Skip to main content

View Diary: Mothership (139 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Why do you think rb137 wrote the damn diary (0+ / 0-)

    And please do read rb137 comments, shes got a physics background.

    In fact contact her, or anyone else, and since youre asking other people in other diaries and not providing the source (which is inherently unfair on your part), I would ask you - in all fairness - to at least cite the fooking numbers:

    Otherwise what you are doing is presenting your version (which you yourself claim you dont have the chops to follow) to someone else in order to ascertain the veracity of a 3rd party claim (by me). If you think this might be important, at least exercise due diligence, please stop making a half hearted attempt.

    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 Tue Mar 29, 2011 at 11:49:12 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  What I am trying to check is not rb137's claims (0+ / 0-)

      concerning possible breach of the containment, but yours which you have made rather frequently that those numbers somehow indicate the presence in one or more reactors or spent fuel pools of 'recriticality' or 'recent fission'..  (See below.)

      While I have seen statements that would support a possible continued residual amount of "fission" continuing after shutdown,  and statements questioning the readings or the completeness of their report, I have not seen anything supporting your claim of 're-criticality'.  

      This is one defintion of "critical":

      critical means operating at a sustained level of power production ...

      in a shutdown reactor immediately after powering down 1% of the total energy of full power is still produced by latent radioactivity.  This decay heat is what needs to be removed from the reactors and the spent fuel pools to prevent meltdown,  this amount of heat is easily enough to cause a meltdown which we have seen.


      I've also seen a number of others as well, here and from other sources.  

      And from answers to my questions I understand that the fuel rods could melt (as has been widely asserted and commonly assumed to have occurred) without the occurence of 'criticality':

      I misstated that somewhat. The zirconium cladding can catch fire on its own, and no criticality or chain reaction is needed for the rods to heat and melt absent proper cooling, but the normal reason they would do so is their remaining nuclear energy causing spontaneous fission and other emissions. Again, not a chain reaction, but a nuclear reaction of sorts is still occurring.

      We don't know what kind of reaction occurred, but we can say with reasonable certainty at this point that some of the rods melted in at least a couple of the reactors.

      Which would lead me to believe that the presence of some small residual level of 'fission' would be neither unexpected nor particulary worrisome given the current state of our troubles at this plant.

      On the other hand, if any conditions have developed in the reactors, or containment structures or spent fuel pools that have created a sustained nuclear reaction indicated by use of the term "re-criticality", even if that reaction lasted only for a defined period of time,  that would be both unexpected and very troubling.

      Please don't think I'm hounding you.  I am taking your conclusion seriously.

      Which is why I have repeatedly asked you to provide any outside support you might have for the conclusions you came to, conclusions posted repeatedly, such as these:

       I think there is some recriticality as of March 23rd, in 2 & 3.
      Rb137 showed us the numbers in her diary
      and Kbman is worried too.

      Are we seeing recriticallity?
      Its almost not a question.

      TMI was over in 5 days, they found the stuck valve at about 85 hrs, and were able to pump water. That left about 1/4 of the fuel on the floor.

      Its been 2 weeks. My guess is most of the fuel is on the floor, at a certain point it may be enough fuel to initiate low level fission. These short lived isotopes are initial evidence that that is indeed what we are seeing, recriticallity.

      It means recent fission

      which can come from the SFP or the melted fuel on the floor of the reactor.

      My very uneducated guess is this fission occurred within the last 100 hrs. Or less.

      Since the water in the turbine room of #3, (when the 3 workers stepped in the water) contained these isotopes, it suggest that the source was the fuel rods on the floor of the reactor, which suggests recriticality in #3.

      Either the SFP or melted fuel, its almost a moot point, its real fucking bad.

      Looking at the TEchnetium99m and Barium 140

      We see that #3 has the higher levels. #2 has more I-134.

      And the ratios of ba 140 to La 140 are of issue, because the higher amounts of ba 140 in #3 & #2 suggest more recent fission than in 1 or 4.

      Decay chain is BA-140, LA-140, Cerium 140, which is stable.

      The following blog posts I found when trying to search for some of your key terms to see if anyone else agreed with your conclusion, which if correct would have fairly significant implications.  Can't tell if they were yours or someone elses, but they were pretty much the only ones I found.

      Since you have not provided me links to any sources (as I requested) that support your conclusions as quoted above, I have to assume you have none.  

      Doesn't mean you're not correct, just that no one else has reached that same conclusion.

      We'd rather dream the American Dream than fight to live it or to give it to our kids. What a shame. What an awful, awful shame.

      by Into The Woods on Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 11:41:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You might find this interesting (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roger Fox

      We'd rather dream the American Dream than fight to live it or to give it to our kids. What a shame. What an awful, awful shame.

      by Into The Woods on Wed Mar 30, 2011 at 08:30:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes. Thanks. (0+ / 0-)

        Looking at the isotope data my guess is there was fission going on between March 17th and March 23rd. I dont know if it was a peak during that window or just continued and declining levels of fission dating from March 12th.

        Neutron beams from March 13th to the 16th... @ 1 & 2. hmmm. Sheds some light on that question. Were the exposed top of the fuel rods crumbling or slagging down at that time, it is roughly the same time frame for TMI.... ?

        I'd love to see daily isotope data for each day!

        AS you pointed out  the TC99m precursor has a 1/2 life of 66 hrs IIRC..... would love to see those numbers....

        I guess we'll have to wait and see how much fuel was impacted, got caught up in the assemblies and or dropped to the floor.

        IIRC TMI was over in 5 days, at 3.5 days they got a handle on the cooling. TMI wiki has a graphic suggesting something like 20% of the fuel was impacted, some dropping to the floor. SO can we assume that by day 3 or 4 that Fukushima reactors were at a similar point?

        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 Thu Mar 31, 2011 at 01:35:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site