Nuclear Reactor 4 Poses a Massive Global Risk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGDI6sKHbFo&feature=related
Discussion of ongoing world threat from Fukushima-Diachii reactor #4 spent fuel pool which contains a higher level of potential radioactivity than all the radiation released during all the above ground nuclear testing. The building is unstable and the Japanese government says it should have the problem fixed in a couple of years. The effort needs to be sped up due to the potential danger. Japan has asked for international assistance from the UN due to their concern for the danger.
Why does Washington have plenty of money with which to attack the Middle-East but not enough to help stop the ongoing disaster in Japan which is contaminating our world with radioactive isotopes?
To all caps STUPID x3
Do you ever read what you post?
Honestly, your posts are so insane, you set the example of why we should remain active against nuclear energy.
Been INSANE long
In our guts, we KNOW you're nuts
The nuclear leadership and the Defense Industrial Complex were not always this ... disturbed, morally bankrupt, sanity challenged, doctrinaire and frankly ... dangerous.
Consider these Admiral Hyman G. Rickover statements:
"To doubt one's own first principles is the mark of a civilized man. Don't defend past actions; what is right today may be wrong tomorrow. Don't be consistent; consistency is the refuge of fools."
"Sit down before fact with an open mind. Be prepared to give up every preconceived notion. Follow humbly wherever and to whatever abyss Nature leads, or you learn nothing. Don't push out figures when facts are going in the opposite direction."
The nuclear power industry, simply lost their way, about 3 decades ago.
In My Humble Opinion
KaBoom
PERHAPS, EVENTUALLY, when the lying slows down …
We shall discover, HOW & WHY Fukushima 3 was able to sustain a fission chain reaction sufficient to create a nuclear explosion. I presume the atomic blast in Fukushima 3 is what destroyed and destabilized the structure of Fukushima 4.
Perhaps the hydrogen explosion speared a plutonium projectile into a fissionable target of opportunity …
Perhaps a few grams of tritium were generated and trapped in the crush volume, increasing the effective value of α.
Perhaps deflagration shock wave stobing induced a stray resonance effect, sufficient to trigger the detonation.
Perhaps some uranium hydride and or plutonium hydride was brewed in the smoking cauldron.
I wonder … HOW it happened. It was quite a blast, for a random event.
Just asking
STUPID STUPID STUPID
Another pinhead anti-nuke demonstrating their stupidity for all to see.
The idiot didn't do his homework. There's more freely available declassified information from the days of the Manhattan Project, that gun assembly ( as posited by the above idiot ) is not possible with either reactor grade, or even weapons grade plutonium. The Manhattan Project production reactors at Hanford were making weapons grade plutonium. The Manhattan Project originally intended that weapons grade plutonium be used in a "plutonium gun" type nuclear weapon. However, when Los Alamos got the first macroscopic sized pieces of plutonium from Hanford, they discovered that the neutron background was too high for a gun assembly.
That's why Los Alamos scientist Seth Neddermeyer came up with the idea of an implosion assembly. Neddermeyer's first attempts were with imploding cylindrical pipes, because that gives you an implosion in only 2 dimensions which is easier than a 3 dimensional spherical implosion. Alas, Neddermeyer discovered that you can't get a symmetrical implosion if there is only one explosive used to drive the implosion. One has to use the special shaped-charges called "explosive lenses" in order to get the symmetric assembly. A good reference here complete with pictures of the Neddermeyer's implosions is Peter Goodchild's biography of Robert Oppenheimer called "Shatterer of Worlds"
The above poster is just posting "gobbledygook" - just stringing together "buzz words". Let's deconstruct one of the stupider statements by this moron:
Perhaps deflagration shock wave stobing induced a stray resonance effect, sufficient to trigger the detonation.
If the burn propagation in the explosive is sub-sonic, then we have a "deflagration".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflagration
If the burn propagation is super-sonic, then we have a "detonation".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detonation
If the burn is sub-sonic, we don't have a shock-wave; because the normal sonic propagation is faster than the burn. It's only if we have a super-sonic propagation that we get a shockwave.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_wave
So our pinhead idiot above talks about "deflagration shock wave". WRONG!!! STUPID!!! DUMB!!. "Shock wave" and "deflagration" don't go together, dummy.
To someone with the above poster's rather limited IQ, physics and science may appear to be a bunch of buzz words strung together. However, a bunch of random buzz words strung together is not going to fool a real scientist into believing that you know what you are talking about.
Likewise, with the reference to increasing alpha via tritium. Nuclear weapons use a concept that fuses tritium and deuterium in D-T fusion. But just like having gasoline but no air / oxygen in the cylinders of your car engine; you need BOTH tritium and deuterium together to get D-T fusion. Where's the deuterium coming from ( the trace amounts in water is too low a concentration)?
Just because something is "quite a blast" doesn't mean the blast is nuclear. In fact, the smallest tactical nuclear weapons, the artillery shells" were about a kiloton in yield. Now the Little Boy bomb was about 15 kilotons. Little Boy essentially wiped out a moderate sized city in Hiroshima. A single kiloton is going to wipe out 1/15-th that amount; and surely would wipe out a city block.
The Unit 3 blast didn't even wipe out the two buildings standing a couple hundred feet away - Unit 2 and Unit 4. If you think that a kiloton can explode and not completely wipe away nearby buildings, then you don't have any idea how big a blast a kiloton is.
No - the explosion of Unit 3 was no more than the explosions we saw in gun camera footage during the Gulf War in 1991 where a 1 ton bomb took out buildings of that size. The explosion of Unit 3 was closer to 1 ton, than it is to a kiloton.
But the anti-nuclear IDIOTS are so manifestly STUPID that they can't distinguish between two explosive events that are 3 orders of magnitude apart.
If it weren't so PATHETIC that there are people that STUPID; this would really be quite funny.
Stupid questions
So,
The above comment, turns the academic world up-side down, with the assertion that 'there are stupid questions'.
Great way to win support for continued nuclear gambling at the death lottery.
Yep, you win the liar's cupie-doll, but have lost the bid for public support.
Game over
shock wave
shock wave (OR)
noun n [C] Definition
• a sudden wave of increased pressure or temperature, caused by an explosion, an earthquake or an object moving faster than the speed of sound
• a very strong reaction that spreads through a group of people when something surprising or bad happens
The assassination of the president sent shock waves across the world.
(Definition of shock wave noun from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus © Cambridge University Press)
Must we suffer further parsing of words (not terms of art) such as IS, OR, ALONE and SEX?
Dumb Luck
Humanity, indeed life on earth, caught a lucky break at Fukushima.
Most GE Mark ! and GE Mark II facilities have FULL spent fuel pools over the reactor. For some reason the nuclear explosion yield in Reactor III, was insufficient to propigate through the spent fuel and dry cast storage on the entire Fukushima nuclear power station.
The fuel inventory stored in Unit 3 is probably tons short of balance. That is going to require a very expensive, LONG term, clandestine clean up. A single digit increase in yield would have scattered the contents of the Unit 4 storage, down-slope to the Pacific; or continued the atomic chain reaction.
It was very nearly, GAME-OVER, for what passes for sentient life on earth.
LIGHTS OUT!
Because
Because Washington DC politicians, the nuclear power industry and their enablers in the press DO NOT CARE if the Fukushima 4 'spent-fuel' structures collapse. Because NEITHER side of the aisle in the Senate, House of Represenatives OR the federal executive branch OR the federal courts give a hoot in Hell if highly radioactive plutonium laced nuclear fuel rods bounce down the Fukushima shoreline into the Pacific Ocean.
Because NO-ONE in the United Nations gives two-chits if the NorthWest Pacific Ocean and the Western Third of Canada, USA and Mexico become vast graveyards. A 100,000 year cancer spike in humans, wildlife and sea creatures is simply less important to the permanent political class, than their next election.
Because the next quarterly report is the only consideration at GE, TEPCO, AREVA, Seimens, Hitachi, Toshiba and the rest of the nuclear industry.
Because there is more profit in fraud and known design flaws than in sound engineering practices. Because radiation decontamination of regions and population groups is expensive and has no financial payback. Because lying is easier than telling the truth.
Good question.
To OP, you ask some good questions here.
I think though that you know the answer why? I think we all know the sad truth about nuclear power.
As I said before the "threat of the cold war is over, but not the threat of nuclear poisining."