# Still support nuke power plants? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 14, 2011, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647 "2011-03-14T11:56:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 43
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/841 "2011-03-22T19:17:00Z")
There is no such thing as a reactor that makes radioactive material ‘go away’, or what ever crap you are trying to sell. ---
**Author:** ![Algorithm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/algorithm/32/12204_2.png) [@Algorithm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algorithm)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/842 "2011-03-22T19:26:57Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > There is no such thing as a reactor that makes radioactive material ‘go away’, or what ever crap you are trying to sell. Nobody said that. Read it again: > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > there are reactor designs which will eat the waste from current reactors (and produce power doing it) ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/843 "2011-03-22T19:28:30Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > They are accumulating the radiation in their bodies. When people say it is equivalent to a MRI or Xray, they don’t point out it is getting an xray 10 hours a day. It is more like living in an MRI machine. MRI’s do not have any ionizing radiation in them. It’s all radio-frequency electro-magnetic radiation. Very different from an x-ray machine or CAT scan, which is probably what you’re thinking of. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/844 "2011-03-22T20:06:06Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > That said there are reactor designs which will eat the waste from current reactors (and produce power doing it) but for various reasons we will not build them. This is a terrible description of a Integral Fast Reactor, which almost everybody tried to build and run, and everybody stopped after the first accident. An IFR uses Metal sodium (Na) coolant, which sounded great until the first time the pipes burst and radioactive molten sodium ended up all over the place. Along with a shitpile of hot plutonium and other extremely radioactive material, none of which is any fun at all when things go terribly wrong. There’s a reason nobody is using IFRs, or planning to. For starters, you can’t spray molten sodium with water. It goes boom. Actually that’s the end of the story right there. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/845 "2011-03-22T21:21:19Z")
What about thorium? It’s years away of course but in the long run might it be better than uranium? ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/846 "2011-03-22T21:22:38Z")
This kind of crap really gets my fuel rods burning. > [@](#): > > High radiation detected 40km from nuclear plant > > Japan’s science ministry says radiation exceeding 400 times the normal level was detected in soil about 40 kilometers from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. > > The ministry surveyed radioactive substances in soil about 5 centimeters below the surface at roadsides on Monday. > > The ministry found 43,000 becquerels of radioactive iodine-131 per kilogram of soil, and 4,700 becquerels of radioactive cesium-137 per kilogram about 40 kilometers west-northwest of the plant. [http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/22\_35.html](http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/22_35.html) ``` You are supposed to think that ordinary amounts of radioactive iodine-131 exist in all soils, and this is just 400 times the 'normal levels'. Like radioactive iodine-131 just happens to be in all soils at some 'normal' level. What a crock. The cesium-137 crap is far worse. Like cesium-137 just happens to normally exist in soil. "Oh, it is only 400 times the normal, naturally occuring radioactive background radiation". Like iodine-131 and cesium-137 are some sort of natural trace element that just exists. "Oh, you eat a little bit every time you have food. This is just a little more, it not hurt you" ``` Oh Please ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/847 "2011-03-22T21:24:37Z")
You know, it might be a good idea to put out some collection paper and measure how much radioactive dust is falling from the sky, rather than digging up soil and checking it. It’s not like it’s a mystery where it’s coming from. ``` Oh, and check the rainwater while you are at it. I heard rain brings it down to the earth. So maybe put out some barrels and check the rain water. That way you don't have to go digging in the ground to try and figure this out. ``` ---
**Author:** ![TravisFromOR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cc9497/32.png) [@TravisFromOR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisFromOR)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/848 "2011-03-22T21:37:36Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > You know, it might be a good idea to put out some collection paper and measure how much radioactive dust is falling from the sky, rather than digging up soil and checking it. It’s not like it’s a mystery where it’s coming from. > > ``` > Oh, and check the rainwater while you are at it. I heard rain brings it down to the earth. So maybe put out some barrels and check the rain water. That way you don't have to go digging in the ground to try and figure this out. > > ``` Now you’re giving advice to people that actually know what they’re doing? :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/849 "2011-03-22T21:37:53Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > What about thorium? It’s years away of course but in the long run might it be better than uranium? The Chinese are building one it seems and it does seem impressive as a technology (a technology which the US invented decades ago). As for FX he has no clue. Actual facts are meaningless to him. Yes, molten sodium is nasty stuff. It is also used in industry in various processes. Industry deals with lots of nasty crap all the time. Coping with molten sodium is not a new thing. ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/850 "2011-03-22T21:40:13Z")
The only reason to respond to FXMastermind at this point is to make sure that people on the fence who read his/her posts understand that it’s mostly hysterical rantings. ---
**Author:** ![Kevbo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e47774/32.png) [@Kevbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kevbo)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/851 "2011-03-22T22:23:00Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > You need to cite or link to where you are getting this crap from. “This crap” being the notion that any Uranium burning reactor creates Pu. Well, to be honest, I got it from hanging out with nuclear engineers and physicists over beers when we were stuck in remote places (where they put Nuke plants) and the locals don’t speak English. I don’t care much for sports, so eating nice meals, drinking beer, and picking their brains about their field of expertise was pretty much the only entertainment to be had when we were not working. Which is hardly a cite, so here: > **[Plutonium](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium)** > > Plutonium is a chemical element; it has symbol Pu and atomic number 94. It is a silvery-gray actinide metal that tarnishes when exposed to air, and forms a dull coating when oxidized. The element normally exhibits six allotropes and four oxidation states. It reacts with carbon, halogens, nitrogen, silicon, and hydrogen. When exposed to moist air, it forms oxides and hydrides that can expand the sample up to 70% in volume, which in turn flake off as a powder that is pyrophoric. It is radioactiv... for starters. Wikipedia is not a primary source, but the article above seems to be quite well written and reasonably accessible for lay people. It has a good bibliography, but if you don’t know enough to know that bombarding Uranium with neutrons is going to create some Plutonium, then maybe just stick with the Wiki article. Scroll down to the “Isotopes and synthesis” section. It is well footnoted with primary references. Scan down to the equations. Here is a layman’s explanation of the first one: If you have neutrons about and 238U (which is what low enriched uranium reactor fuel mostly is) then some of the 238U will capture neutrons and become 239U. This has a half life of just under 24 minutes, and so quickly decays into 239Np (neptunium). The Np in turn decays (half life a little under 2.5 days) and presto, you have 239Pu. Reactors have very high neutron flux, so this happens a lot. Now 239Pu is chemically the same (and just as poison) as any other Pu isotope, and the ideal isotope for bomb making but it may not be what you want for other uses. Here is a lay explaination of the second equation: So you may want to make a reactor that has lots of deuterons (D, the nuclei of heavy hydrogen) flying around. When those are captured by the U238, they create 238Np and a couple neutrons (which, will cause some of the above reaction, which might be undesirable) which then decays (HL of a couple days) into 238Pu. 238Pu is not good for weapons, because it is pretty thermally hot stuff, which makes it great for making radioisotope generators/heaters for outposts in Siberia, which is great if you are a Russian, or powering deep space probes if you are NASA. If you have neutrons about and 238Pu or 239Pu, then eventually you are going to end up with some of the other Pu allotropes, so you end up with a fair mix of Pu species even when you optimize your reactor for one isotope, or even if you optimize it to create as little Pu as possible. You just CAN’T have 238U and lots of neutrons around and not end up with SOME Plutonium. The Wiki article doesn’t go into it, but by optimal choices of moderator, and operating at optimal flux levels you can make the reactor create lots more of Isotopes that ARE good for making bombs, and fewer that interfere with bomb fission (U240). You would pretty much have to be doing that on purpose, and if the Japanese Pu is found to contain abnormally low levels of 240Pu then THAT would be a smoking gun that they are intentionally making Pu for weapons use. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/852 "2011-03-22T22:24:34Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > From what I recall, they were talking about 50-200 microsieverts per hour for the workers. That’s certainly nasty (not exactly a ‘suicide mission’ though), but it would still take several hours before workers would start to get sick (though IIRC, in the US a worker is only allowed 50 microsieverts of total exposure per year). > > Maybe I’m missing something here, or I’ve got the wrong exposure levels or something (wouldn’t be the first time I was way off base in this thread). > > -XT I can’t comment on that, all I was saying is we don’t have easily wearable suits which protect us that much from gamma radiation. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/853 "2011-03-22T22:39:21Z")
A half inch of lead will stop over 50% of gamma rays. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/854 "2011-03-22T22:46:35Z")
Your suggestion that someone wear a suit made of half inch thick lead is about as credible, sensible, and sane as any of your other recent posts. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/855 "2011-03-22T22:50:43Z")
A suit of half inch lead wouldn’t protect you from gamma rays. An inch of lead won’t protect you from gamma rays. You just take four times as long to die. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/856 "2011-03-22T22:52:34Z")
The real problem is that gamma rays also effect electronics, optics and everything else, so robots and remote controlled devices have to be heavily shielded. Even so, they can’t get very close to an intense gamma ray source, like a pile of burning fuel rods. ---
**Author:** ![TravisFromOR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cc9497/32.png) [@TravisFromOR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TravisFromOR)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/857 "2011-03-22T23:00:40Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > The real problem is that gamma rays also effect electronics, optics and everything else, so robots and remote controlled devices have to be heavily shielded. Even so, they can’t get very close to an intense gamma ray source, like a pile of burning fuel rods. I need a cite for this, or is it like the mythical victims of radiation poisoning that you have yet to supply. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/858 "2011-03-22T23:04:36Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > You are supposed to think that ordinary amounts of radioactive iodine-131 exist in all soils, and this is just 400 times the ‘normal levels’. Like radioactive iodine-131 just happens to be in all soils at some ‘normal’ level. What a crock. > > The cesium-137 crap is far worse. Like cesium-137 just happens to normally exist in soil. “Oh, it is only 400 times the normal, naturally occurring radioactive background radiation”. Like iodine-131 and cesium-137 are some sort of natural trace element that just exists. For the benefit of those reading FXMastermind’s ravings who are uncertain as to what this means: The normal amount of either of these two substances is extremely low. Iodine-131 actually has medical uses - as in, there are certain conditions where the standard treatment is to drink a dose of Iodine-131 as treatment. One would not do this lightly, but it’s an indication it’s not Evil Death Distilled as FXMastermind implies or fears or wants you think or something of the sort. And yes, Iodine-131 _does_ exist in all soils on the planet since the first above-ground nuclear detonation. Cesium-137 is more problematic. Almost all occurrence of it is due to the nuclear age and it lasts longer than Iodine-131. But that also means that “normal background” is vanishingly small, outside of an area like Chernobyl or a nuclear test site Now, clearly, neither of these things are stuff you want to eat or inhale if you can easily avoid doing so, but getting microscopic amounts are not Evil Death Distilled. > [@](#): > > “Oh, you eat a little bit every time you have food. This is just a little more, it not hurt you” Yes, actually you DO get a teeny amount every time you eat something. Foods that high in certain nutrients - potassium, iron, calcium, etc - tend to have more than other foods. Oddly enough, though, those same foods - bananas, leafy greens, etc. - are also associated with _de_creased risk of cancer, not increased. Go figure. Of course, if you eat _highly radioactive_ foodstuffs that’s bad. Which is precisely why food in Japan is now being monitored and anything exceeding legal limits will not be permitted into the food chain. I will also note. once again, those limits are set for the most vulnerable - pregnant women and children. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/859 "2011-03-22T23:09:43Z")
> [@TravisFromOR](#): > > I need a cite for this, or is it like the mythical victims of radiation poisoning that you have yet to supply. I’ll confirm that gamma radiation _does_ affect electronics, cameras, optics, etc., it’s a common fact. Not nearly to the extent \*\*FXMastermind \*\*thinks it does, of course. In addition, both the military and nuclear industry do have electronics and optics that are “hardened” against radiation and thus much more resistant than normal equipment. However, I, too, am also still waiting for these pictures of radiation victims he promised us pages ago. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2011, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647/860 "2011-03-22T23:11:07Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > A half inch of lead will stop over 50% of gamma rays. > [@FXMastermind](#): > > A suit of half inch lead wouldn’t protect you from gamma rays. An inch of lead won’t protect you from gamma rays. You just take four times as long to die. First you say a half an inch stops 50% of gamma rays, then you say lead of any thickness is useless as protection. You really don’t see how this makes you look like a total idiot? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647.md?page=42) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/still-support-nuke-power-plants/574647.md?page=44)