Japanese N-Plant Explosion

It's not the background radiation that is the problem, it is the presence of radioactive isotopes of iodine that are taken up by the thyroid gland.
Inside the body, radiation is much more deadly than outside.

The iodine isotopes are generated in power stations, and have a shortish half life. Eight Days.

If you have children, the death of one of them is a big issue.
As regards treatment, I suppose the gland can be removed and its hormones taken as pharma.

I think it would be better for iodide to be made available, and people not given reassurances that later turn out to be empty words.

That's what happened after Chernobyl, but this time things may be fine.

As regards the Japanese men and women who remain at the plants, they are very brave people.
There were many heroes at Chernobyl too.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
It's not the background radiation that is the problem, it is the presence of radioactive isotopes of iodine that are taken up by the thyroid gland.
Inside the body, radiation is much more deadly than outside.

The iodine isotopes are generated in power stations, and have a shortish half life. Eight Days.

If you have children, the death of one of them is a big issue.
As regards treatment, I suppose the gland can be removed and its hormones taken as pharma.

I think it would be better for iodide to be made available, and people not given reassurances that later turn out to be empty words.

That's what happened after Chernobyl, but this time things may be fine.
Click to expand...

What supplement are people given for all the particulate pollution that kills thousands including children ever year from coal pollution? The increase Thyroid cancer rate even from a disaster like Chernobyl and all nuclear power accident combine is nothing compare to coal power, yet people don't panic about coal power! If we had for example replaced all coal power with nuclear power even with the occasional accidents from nuclear power the total death toll would be lower and the quality of life would be higher.

Now what is happening with Fukushima power plant is not likely to kill anyone from radiation, the plants have containment domes and the radiation leak is not likely to be anywhere near that of Chernobyl, yet people seem to be giving this as much attention as the whole earthquake and tsunami event which has killed hundreds if not thousands.
 
adoucette said:
They may be teetering on the edge of economic disaster but so far there is no indication that any of the containment vessels are at risk.

Arthur
Click to expand...

All it takes is for the botched-up cooling system to fail and it will meltdown. The other reactors will have to be abandoned and chernobyl will look like a picnic. The only reason it has not yet done so is due only to the diligence and perseverence of the plant workers and the defence force soldiers battling to maintain the water supply.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
I think it would be better for iodide to be made available, and people not given reassurances that later turn out to be empty words.

That's what happened after Chernobyl, but this time things may be fine.

As regards the Japanese men and women who remain at the plants, they are very brave people.
There were many heroes at Chernobyl too.
Click to expand...

Comparison of what is going on here to Chernobyl ignores the HUGE difference in the plants.

The first major difference is Chernobyl had no Containment Dome at all.
The reactor was housed in a large building, which the initial explosion destroyed and allowed essentially uncontrolled release of radiation and radioactive elements.

The second major difference is Chernobly used a completely different form of neutron moderation in that they used Graphite.

Now Graphite is damn near impossible to ignite, but you can when you have the heat generated in a reactor and the reactor components are open to the air, which is what happened after the initial explosion. Worse, when you do get a Graphite fire it is very difficult to put out, and the Graphite fire burned out of control at Chernobyl for 10 days and it was this fire that caused the huge spread of radioactive material far beyond the plant site.

The intense graphite fire was responsible for the dispersion of radionuclides and fission fragments high into the atmosphere. The emissions continued for about twenty days, but were much lower after the tenth day when the graphite fire was finally extinguished.


The graphite fire

While the conventional fires at the site posed no special firefighting problems, very high radiation doses were incurred by the firemen, resulting in 31 deaths. However, the graphite moderator fire was a special problem. Very little national or international expertise on fighting graphite fires existed, and there was a very real fear that any attempt to put it out might well result in further dispersion of radionuclides, perhaps by steam production, or it might even provoke a criticality excursion in the nuclear fuel.

A decision was made to layer the graphite fire with large amounts of different materials, each one designed to combat a different feature of the fire and the radioactive release. The first measures taken to control fire and the radionuclides releases consisted of dumping neutron-absorbing compounds and fire-control material into the crater that resulted from the destruction of the reactor. The total amount of materials dumped on the reactor was about 5 000 t including about 40 t of borons compounds, 2 400 t of lead, 1 800 t of sand and clay, and 600 t of dolomite, as well as sodium phosphate and polymer liquids (Bu93). About 150 t of material were dumped on 27 April, followed by 300 t on 28 April, 750 t on 29 April, 1 500 t on 30 April, 1 900 t on 1 May and 400 t on 2 May. About 1 800 helicopter flights were carried out to dump materials onto the reactor; During the first flights, the helicopter remained stationary over the reactor while dumping materials. As the dose rates received by the helicopter pilots during this procedure were too high, it was decide that the materials should be dumped while the helicopters travelled over the reactor. This procedure caused additional destruction of the standing structures and spread the contamination. Boron carbide was dumped in large quantities from helicopters to act as a neutron absorber and prevent any renewed chain reaction. Dolomite was also added to act as heat sink and a source of carbon dioxide to smother the fire. Lead was included as a radiation absorber, as well as sand and clay which it was hoped would prevent the release of particulates. While it was later discovered that many of these compounds were not actually dropped on the target, they may have acted as thermal insulators and precipitated an increase in the temperature of the damaged core leading to a further release of radionuclides a week later.
Click to expand...

http://www.oecd-nea.org/rp/chernobyl/c01.html

Ultra said:
All it takes is for the botched-up cooling system to fail and it will meltdown. The other reactors will have to be abandoned and chernobyl will look like a picnic.
Click to expand...
No, if they can't keep the fuel cool (and no reason at this time to think they can't) then yes, it will melt down, and then it will be much like 3 Mile Island where the Reactor is turned into a pile of junk. An economic disaster.

In contrast to Chernobyl there is nothing to burn in this reactor and the containment dome, like the one at 3 Mile Island, was designed to both survive an earthquake and handle a loss of coolant accident with only a very limited release of radioactivity.

Arthur
 
Last edited:
ElectricFetus said:
What supplement are people given for all the particulate pollution that kills thousands including children ever year from coal pollution? The increase Thyroid cancer rate even from a disaster like Chernobyl and all nuclear power accident combine is nothing compare to coal power, yet people don't panic about coal power!
Click to expand...

True. But, perhaps they should worry about particulates and irritating oxides too.
Maybe people should buy a gas mask along with their mulitmineral tablets.

@adoucette
Yes, if it has survived a tsunami, a major earthquake, failure of backup cooling and an explosion, then the design was a good one.
If they were higher up, it might be better in hindsight.

I'm not against nuclear power.
We are going to need it increasingly for the rest of this century.

From the little I know about coal plants, I would prefer to live close to a nuclear power station than to one of them.
 
Last edited:
Kyodo News reports the cooling system pump has stopped at the Tokai nuclear power plant in #Ibaraki, #Japan - Reuters

Poor sods. As if they didn't have problems enough. Just watching the news on TV now..Really awful. I don't half feel sorry for them.
 
Saquist said:
So this is nothing like a nuclear submarine. When they're scrammed they are off line. The only thing you need to contain is any radioactive gases. So in effect these are bombs waiting to go off?
Click to expand...

Well, IIRC, when a sub's reactor is scrammed, they totally shut down the reaction, but it is still a "hot" reactor. However, nuclear subs have much smaller reactor cores (which is why they run a more enriched isotope as well - just look at the Alfa class SSN, which I believe is capable of suffering, as they say, a "sudden rapid explosive dis-assembly" of the core in the event of total containment failure) which, given lower mass and a higher overall volume to mass ratio, would result in much faster "deadening" of the reactor core.

But that's just going on what I can remember... and I'm no nuclear engineer :shrug:
 
Captain Kremmen said:
True. But, perhaps they should worry about particulates and irritating oxides too.
Maybe people should buy a gas mask along with their mulitmineral tablets.
Click to expand...

The amount of radioactive materiel release by a nuclear power plant is nothing compared to the millions of tons of ash spewed out by coal, hell coal power plants have given off more radioactive material in the small amounts of thorium and uranium in coal then all nuclear power plants have. Why need a gas mask for radiation when we know people can live in radioactive environments many times higher then Chernobyl for generations without increase cancer or problems? The only time you would need a mask for radiation is if your the unfortunate SOB hired to go in an clean up a nuclear accident.

Kittamaru said:
Well, IIRC, when a sub's reactor is scrammed, they totally shut down the reaction, but it is still a "hot" reactor. However, nuclear subs have much smaller reactor cores (which is why they run a more enriched isotope as well - just look at the Alfa class SSN, which I believe is capable of suffering, as they say, a "sudden rapid explosive dis-assembly" of the core in the event of total containment failure) which, given lower mass and a higher overall volume to mass ratio, would result in much faster "deadening" of the reactor core.

But that's just going on what I can remember... and I'm no nuclear engineer :shrug:
Click to expand...

The alfa were lead cooled reactors, their biggest problems was the opposite of meltdown, freeze up. Freezeup mind you means little if any radiation leak, but it does mean your reactor is now only good as a giant paperweight. Freezeup is a far better problem to have, in a sudden reactor shutdown it will take some time for the molten lead to solidify, especially in theory for a huge gigawatt class reactor, residual and decay heat would be a blessing not a curse keeping a reactor from freezing solid for at least several days, no cooling needed.
 
Last edited:
ElectricFetus said:
The amount of radioactive materiel release by a nuclear power plant is nothing compared to the millions of tons of ash spewed out by coal, hell coal power plants have given off more radioactive material in the small amounts of thorium and uranium in coal then all nuclear power plants have. Why need a gas mask for radiation when we know people can live in radioactive environments many times higher then Chernobyl for generations without increase cancer or problems? The only time you would need a mask for radiation is if your the unfortunate SOB hired to go in an clean up a nuclear accident.
Click to expand...

I think the fear is that radiation is so toxic for so long, and the death is so nasty that people really fear it. Plutonium found in reactor cores is one of the most toxic substances on earth. There are still effects here in england (caesium contamination) that are still ongoing from the chernobly radiation cloud, and we're over 800 miles away. The caesium is taken up by plants, namely grass, which is eaten by sheep and cattle making them and thier products unusable for years and years.
 
ULTRA said:
I think the fear is that radiation is so toxic for so long, and the death is so nasty that people really fear it.
Click to expand...

Yeah that radiophobia, the fear is unfounded, low levels of radiation over long periods of time are far less harmful then they fear, just ask the people of Ramsar.

Plutonium found in reactor cores is one of the most toxic substances on earth.
Click to expand...

Oh please not that false hysterical claim!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium#Toxicity

There are still effects here in england (caesium contamination) that are still ongoing from the chernobly radiation cloud, and we're over 800 miles away. The caesium is taken up by plants, namely grass, which is eaten by sheep and cattle making them and thier products unusable for years and years.
Click to expand...

Unusable by human fear alone! Even if you were to eat cesium contaminate sheep from Britain every day of the year your total radiation dose would still be half that of a dental X-ray!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzz2CXIz_k0
 
ULTRA said:
I think the fear is that radiation is so toxic for so long,
Click to expand...

Yet it's danger tends to be inversely proportional to how long it is radioactive. Granite, which is widely used in construction and in kitchens and bathrooms has 5 to 20 times the concentration of uranium compared to other common rock types, but no one cares that much because it's half life is 4.5 billion years.

and the death is so nasty that people really fear it. Plutonium found in reactor cores is one of the most toxic substances on earth.
Click to expand...

It isn't that toxic, and then pretty much only if you inhale it, and being that Plutonium is nearly twice as dense as lead, the likelihood of that is very low.

There are still effects here in england (caesium contamination) that are still ongoing from the chernobly radiation cloud, and we're over 800 miles away. The caesium is taken up by plants, namely grass, which is eaten by sheep and cattle making them and thier products unusable for years and years.
Click to expand...

Yes, as pointed out, the amount of radiation emitted from Chernobyl was because it was a Graphite Moderated Reactor that did NOT have a containment dome and following the explosion had a massively hot fire that burned for 10 days putting large quantities of radiation into the upper atmosphere.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...inally-free-of-chernobyl-fallout-2020059.html

Arthur
 
Last edited:
Personally, I have no great concern over radiation. I live less than three miles from a reactor that's now being decomissioned. These plants have to go somewhere. Decomissioning has been identified as one of the riskiest times for a reactor, but my neibours and I would hardly know anything was going on. I think education helps allay most fears people have. My Father was a nuclear scientist, so I learned about radiation, atoms, fission and fusion before I was 10 years old. I'd like to have iodine tablets just in case, but just eat sea-salt instead.
 
John99 said:
I was wondering if that was the same. How much salt do you have to eat?
Click to expand...

Sea-salt (and consequently fish) contains a reasonable amount of iodine, so using it normally, say 2-3 grammes a day is sufficient. Some seaweeds are especially rich in iodine which is important for the functioning of your thyroid gland, one of the bodys' regulatory systems.
 
The biggest factor here is lack of certainty. No one -- not even the experts -- actually knows with any real *certainty* what will happen, and this is because no one has tested the robustness of reactor designs with actual catastrophes or near catastrophes. It's not like ramming walls with cars containing crash dummies, accelerometers, airbags, etc. It's simply not economically or ecologically feasible. I've never heard of anyone smoke-testing a nuke plant.
 
ULTRA said:
Sea-salt (and consequently fish) contains a reasonable amount of iodine, so using it normally, say 2-3 grammes a day is sufficient. Some seaweeds are especially rich in iodine which is important for the functioning of your thyroid gland, one of the bodys' regulatory systems.
Click to expand...

Thanks. 2-3 grams isnt too much. Do you eat seaweed? What kind of seaweed should a person eat? I dont think i ever ate it.
 
Cifo said:
The biggest factor here is lack of certainty. No one -- not even the experts -- actually knows with any real *certainty* what will happen, and this is because no one has tested the robustness of reactor designs with actual catastrophes or near catastrophes. It's not like ramming walls with cars containing crash dummies, accelerometers, airbags, etc. It's simply not economically or ecologically feasible. I've never heard of anyone smoke-testing a nuke plant.
Click to expand...

How about destructively testing nuclear rocket engine be intentionally making it meltdown? Is that not enough?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Destruction_of_KIWI_Nuclear_Reactor_-_GPN-2002-000145.jpg
 
John99 said:
Thanks. 2-3 grams isnt too much. Do you eat seaweed? What kind of seaweed should a person eat? I dont think i ever ate it.
Click to expand...

I only eat seaweed on survival expeditions. This is for thier mineral content and can be relatively good. Kelp and other seaweeds are available from health stores as pills.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top