Skip to main content

View Diary: Breaking: Officials fear radiation leaking from core. (260 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The direct quote is (18+ / 0-)

    "the possibility is high that water leaked from the reactor"

    「原子炉の水が漏れた可能性が高い」

    Which was an amendment of an earlier statement that they did not quite know where the water came from.

    「原子炉と使用済み核燃料一時貯蔵プールのどちらから水が漏れたのかは、よく分からない」

    Link

    •  The isotope profile (22+ / 0-)

      is really the reason to think that they are looking at contamination from the core. That's why the Japanese prime minister is now making more definitive statements about it.

      Until they actually find a leak, they can invoke whatever uncertainty they want.

      Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

      by rb137 on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 03:59:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't understand the physics of it (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rb137, Pager, vets74, JanL, peraspera

        I do see congruence in uncertainty with the official Japanese position and the statement in your diary that "it could be consistent with a leak from the core."

      •  Same profile could be (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Drama Queen, JanL

        from spent fuel. They aren't releasing concentrations of the crucial isotopes that tell them it's from the core. But I'm sure they know they're there.

        Now, more than ever, we need the Jedi.

        by Joieau on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 07:41:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Where they found the water is the issue. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Drama Queen, JanL, peraspera

          I'm not sure I understand your comment, or how you know what they are and aren't releasing. I think this profile is grave, given where it was found.

          They are trying to exhaust other possibilities -- they overfilled the reactor with emergency coolant, for example. But you still have water that desperately needs to be contained outside of its container. That's a problem.

          Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

          by rb137 on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 07:53:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, some are short-lived (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Into The Woods

            enough not to be in much concentration in the SFPs, though #3 was refueled six months ago so the SFP could well be the source for these (though I'm sure concentrations are telling them something more). But if it's from the current core, there are way more revealing isotopes they could as easily assay and most probably did. They just aren't releasing that info, probably because it sounds much scarier.

            That there might be reactor water in the turbine building basement isn't a shock at all, given that the steam pipes that bring steam from the reactor to turn the turbine (then go through the condenser and back to the reactor) is ALL reactor water. And after an earthquake and tsunami it would be a big miracle if they didn't have some leaks. Saturated steam will be in the pipes as long as there's water in the reactor unless isolation valves are closed and remain uncompromised.

            This BWR design was never intended to keep reactor water/steam inside the reactor vessel.

            Now, more than ever, we need the Jedi.

            by Joieau on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 09:23:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I respectfully disagree. (0+ / 0-)

              But I appreciate your opinion. Can we stop this now?

              Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

              by rb137 on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 09:31:37 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Barium 140 half life is 12.8 days (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              rb137

              No?

              Barium 140 decays to lanthunum 140 (half life of 40.5 hours) which then decays to the stable cerium 140.

              http://energyfromthorium.com/...

              Technetium99m half life of a mere 6.02 hours......

              http://www.doh.wa.gov/...

              So I'm not seeing how any appreciable quantities could result from the spent fuel rod cooling pool, 3 months later.

              FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 11:03:30 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Technetium99m concentration. (0+ / 0-)

                Good observation.

                Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

                by rb137 on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 11:11:43 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I had to look them up.... he he he (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  VA gentlewoman, rb137

                  I drive a limo.....

                  I just dont see how this assortment comes from spent fuel rods that have been outta the reactor for 3 months, COOLING.

                  I mean La 140 is an intermediate product..... gee whiz..

                  Now the technetium 99m, means fission occurred fairly recently? I'm guessing, like the last 60 hrs?

                  FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 11:26:38 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Your artithmetic is pretty good. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Roger Fox

                    The real question is how they got the sample and the measurement in the first place -- if we knew that, then we'd have a better idea of how much gamma emitter was in the sample. They are measuring decay products from the surface of the sample to get these profiles.

                    Without knowing all of the decay chain patterns that involve the huge elements in the profile, I can't say, for example, that 99mTc is the only gamma emitter in the lot. Do they measure a rate of gamma radiation and attribute it all to 99mTc? Probably their measurement was fine, but I can't say for sure.

                    Also, since 99mTc has the shortest half life, it's decay rate isn't proportional to its concentration in the same way as an isotope with a longer half life. It's kind of comparing apples to oranges -- those are radiation rates listed in the chart, not decay rates, and not concentrations. We talk about them like they're concentrations, though.

                    One other thing -- since the decay products have to escape from the sample, that affects what the profile means, too. Gammas can escape easily, and betas get attenuated a lot. I don't know how they correct for that difference, either.

                    It's clear that the analysts thought 99mTc was present in the sample, though. That's not good news. It's hard to answer your question precisely from looking at that profile, though.

                    Sorry I'm not more helpful.

                    Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

                    by rb137 on Sat Mar 26, 2011 at 01:07:17 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  The unit 1 profile looks like this: (0+ / 0-)

                Photobucket

                Quite a lot different.

                Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

                by rb137 on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 11:13:06 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No Barium 140? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  rb137

                  or did it all turn into LA 140?

                  FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 11:20:31 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I don't know. (0+ / 0-)

                    La 140 is a good guess. The thing that is telling is the difference between the two charts (I know I cut off the exponents here -- I didn't realize that the indenting would not make space for the whole image.)

                    I've posted both charts next to each other in the Mother Ship.

                    http://www.dailykos.com/...

                    Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

                    by rb137 on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 11:39:40 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Something else (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      rb137, VA gentlewoman, Joieau

                      IIRC Pluto said it takes PU to make technetium99m.

                      And #3, 3 months ago had its refueling with MOX, and there are no MOX rods in the cooling pool of #3.

                      Correct me if I'm wrong so far....

                      SO the technetium99m cannot normally be found in the cooling pool of #3.

                      FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                      by Roger Fox on Sat Mar 26, 2011 at 12:03:11 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  99mTc presence is one of the things (0+ / 0-)

                        that raises my eyebrows. I can't comment right now about your question, because I don't remember which rods and cores were made of what -- but I think it's troubling that 99mTc was found in such significant concentrations.

                        Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

                        by rb137 on Sat Mar 26, 2011 at 12:16:13 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I was going by memory (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          rb137

                          Myself.

                          But IIRC..... that means the technetium99m had to come from the reactor not the SFP.

                          FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                          by Roger Fox on Sat Mar 26, 2011 at 12:24:04 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I go by calculating. (0+ / 0-)

                            I never trust my memory on these things. The half life -- that it's a metastable isotope (it doesn't decay into another element, it throws off a gamma ray and no nucleons) is not good news. You won't find an element like that away from the core.

                            I'd have to spend an afternoon proving to myself that there is no path from Uranium to 99mTc to answer your question definitively. I'm not comfortable looking something like that up on the internet and giving a link.

                            I do believe that you are correct about their using MoX in Unit 3. But then I'm trusing my memory, and memory is always a liar.

                            Thanks for your commentary here. You were right on top of one of the important subtleties.

                            Please donate to HEAL Africa, and support HR4128.

                            by rb137 on Sat Mar 26, 2011 at 08:57:24 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

            •  #3Refueling 6 months ago, with MOX? (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              VA gentlewoman, Joieau

              MOX=Pu

              Pu is required to make technetium99m. Right?

              SO that profile with technetium99m cannot come from a Non MOX source. RIght?

              No old MOX rods are cooling at #3, Right?

              SO that profile has to come from the reactor, not the SFP's.

              FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

              by Roger Fox on Sat Mar 26, 2011 at 12:08:33 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Good point. (0+ / 0-)

                So they've criticality in the #3 core now?

                Question for if it melts through - the slag 'elephant's foot' would probably go straight down rather than into the torus, right? What's directly underneath?

                Now, more than ever, we need the Jedi.

                by Joieau on Sat Mar 26, 2011 at 10:41:18 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Technetium99m half life 6.02 hrs (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rb137

          Last refueling of reactor #3 was IIRC 3 months ago.

          Isnt Pu required to make Technetium99m?

          And are there any MOX spent rods in the cooling Pool of #3?

          FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 11:58:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Kan is in over his head. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rb137

        Way, way, way.................................................

        His uncertainty isn't helping because he panicked.

        Financial capitalism's criminals + Angry White Males + KKK wannabes + Personality Disorder delusionals + George Will =EQ= The GOPer Base

        by vets74 on Fri Mar 25, 2011 at 08:18:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site