|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
It is unlikely that the four nuclear reactors under duress at
Fukushima will ever be used again. There have been some suggestions that all four reactors be entombed under a sarcophagus as was done with Chernobyl. This however is not an ideal solution. In such a scenario there is the constant fear that the nuclear material will come in contact with the water table as time goes on leading to widespread contamination of drinking water. This is already a concern with the discovery of leaks of contaminated water out of the reactors. Another danger is large steam explosions with a meltdown if the hot fuel melting through floors of the plant reaches a large source of water such as ground water under the plant. This could lead to large explosions leading to large scale radioactivity release. This was a worry for years later with Chernobyl even with the sarcophagus covering the reactor. On the other hand there is a worry that the crisis could go on for months or even years: More radioactive water spills at Japan nuke plant. By SHINO YUASA, Associated Press – Mon Mar 28, 5:49 pm ET http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110328/...pan_earthquake I therefore suggest means be explored for removing the radioactive material from the area over a short time frame. One possibility: move the entire buildings. Truly large buildings have been moved in the past up to 15,000 tons: The Five Heaviest Buildings Ever Moved. by Molly Edmonds http://science.howstuffworks.com/eng...ing-moved5.htm The heaviest parts of the Fukushima buildings that would have to be moved would be the concrete and steel containment vessels. This article on p. 6 estimates their mass as about 2,500 tons: Nuclear Accident in Japan. http://www.asiaa.sinica.edu.tw/news/...arAccident.pdf On the other hand this article gives the containment vessel weight of a more modern nuclear reactor type as 910 tons: Construction progresses at Shimane 3. 27 July 2009 http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...3-2707094.html The GE Mark I reactors used at Fukushima are known for their leightweight containment vessels so they actually might weigh less than the Shimane 3 containment vessel. Japan is a small island country so there would really be no where safe to put these damaged reactors. Then it might be necessary to move them by sea on barges to some large deserted region. Another problem is that large electricity generation buildings block the path to the pier. These could be razed, an expensive and time consuming prospect, or you might have to first move the reactor buildings sideways, leveling much smaller buildings on the side, then move the reactor buildings towards the pier. In the article on the moving of the large buildings its surprising how low the cost is. For instance the second biggest move was at about 7,400 tons and cost only $6 million. However, a consideration is that for these moves the engineers had to add extra supports inside the buildings to ensure they would remain intact during the lifting and the transportation. This would be a problem if this was necessary for the reactor buildings if this was required inside the highly irradiated areas. Bob Clark |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
On Mar 29, 4:58*pm, Robert Clark wrote:
*It is unlikely that the four nuclear reactors under duress at Fukushima will ever be used again. There have been some suggestions that all four reactors be entombed under a sarcophagus as was done with Chernobyl. This however is not an ideal solution. In such a scenario there is the constant fear that the nuclear material will come in contact with the water table as time goes on leading to widespread contamination of drinking water. This is already a concern with the discovery of leaks of contaminated water out of the reactors. *Another danger is large steam explosions with a meltdown if the hot fuel melting through floors of the plant reaches a large source of water such as ground water under the plant. This could lead to large explosions leading to large scale radioactivity release. This was a worry for years later with Chernobyl even with the sarcophagus covering the reactor. *On the other hand there is a worry that the crisis could go on for months or even years: More radioactive water spills at Japan nuke plant. By SHINO YUASA, Associated Press – Mon Mar 28, 5:49 pm EThttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110328/ap_on_bi_ge/as_japan_earthquake *I therefore suggest means be explored for removing the radioactive material from the area over a short time frame. One possibility: move the entire buildings. Truly large buildings have been moved in the past up to 15,000 tons: The Five Heaviest Buildings Ever Moved. by Molly Edmondshttp://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/heaviest-buil... *The heaviest parts of the Fukushima buildings that would have to be moved would be the concrete and steel containment vessels. This article on p. 6 estimates their mass as about 2,500 tons: Nuclear Accident in Japan.http://www.asiaa.sinica.edu.tw/news/...NuclearAcciden... * On the other hand this article gives the containment vessel weight of a more modern nuclear reactor type as 910 tons: Construction progresses at Shimane 3. 27 July 2009http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Construction_progresses_at_Shima... *The GE Mark I reactors used at Fukushima are known for their leightweight containment vessels so they actually might weigh less than the Shimane 3 containment vessel. *Japan is a small island country so there would really be no where safe to put these damaged reactors. Then it might be necessary to move them by sea on barges to some large deserted region. *Another problem is that large electricity generation buildings block the path to the pier. These could be razed, an expensive and time consuming prospect, or you might have to first move the reactor buildings sideways, leveling much smaller buildings on the side, then move the reactor buildings towards the pier. * In the article on the moving of the large buildings its surprising how low the cost is. For instance the second biggest move was at about 7,400 tons and cost only $6 million. However, a consideration is that for these moves the engineers had to add extra supports inside the buildings to ensure they would remain intact during the lifting and the transportation. This would be a problem if this was necessary for the reactor buildings if this was required inside the highly irradiated areas. * *Bob Clark the entire plant will never produce power again, its too damaged and too contaminated. The sea water cooled things initially but made long term problems worse. For everyones safety the japanes government should enforce at least a 70 mile exclusin zone cutting all utilties to homes in that area, and remove people by force if necessary If they tried lifting the reactors all the plumbing will leak radioactive water. sooner or later it will be entombed on site. japan will learn another lesson from all this Consumers worldwide will avoid buying japanes made goods from japan for fear they may be buying radioactive merchandise. Even if all expoorts are tested sales will be poor |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
On Mar 29, 10:58*pm, Robert Clark wrote:
*Japan is a small island country so there would really be no where safe to put these damaged reactors. Then it might be necessary to move them by sea on barges to some large deserted region. We can use Russia, no one seems to be using that. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:56:29 -0700 (PDT), bob haller
wrote: Consumers worldwide will avoid buying japanes made goods from japan for fear they may be buying radioactive merchandise. Even if all expoorts are tested sales will be poor Most people don't know what's Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Taiwanese, etc. anymore. Brian |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
On Mar 29, 6:36*pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:56:29 -0700 (PDT), bob haller wrote: Consumers worldwide will avoid buying japanes made goods from japan for fear they may be buying radioactive merchandise. Even if all expoorts are tested sales will be poor Most people don't know what's Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Taiwanese, etc. anymore. Brian this will bring country of origin to big note |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
On Mar 29, 6:45*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Mar 29, 6:36*pm, Brian Thorn wrote: On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:56:29 -0700 (PDT), bob haller wrote: Consumers worldwide will avoid buying japanes made goods from japan for fear they may be buying radioactive merchandise. Even if all expoorts are tested sales will be poor Most people don't know what's Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Taiwanese, etc. anymore. Brian this will bring country of origin to big note What a bunch of nonsense over a non-crisis. The long term consequences will be nearly zero. Do some reading before you guys post such BS. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
Robert Clark wrote in message It is unlikely that the four nuclear reactors under duress at Fukushima will ever be used again. There have been some suggestions that all four reactors be entombed under a sarcophagus as was done with Chernobyl. This however is not an ideal solution. In such a scenario there is the constant fear that the nuclear material will come in contact with the water table as time goes on leading to widespread contamination of drinking water. This is already a concern with the discovery of leaks of contaminated water out of the reactors. Another danger is large steam explosions with a meltdown if the hot fuel melting through floors of the plant reaches a large source of water such as ground water under the plant. This could lead to large explosions leading to large scale radioactivity release. This was a worry for years later with Chernobyl even with the sarcophagus covering the reactor. On the other hand there is a worry that the crisis could go on for months or even years: More radioactive water spills at Japan nuke plant. By SHINO YUASA, Associated Press =96 Mon Mar 28, 5:49 pm ET http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110328/...pan_earthquake I therefore suggest means be explored for removing the radioactive material from the area over a short time frame. One possibility: move the entire buildings. Truly large buildings have been moved in the past up to 15,000 tons: The Five Heaviest Buildings Ever Moved. by Molly Edmonds http://science.howstuffworks.com/eng...eaviest-buildi ng-m= oved5.htm The heaviest parts of the Fukushima buildings that would have to be moved would be the concrete and steel containment vessels. This article on p. 6 estimates their mass as about 2,500 tons: Nuclear Accident in Japan. http://www.asiaa.sinica.edu.tw/news/...uclearAccident. On the other hand this article gives the containment vessel weight of a more modern nuclear reactor type as 910 tons: Construction progresses at Shimane 3. 27 July 2009 http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...ses_at_Shimane _3-2= 707094.html The GE Mark I reactors used at Fukushima are known for their leightweight containment vessels so they actually might weigh less than the Shimane 3 containment vessel. Japan is a small island country so there would really be no where safe to put these damaged reactors. Then it might be necessary to move them by sea on barges to some large deserted region. Another problem is that large electricity generation buildings block the path to the pier. These could be razed, an expensive and time consuming prospect, or you might have to first move the reactor buildings sideways, leveling much smaller buildings on the side, then move the reactor buildings towards the pier. In the article on the moving of the large buildings its surprising how low the cost is. For instance the second biggest move was at about 7,400 tons and cost only $6 million. However, a consideration is that for these moves the engineers had to add extra supports inside the buildings to ensure they would remain intact during the lifting and the transportation. This would be a problem if this was necessary for the reactor buildings if this was required inside the highly irradiated areas. Bob Clark Just junk the current technology. There's no need to roomate a with gamma ray generator. Pebble bed technology and thorium seem to be solutions. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
Robert Clark wrote:
It is unlikely that the four nuclear reactors under duress at Fukushima will ever be used again. There have been some suggestions that all four reactors be entombed under a sarcophagus as was done with Chernobyl. This however is not an ideal solution. In such a scenario there is the constant fear that the nuclear material will come in contact with the water table as time goes on leading to widespread contamination of drinking water. This is already a concern with the discovery of leaks of contaminated water out of the reactors. Another danger is large steam explosions with a meltdown if the hot fuel melting through floors of the plant reaches a large source of water such as ground water under the plant. This could lead to large explosions leading to large scale radioactivity release. This was a worry for years later with Chernobyl even with the sarcophagus covering the reactor. On the other hand there is a worry that the crisis could go on for months or even years: More radioactive water spills at Japan nuke plant. By SHINO YUASA, Associated Press – Mon Mar 28, 5:49 pm ET http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110328/...pan_earthquake I therefore suggest means be explored for removing the radioactive material from the area over a short time frame. One possibility: move the entire buildings. Truly large buildings have been moved in the past up to 15,000 tons: The Five Heaviest Buildings Ever Moved. by Molly Edmonds http://science.howstuffworks.com/eng...ing-moved5.htm The heaviest parts of the Fukushima buildings that would have to be moved would be the concrete and steel containment vessels. This article on p. 6 estimates their mass as about 2,500 tons: Nuclear Accident in Japan. http://www.asiaa.sinica.edu.tw/news/...arAccident.pdf On the other hand this article gives the containment vessel weight of a more modern nuclear reactor type as 910 tons: Construction progresses at Shimane 3. 27 July 2009 http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...3-2707094.html The GE Mark I reactors used at Fukushima are known for their leightweight containment vessels so they actually might weigh less than the Shimane 3 containment vessel. Japan is a small island country so there would really be no where safe to put these damaged reactors. Then it might be necessary to move them by sea on barges to some large deserted region. Another problem is that large electricity generation buildings block the path to the pier. These could be razed, an expensive and time consuming prospect, or you might have to first move the reactor buildings sideways, leveling much smaller buildings on the side, then move the reactor buildings towards the pier. In the article on the moving of the large buildings its surprising how low the cost is. For instance the second biggest move was at about 7,400 tons and cost only $6 million. However, a consideration is that for these moves the engineers had to add extra supports inside the buildings to ensure they would remain intact during the lifting and the transportation. This would be a problem if this was necessary for the reactor buildings if this was required inside the highly irradiated areas. Bob Clark Next time build them under water. If the dome blows up it will flood with water and keep it cool. -- All is as it is. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
On Mar 29, 6:36*pm, Brian Thorn wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:56:29 -0700 (PDT), bob haller wrote: Consumers worldwide will avoid buying japanes made goods from japan for fear they may be buying radioactive merchandise. Even if all expoorts are tested sales will be poor Most people don't know what's Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Taiwanese, etc. anymore. Brian If you have cans of tuna that glow in the dark send them to Bush and Chaney. They have lots of GE stock. TreBert |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Solutions to the Japanese nuclear crisis?
On Mar 29, 7:14*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Mar 29, 6:45*pm, bob haller wrote: On Mar 29, 6:36*pm, Brian Thorn wrote: On Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:56:29 -0700 (PDT), bob haller wrote: Consumers worldwide will avoid buying japanes made goods from japan for fear they may be buying radioactive merchandise. Even if all expoorts are tested sales will be poor Most people don't know what's Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Taiwanese, etc. anymore. Brian this will bring country of origin to big note What a bunch of nonsense over a non-crisis. *The long term consequences will be nearly zero. *Do some reading before you guys post such BS. I challenge your statement. Long term issues Customers acceptance of products from a area thats radioactive espically with pluntonium. people will fear they are getting a glow in the dark whatever. higher cancer rates worldwide, if they go up after this lawyers will win big time suing tokyo power and the country for allowing whats clearly a unsafe plant Japans nuke accident clean up costs, these will go on forever Short and long term costs for japan and the world to close unsafe nuke plants or those in danger areas, note thats most of the plants worldwide Long term added costs to put all spent cores in dry cask storage quickly and get those cores away from operating plants, where their in danger if the plant malfunctions.or attacks by terrorists long term storage issues for nuke waste, no one will want it where they are. Yucca mountain is a great example of not in my backyard, although there are other issues too. Effects to GE for building a cheap plant that failed to take into account known safety issues. Like designing for a 18 foot sunami when historical info indicated one twice the height was possible. It will cost too much to build for that severity this will be fine..... bad design decision Now if the plant fully melts down all of these and far more Americans will likely be encouraged or ordered to remain indoors for a week or more.Think improvised fallout shelters. There will be widespread panic lawness stick ups, runs on stores hoarding traffic jams as people try to get to areas believed safer. I hope none of this occurs but some certinally will. Incidently news just reported 2 japanese workers got drenched with radioactive water today. Sooner or later that plant will be entomed |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Japanese nuclear mess is getting worse than what some said itwould be. | [email protected] | | Policy | 40 | April 6th 11 07:29 AM |
Japanese Company Wants To Built Nuclear Plants In Texas | nightbat[_1_] | Misc | 9 | March 30th 11 12:12 AM |
Power cuts feared in UK nuclear plants crisis | Abo | UK Astronomy | 2 | October 8th 08 07:42 AM |
email extractor , site , solutions , email based marketing , email marketing solution , email extractor , newsletter software , mass email , e-mail marketing , email marketing solutions , bulk email software , web advertising , email marketing , mark | Nuclear Incorporation. www.nuclear-inc.com | UK Astronomy | 0 | April 5th 07 09:37 PM |
How do I - Dew Solutions | Mark Smith | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | May 9th 04 08:38 PM |