Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 74

Thread: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

  1. #61
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Whatever the number is, but someone taking on a mining job KNOWS that it's a risky job, riskier than I had imagined, but still...

    The point is that there is not a huge detriment to the environment as a whole... when it's individual injuries, not in the same way that you're talking about when you're talking about excesses of radiation that results from catastrophic problems at nuclear plants.
    Mix old coal plants, like we used to have, and an inversion layer, and the death toll is horrendous...look up the "great smog of 1982" in London. It happened in the USA as well, in Donora, PA.
    Those don't happen anymore, because technology was applied to make the plants cleaner (not clean, just a bit cleanER) and the same thing happens with Nukes, they get better as the next generations come along.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  2. #62
    Verifier
    Gladiator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Your Back Yard
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,878

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    It's the Thresher and the Scorpion. Those were not lost to a nuclear accident. I know their history. I learned it during Navy Nuclear Power School. They are not polluting the ocean any more than a conventional sub would be because they are shut down and even have safety measures in place to cover them not being able to start up down there.

    There is no "company line". I have not worked in nuclear power for anyone but the US Navy. I know exactly how safe we operate. I also know our backups and fail-safes. But, along with these things, I know the guidelines that commercial plants in the US are required to follow, who checks up on them, and what happens if they do not follow procedures. I also know that even commercial plants must have backups and show that they have plans set up if something goes wrong.

    How long till the steel separating the fuel rods from the ocean corrodes away in the sunken nuclear powered ships and submraines? What happens when the fuel rods are exposed to the ocean water?

    Google Search for Ocean Corrosion of steel:

    "Corrosion in seawater is at approx 0,1 to 0,2 mm/year with a good access to oxygen as if the ballast water is changed out frequently. (This is also dependent on temperature).If there is a lot of dirt at the bottom and no working cathodic protection system (sacrificial anodes), it may cause microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) then the rate can be as high as 2 mm/year!"

    "...look at "Handbook of Corrosion Data" published by ASM International and that pages 679 to 706 cover seawater corrosion."

    Saltwater corrosion engineering - Corrosion rate of steel in saltwater








    //
    _______________________________
    How did Our Oil get under Their Sand?

  3. #63
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by Gladiator View Post
    How long till the steel separating the fuel rods from the ocean corrodes away in the sunken nuclear powered ships and submraines? What happens when the fuel rods are exposed to the ocean water?

    Google Search for Ocean Corrosion of steel:

    "Corrosion in seawater is at approx 0,1 to 0,2 mm/year with a good access to oxygen as if the ballast water is changed out frequently. (This is also dependent on temperature).If there is a lot of dirt at the bottom and no working cathodic protection system (sacrificial anodes), it may cause microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) then the rate can be as high as 2 mm/year!"

    "...look at "Handbook of Corrosion Data" published by ASM International and that pages 679 to 706 cover seawater corrosion."

    Saltwater corrosion engineering - Corrosion rate of steel in saltwater





    //
    depends on oxygen content. corrosion is a lot slower at deep ocean depths...
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  4. #64
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,290

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    depends on oxygen content. corrosion is a lot slower at deep ocean depths...
    All the perfume in the world cannot cover the "turds" that these reactors are in the ocean. They have stainless steel jackets on the fuel rods but it's just a matter of time until it is directly exposed to the ocean water and it's currents, migrating schools of fish, mollusks, algae, whatever and then it's in your food chain. That would have been an unthinkable option in the recent past. Now the big media is trying to adjust our perception of that scenario. There are seven reactors in the ocean, just two that the USA is willing to admit to, but willing to admit to is the key. Lots of Russian trash. Who knows what else. The USA used to dump radioactive waste 600 miles west of San Francisco and 400 miles east of New Jersey. Morons all!!!!!

  5. #65
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by Gladiator View Post
    How long till the steel separating the fuel rods from the ocean corrodes away in the sunken nuclear powered ships and submraines? What happens when the fuel rods are exposed to the ocean water?

    Google Search for Ocean Corrosion of steel:

    "Corrosion in seawater is at approx 0,1 to 0,2 mm/year with a good access to oxygen as if the ballast water is changed out frequently. (This is also dependent on temperature).If there is a lot of dirt at the bottom and no working cathodic protection system (sacrificial anodes), it may cause microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC) then the rate can be as high as 2 mm/year!"

    "...look at "Handbook of Corrosion Data" published by ASM International and that pages 679 to 706 cover seawater corrosion."

    Saltwater corrosion engineering - Corrosion rate of steel in saltwater
    By that time, it is quite likely that the vast majority of the fuel (radioactive material) would have already burned away. There are also things put into place (that I'm not sure how deep I can get into, considering it deals with the nuclear reactors of a US submarine, the specifics are classified) that help to absorb some of those particles coming out of the reactor that would cause further reactions.

    It isn't possible (without severely compromising some sensitive information) to explain everything that is in place to help ensure that if an accident happens at sea with a nuclear reactor, it will not be a huge ecological issue, especially if the reactor is, itself, isn't what caused the initial problem and wasn't compromised.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  6. #66
    Global Moderator
    Custom User Title
    LaughAtTheWorld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Seoul/Chicago
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 01:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,541

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post
    EMP damage is not permanent, you understand that right. That concept is nothing more than a Hollywood fantasy. While it would impact the area, things could be rebuilt and electricity would be restored.

    Furthermore, the range of a 1 megaton be approximately 300 mile radius from the detonation point. So one detonation over middle American w/ a 1 megaton nuke will not result in a coast to coast EMP. Also, you need a sophisticated delivery system. MAD strategy would certainly be applicable in this scenario.

    This was tested with the Starfish Prime detonation prior to the prohibition of above ground nuclear testing.
    No, the concept is real. Although it may not be permanent, it will cause massive electromagnetic shock that will rupture most of US communications
    "The misery of being exploited by capitalists is nothing compared to the misery of not being exploited at all" - Joan Robinson
    "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries" - Winston Churchill

  7. #67
    Verifier
    Gladiator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Your Back Yard
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,878

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    By that time, it is quite likely that the vast majority of the fuel (radioactive material) would have already burned away. There are also things put into place (that I'm not sure how deep I can get into, considering it deals with the nuclear reactors of a US submarine, the specifics are classified) that help to absorb some of those particles coming out of the reactor that would cause further reactions.

    It isn't possible (without severely compromising some sensitive information) to explain everything that is in place to help ensure that if an accident happens at sea with a nuclear reactor, it will not be a huge ecological issue, especially if the reactor is, itself, isn't what caused the initial problem and wasn't compromised.

    Here is a list of the 5 sunken Russian Submarines. Hope the Russians have safe technology.


    List of sunken nuclear submarines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    Here is a list of all the man-made nuclear releases to the Earth's environment, so far.

    Lists of nuclear disasters and radioactive incidents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




    //
    _______________________________
    How did Our Oil get under Their Sand?

  8. #68
    Verifier
    Gladiator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Your Back Yard
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,878

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Even if Stainless Steel were used, Stainless is subject to attack by Salt Water.

    " Chlorine can be introduced into a piping system in many ways, but the most common seen in food industry applications are as salt (sodium chloride) and in chlorine-based sterilising solutions such as bleach (sodium hypochlorite.) Salt water (brine) is known to corrode stainless steel, ..."


    Chloride attack on Stainless Steel

    Not to mention Black Chimneys. Sulfuric acid is released from some parts of the Sea Floor. Hope no Stainless Steel vaults with Nuclear Rods land on Black Smokers.

    "....black smokers typically emit particles with high levels of sulfur-bearing minerals, or sulfides. Black smokers are formed in fields hundreds of meters wide when superheated water from below Earth's crust comes through the ocean floor. This water is rich in dissolved minerals from the crust, most notably sulfides. When it comes in contact with cold ocean water, many minerals precipitate, forming a black chimney-like structure around each vent. The metal sulfides that are deposited can become massive sulfide ore deposits in time."


    Hydrothermal vent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



    Page 62 discusses some of the fators involving marine bacteria affecting the corrosion of Stainless Steel.

    http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut...i/attachme.pdf


    //
    Last edited by Gladiator; 12-10-11 at 07:19 PM.
    _______________________________
    How did Our Oil get under Their Sand?

  9. #69
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,290

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    By that time, it is quite likely that the vast majority of the fuel (radioactive material) would have already burned away. There are also things put into place (that I'm not sure how deep I can get into, considering it deals with the nuclear reactors of a US submarine, the specifics are classified) that help to absorb some of those particles coming out of the reactor that would cause further reactions.

    It isn't possible (without severely compromising some sensitive information) to explain everything that is in place to help ensure that if an accident happens at sea with a nuclear reactor, it will not be a huge ecological issue, especially if the reactor is, itself, isn't what caused the initial problem and wasn't compromised.

    The stainless might last 100 years from an optimistic point of view. The fuel rods will be hot for 250,000 years. No problem, eh? Just a nice steady exposure to marine life and your grandkids food chain. Not to worry, Global Warming ought to reduce the world population to a manageable size by then anyway.

  10. #70
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Fukushima fuel rods may have completely melted

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    The stainless might last 100 years from an optimistic point of view. The fuel rods will be hot for 250,000 years. No problem, eh? Just a nice steady exposure to marine life and your grandkids food chain. Not to worry, Global Warming ought to reduce the world population to a manageable size by then anyway.
    What do you mean by "hot"? How much is hot? Please tell me since you seem to believe you are an expert on this. What kind of reactivity rate will we see coming from those nuclear reactors after 100 years, when you predict that the stainless steal will fail? It is calculable, I promise you.

    How much higher will the exposure to marine life be with those 9 reactors at the bottom of the ocean above background? This, too, is calculable.

    I'm not worried about small levels of radiation (that will not even be a blip on the radar when compared to the whole) because I know that there are much higher sources of radiation in our everyday lives. I was exposed to less radiation working around nuclear reactors for the Navy for 9 years than most people get in just one year from natural sources. I know what goes into our reactors and at least some of the designs to help prevent them from becoming huge ecological problems if they are left at the bottom of the ocean.

    No, nothings perfect. But nuclear power is no where near the ecological disaster that fuel and other petroleum products are, especially when it comes to being in the ocean. In fact, if I were you guys, I would be much more worried about the nuclear weapons on that ocean floor than those reactors.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •