Japan Earthquake and Tsunami

wa-loaf said:

From what I heard on the radio, unlike France which recycles all of it's spent rods and the US where we have off site storage, all the spent rods are stored on-site in Japan.

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

Yes doing to many things at once. Fingers are not keeping. You knew what I meant.

Click to expand...

dmc said:

You could've just said "yes it is" instead of acting like an uppity, know it all - douche bag..

Socially Liberal... i highly doubt it...

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

I am going to oversimplify this.

There are basiclly two type of reactors in the world. One that generates the steam via direct contact with the fuel, thus creating contaminated turbines. This is the type that Chernobyl is or was. Very obselete technology, but it allowed for very big reactors thus making the output higher.

The second is pressurized steam system. The core has its own cooling loop that is self contained. The steam is generated outside of the core and is not in contact with the radiation directly. This type of the reactor used on all of our Navy ships, demostic plants along with the Japanese and French plants.

With Chernobyl, it was not the core radiation that caused the problems, it was the release of the radioactive gases. The strontium and cesium release was quite large. This made it into the food chain rather rapidly by animals eating the contamnated plants.

This plant has the stainless containment vessel and a concrete sheath over that. This should protect from any escaping as long as the vessel does not become brittle from the heat. The problem here lies in the potential breach of the core cooling system. If they pumping seawater, it most likely pumping onto the vessel itself. There would more signficant steam clouds if the vessels had been breached. If they can maintain cooling and slow the decay reaction down then it should be fine. The vessel design has done its job so far.

Exposed fuels rods doe not mean exposed to atmosphere. It means they are immersed in the cooling liquid. BTW

Click to expand...

dmc said:

yes we all are supposed to speak PickUt language...

Click to expand...

Morwax said:

This one?
Says "This plant has the stainless containment vessel"

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

Clad is not the same. I stated the vessels at these plant are all stainless to my knowledge due to their age.

And yes I am. I could give to 2 cents what you do as long as it does not affect me.

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

The problem is using sea water and its affect on the all ready brittle stainless steel confinement vessel.

Click to expand...

Morwax said:

This one?

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

Good god man, open your eyes and read.

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

Well read does not make you knowledgable.

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

And your point is?

Click to expand...

Morwax said:

A physicist would know stainless steel is not strong enough and would never be used for containment alone.

Click to expand...

Morwax said:

They are not, never have been and never will be made of stainless steel. :beer:

Click to expand...

dmc said:

just remember that PuckTi says reading does not make you knowledgeable... So why even pay attention to what he says...???

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

Stay the f-ing out of it unless you have something less offensive.

Click to expand...

Morwax said:

Im beginning to think they should have used your head for a containment vessel...its pretty thick

Click to expand...

Morwax said:

Typically, the vessel is constructed of low alloy steel with an internal stainless steel cladding to protect the vessel from corrosion. http://www.babcock.com/products/commercial_nuclear_plant_components/reactor_vessels.html
Im beginning to think they should have used your head for a containment vessel...its pretty thick

Click to expand...

Puck it said:

We use stainless in ultra high vacuum chambers all time. Low e-7 or -8 torr.

Click to expand...