Highest hydrogen levels of year inside Reactor No. 2 containment vessel
Hydrogen Density of Reactor No. 2′s Primary Containment Vessel
- Apr. 27, 2012 @ .36%
- Apr. 11, 2012 @ .19%
- Mar. 11, 2012 @ .06%
- Feb. 3, 2012 @ .04%
- Dec. 22, 2011 @ .45%
For 2012, it appears Tepco did not publish hydrogen levels for the No. 2 PCV until Feb. 3. Please post in comments or send in as a tip if you are able to locate a figure for hydrogen levels between Dec. 23, 2011 and Feb. 2, 2012.
Related Posts
- Hydrogen levels quintuple at Reactor No. 2 in last two weeks March 26, 2012
- Hydrogen levels quadruple at Reactor No. 2 in last two weeks March 24, 2012
- “Worrisome Trend” Returns: Hydrogen levels spike 2.5 times over four days at Reactor No. 2 June 18, 2012
- Now hydrogen levels triple at Reactor No. 2 in recent days March 22, 2012
- Gundersen: Recent hydrogen build up inside Fukushima reactor “worrisome” (VIDEO) May 20, 2012
|
Discussion Threads
-
FORUM: Fukushima Webcam Discussion Thread
(5,215 Comments)
-
FORUM: General Discussion Thread (Nuclear Issues)
(5,441 Comments)
-
FORUM: Off-Topic Discussion Thread (Non-Nuclear Issues)
(4,041 Comments)
-
FORUM: Post Your Radiation Monitoring Data Here
(3,293 Comments)
-
FORUM: Alternative Energy — Converting to clean, renewable energy sources
(419 Comments)
-
FORUM: Petitions, Ballot Initiatives, Other Signature Drives (VIDEO)
(173 Comments)
-
FORUM: Upcoming meetings, gatherings, & demonstrations about energy issues
(477 Comments)
-
FORUM: What should be done about Japan burning radioactive debris?
(151 Comments)
-
FORUM: Methods for combating radiation and its effects
(1,068 Comments)
-
FORUM: Effects of low level radiation
(537 Comments)
-
FORUM: Possible Fukushima-related Anomalies — Deformations, Yellow Rain, Metallic Taste in Mouth, etc.
(1,731 Comments)
SUBMIT YOUR NEWS TIPS Your identity will not be made public unless you request it
SUPPORT ENENews ENENews receives no funding from anyone or anything, except 1) People who donate via the button below, and 2) Google, who pays for the two ad spots. Thanks to all who have donated or are planning on doing so, it's nice to know people appreciate your work.
|
sending...
There is a lot of talk about an earthquake taking down reactor spent fuel pool and all. How likely is it that a hydrogen explosion could bring down 4????
Report Comment
Shock wave from a large explosion 50 meters away. Sure wouldn't help.
Report Comment
many moons: The explosion that demolished the upper floors of Building4 might have been from a zirconium/cesium explosion in SFP4, which at the time contained no water, which had boiled off. The hot spent fuel rods were burning. A mixture of zirconium and cesium vapors is explosive, and this is probably what caused the explosions that blew out the walls.
http://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/chemical/8183
The zirconium came from the highly unstable Zircaloy cladding, commonly used in nuke fuel rod cladding. Zirconium is so explosive that it has been used in pyrotechnics. Cesium is a product of nuclear chain reactions, and is present in spent nuclear fuel rods. Zirconium vapors explode in combination with cesium vapors, which would occur as fuel rods heat up durning a meltdown.
If SFP4 springs a leak, or if Building4 collapses in some future earthquake, a meltdown of the fuel rods may occur once again. And, yes, a zirconium/cesium explosion is once again possible.
Report Comment
Thanks for the great info Philip. I think what many moons was asking is, if the hydrogen level in 2 continues to build and 2 has a hydrogen explosion or an explosion that you discribe, would the force of an explosion in 2 cause 4 to topple over.
Report Comment
And when they say hydrogen, dont they really mean the radioactive gas tritium?
Is there a difference?
Are they covering their you know what by making it sound safer and non radioactive somehow?
Report Comment
75% US Nuclear Plants Leaking Toxic Tritium Radiation Into Drinking Water Supply; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/75-us-nuclear-plants-leaking-toxic.html
Report Comment
Good question. The answer is that both radioactive tritium and the more common (but very explosive) hydrogen gas are present in the plants. When we hear of the massive hydrogen explosions that rocked Fukushima, the culprit in the explosion itself is the buildup of ordinary hydrogen gas in the presence of air containing oxygen. The majority of the hydrogen would have come from the zirconium-water/steam reaction as the fuel rods melted and burned. In the explosions there certainly would have been harmful tritium released along with the cesiums, strontiums, iodines, and assorted transuranics like plutonium. Of course EVERY nuclear plant releases and leaks liquid and gaseous tritium on an ongoing basis as part of "normal" operation.
Report Comment
Back to Many Moons original question, do you think that an explosion, you have described, if it were to occur in reactor number 2, could the shockwave of this event cause number 4 to shatter or collapse?
Report Comment
They are still a long way from a hydrogen explosion.. however when they 'vent' it releases lots of radiation, many spikes were recorded
Report Comment
so where is #2's core? could a $50 dollar t.l.d. thermometer find it? could being the first to lose a reactor underground (or 14) too emotional to talk about?
Report Comment
There are many things loose underground at Fukushima.
Lets face it – the Japanese do not have a handle on the situation.
Report Comment
The crank is turning and we are just waiting for another, … "POP Goes the Wiesel!"
Report Comment
The problem is NOT Hydrogen explosions, but small and inefficient prompt criticality related NUCLEAR explosions in the substrate bedrock under the plants, which have likely occurred repeatedly since March, 2011. Small, inefficient (leaving the corium to re-settle) nuclear explosions from large totally improperly contained high mass blobs of corium might produce quakes in the range of 2.5 through 5.0 (lower or higher, as well) and there probably have been quite a number of these within distances that might be plausible for escaped corium under and adjacent to FukuDai. I know and have had classes from scientists at the USGS in Palo Alto, CA and there are many people there with great integrity. However, that does not mean that depths of small earthquake epicenters are being accurately reported to the public. All data dissemination to the public must be scrutinized for accuracy against both common sense and against other data and sources. The problem is not Hydrogen explosions, but the radiation, and fallout spewing from fissures in the ground coming up through the original corium melt-through holes, as well as from cracks in the ground in and around FukuDai. For all we know and are not being told, there may be marine locations where intensely radioactive groundwater is mixing with seawater from very likely ongoing fission events or small nuclear explosions from all three coriums. Some recent measurements in coastal currents would appear to support such a statement.
Report Comment
Radioactive Smoke/Steam Coming Out Of Ground At Fukushima 2.28.2012; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/02/tokyo-alert-severe-radioactive-smoke.html
Fukushima Lies Movie Part I and II; via A Green Road Blog; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/fukushima-lies-movie-part-i-and-ii.html
\
Report Comment
Where you have heavy water that has been irradiated, you will find some tritium. Under special conditions tritium will undergo a fusion reaction. There is your hydrogen explosion. I am no physicist, just a dump truck driver, but I think it goes something like 3H plus 1N = He + energy. But, there isn't any heavy water anymore. Remember, heavy water is a substance they use to shield radiation.
Report Comment