Nuclear meltdown! Holy Godzilla NOOOO!!!

[FXMastermind]

Now I don’t like that wost case scenario at all. Not at all. It’s why everybody really really wants this to not get worse. It’s why the US stepped in, and why the suicide workers went back in, even when the gamma radiation was so bad they might die.

You can’t leave. You simply can’t leave the situation alone.

[GIGObuster]

@Whack-a-Mole

Chernobyl is a “worse case scenario”.

For nuclear plants it does not get worse.

The China Syndrome is a movie. Melting through the floor of the reactor and down to…somewhere…can’t happen. CANNOT HAPPEN

Three Mile Island saw half its core melt in four hours. It never breached the reactor much less the containment vessel.

Chernobyl had NO containment vessel.

Chernobyl also had a supremely bad design that these reactors do not have.

Chernobyl had however a system of concrete chambers at the bottom, if one checks the graph from the World Nuclear association, one can see that the portion that melted after the explosion and fire was stopped… on the last level.

The point that I was making before was that a meltdown is not the biggest of your worries since containment is better now, it is a chemical explosion and fire what could release core material into the atmosphere. Unfortunately for the fear mongers, the Japanese nuclear plant can not explode like the dirty bomb that Chernobyl was in effect.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@FXMastermind

Nobody who understand nuclear reactors disputes this. It’s exactly why the situation is so critical. You do not want melted fuel and exposed fuel rods. It’s very serious.

Yes that is bad.

Yes, nobody wants it to happen.

Yet at Three Mile Island half the reactor core melted. (Read that again…it melted.)

No one had a clue. Indeed they had no clue it was that bad till years later when they were able to open the reactor and see what happened.

[FXMastermind]

Are you under the impression nobody knows about TMI? What is your point?

[TravisFromOR]

This thread has mostly become “Mastermind” talking to himself. It’s pathetic, and an embarrassment to the rational souls who have well thought out reasons for being against nuclear power.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@GIGObuster

Chernobyl had however a system of concrete chambers at the bottom, if one checks the graph from the World Nuclear association, one can see that the portion that melted after the explosion and fire was stopped… on the last level.

The point that I was making before was that a meltdown is not the biggest of your worries since containment is better now, it is a chemical explosion and fire what could release core material into the atmosphere. Unfortunately for the fear mongers, the Japanese nuclear plant can not explode like the dirty bomb that Chernobyl was in effect.

IIRC when a nuclear reactor power plant core melts it cannot sustain a nuclear reaction.

It is still hot from decay products but not sufficient to melt to China or anything near close to that (e.g. to an aquifer).

[FXMastermind]

Stop making stupid crap up and posting it. What you said is so wrong it’s only funny if you are deliberately saying stupid crap.

Wait, are you deliberately saying stupid crap?

[Whack-a-Mole]

@FXMastermind

Are you under the impression nobody knows about TMI? What is your point?

The point is your scaremongering about what “could” happen with zero reference to what we “know” happens in meltdown scenario.

Again, Chernobyl was unique. They could not have planned it to be worse than it was. If they tried their level best they could not have made it worse. Everything about that plant was a disaster. The joys of Soviet engineering.

The Japanese reactors are nothing like it.

[TravisFromOR]

@FXMastermind

Stop making stupid crap up and posting it. What you said is so wrong it’s only funny if you are deliberately saying stupid crap.

Wait, are you deliberately saying stupid crap?

Egads! You are talking to yourself! I was just poking you earlier, but this proves it.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@FXMastermind

Stop making stupid crap up and posting it. What you said is so wrong it’s only funny if you are deliberately saying stupid crap.

Wait, are you deliberately saying stupid crap?

Ok…you are clearly a fucking troll.

You have to be.

I can’t believe someone is this stupid.

Your crap has been debunked soundly over and over here and your responses are hand-waving fear-mongering.

I’m done responding to you unless you provide something of substance (which you have almost completely failed to do so far). Not going to hold my breath on that one.

Hopefully others will follow suit.

Go stick your head in a hole. The radiation is coming! :eek:

[GIGObuster]

@Whack-a-Mole

The point is your scaremongering about what “could” happen with zero reference to what we “know” happens in meltdown scenario.

Again, Chernobyl was unique. They could not have planned it to be worse than it was. If they tried their level best they could not have made it worse. Everything about that plant was a disaster. The joys of Soviet engineering.

The Japanese reactors are nothing like it.

Indeed.

Why Fukushima Daiichi won't be another Chernobyl

Why Fukushima Daiichi won’t be another Chernobyl

What is different about the Fukushima Daiichi accident?

The Chernobyl reactor was actually running – albeit at low power – at the time of the accident there. By contrast the Fukushima Daiichi reactors automatically shut down as soon as they felt the earthquake, by inserting control rods so the nuclear reactions in their cores began slowing within seconds. This means that, from the outset, the amount of heat being produced was much smaller than at Chernobyl.
**
So why couldn’t a runaway reaction happen at Fukushima Daiichi?**
The Chernobyl reactor had a fundamentally different design to those at Fukushima Daiichi. Chernobyl ran on unenriched uranium, which is a fairly weak nuclear fuel. In order to use it, the reactor was designed in a way that made it easier for the nuclear reaction to accelerate. This allowed it to generate useful amounts of power, but it also left it vulnerable to running out of control.

Fukushima Daiichi runs on more powerful fuels than Chernobyl did, mostly enriched uranium. In contrast to the Ukrainian reactor, its design minimises the nuclear reaction unless its human operators boost it. “You have to actually try to make it go,” Bluck says.

Ordinarily the reactor cores are surrounded by water. Heat from the nuclear reaction boils the water, creating steam that drives turbines which generate electricity. In doing so, the water also helps to cool the reactor.

But crucially, the water is also a “moderator”: it helps keep the uranium fission reaction going by slowing down neutrons produced by the reaction as they hurtle out of the fuel rods. Slow neutrons sustain the reaction, by liberating still more neutrons and heat from uranium atoms in the rods; fast-moving neutrons just pass straight through the other fuel rods without colliding with other uranium atoms. If the water heats up too much, however, bubbles form within it and these allow the neutrons to escape, slowing down the nuclear reaction.

Effectively, if the coolant overheats, it starts shutting down the reaction without any human intervention. “It’s a brilliant solution,” Bluck says.

Nuclear engineers call this a “negative void coefficient”, because having voids – bubbles – in the coolant slows down the reaction. By contrast Chernobyl had a positive void coefficient, so the reaction was more likely to accelerate.

[Whack-a-Mole]

@GIGObuster

Indeed.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20257-why-fukushima-daiichi-wont-be-another-chernobyl.html?full=true

Why Fukushima Daiichi won’t be another Chernobyl

Indeed again:

Fukushima Reactors Stabilized:

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS_Stabilisation_at_Fukushima_Daiichi_2003111.html

ETA: Willing to bet FXMastermind is disappointed in this. His proclamations of a doomsday scenario didn’t pan out.

[FXMastermind]

I am thrilled by the news, and will be very very happy when this is all under control.

[bengangmo]

OK…here’s a question.
If the worst possible case had happened. If everything had gone out of control and the rods had melted and exploded.

1. How many deaths are we talking?
2. How much land un-useable for how long?

[Gary_Kumquat]

@FXMastermind

I am thrilled by the news, and will be very very happy when this is all under control.

Now that is a lie, isn’t it?

Seriously, you’ve been nigh on masturbatory in the sheer thrill and enjoyment you’ve had from talking up doom and gloom, with claims such as:

“Those tremendous explosions really did blow three reactor buildings all to hell. Literally, it’s hell.”

“They won’t say it, but this means an uncontrollable nuclear fire. The level of radiation is so high it will kill anyone, even in a suit, who gets within 100 yards of the fire.”

I think you’re going to be absolutely gutted if, as it currently looks like, actually they’re going to bring everything to a stable situation without fatalities, or any significant impact on even the local surroundings.

[TravisFromOR]

He’s lied before, I see no reason to take what he says at face value now.

[levdrakon]

@bengangmo

OK…here’s a question.
If the worst possible case had happened. If everything had gone out of control and the rods had melted and exploded.

1. How many deaths are we talking?
2. How much land un-useable for how long?

If you don’t already have a pretty good idea by now, you and your friends have no business advocating for nuke.

[Moonlitherial]

You know that by opposing nuclear you are advocating for other existing technology. Which of those have a lower mortality rate?

[FXMastermind]

I wish people would stop with the illogical fallacies.

I can be against something, because it’s dangerous, and also be against something else, because it is more dangerous. It’s not an either or situation.

[Cat_Whisperer]

I’m very glad to hear things are coming along in Japan; as I’ve said from the start, we’re learning invaluable lessons from this (unfortunately with an extremely high price tag in terms of human life).