO]

I see. Does the Zircolay have to be gone before it melts to the safe zone below? Are they just prepping for meltdown now?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

There is really no prepping for meltdown. They're trying to prevent that. Once the Zircaloy got above 2200 F you already had a meltdown in process. If it goes below 2200 it will turn back into metal and safe. It's just a blob at that point.

 

[NEO]

he says this is above 3 mile island and right below Chernobyl.

 

[TennTradition]

He does believe all the reactors are lost. he says that part is a given. The rest he says he's not sure about yet. He wouldn't want to guess until he sees if the others begin to deteriate.

Here's a link he gave me that said is very good.

You Can Stop Worrying About A Radiation Disaster In Japan -- Here's Why

I should have been more clear. They've flooded the reactors with sea water and boric acid. The reactors will never again be operable. What I meant by lost was the fear of meltdown.

 

[TennTradition]

He says there will be a primary meltdown in containment but it wont reach outside.

He says there is no primary leak but the radiation is all coming from the venting.

This is based on what he has been told.

My understanding is that there is a strong belief that a part of reactor 2's primary containment has been compromised to some extent. That information could be wrong, because it can't be confirmed at this point.

I would agree that the vast majority of the radiation is coming from the vented source (and the burning spent fuel pool). However, I'm also highly suspect (based on the suspicions of some of my contacts) that there is some radioactive leakage from the primary containment (beyond the standard design leakage rate of 1%).

Th bigger concern that I have is that if these reactors have to be abandoned due to dangerously high radioactivity levels, a meltdown is highly likely. As he said, the fuel will then fall into the primary containment as a molten liquid. The problem is that there is no guarantee that Mark I primary containment will contain the meltdown at that point. Sandia National Labs has put the probability of liner-melt-through at 42% in the event of a melt-through of the reactor. Those are not favorable odds when you have three reactors that could meltdown. (If all three meltdown, then there would be a 80% chance that at least one would have containment breakthrough if all three melt down, if my math is right and you believe the 42% figure.)

 

[Volst53]

When would they pack the reactors with sand and concrete to help contain the meltdown(s), or are we already past that point.