‘Massive cracks’ found at Fukushima plant; 2,100 Bq/liter of strontium-90 detected from snow blanketing area — Asahi: Cracks up to 40 feet in concrete near tanks of radioactive waste

Published: February 12th, 2014 at 12:15 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
67 comments


The Asahi Shimbun, Feb. 12, 2014: Cracks found in floor near Fukushima radioactive water tanks — [Tepco] said some of the contaminated water from the melting snow blanketing the area may have seeped into the ground through the cracks. Workers on patrol discovered the cracks, stretching 12 meters and 8 meters, respectively, near a group of storage tanks [...] TEPCO detected up to 58 becquerels of radioactive cesium and up to 2,100 becquerels of radioactive strontium per liter of melted snow in the area. Freezing temperatures may have cracked the concrete, the TEPCO officials added.

Voice of Russia, Feb. 12, 2014: Huge cracks found in floor near Fukushima radioactive water tanks [...] Officials with Tokyo Electric Power Co. said some of the contaminated water from the melting snow blanketing the area may have seeped into the ground through the cracks. [...]

Worldcrunch, Feb. 12, 2014: New Cracks At Fukushima — Two massive cracks, possibly caused by freezing temperatures, have been found in a concrete floor next to tanks where radioactive water is stored at Japan’s nuclear power plant Fukushima [...]

From Saturday: NBC News: Two Quakes Strike Fukushima — Kyodo: Quakes jolt Fukushima

Published: February 12th, 2014 at 12:15 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
67 comments

Related Posts

  1. Asahi: ALL radioactive water storage tanks at Fukushima Daiichi leaking? “We are giving priority to the No. 2 tank, whose conditions are worse” April 8, 2013
  2. ‘Water Storage Nightmare’: Bolts in Fukushima tanks will corrode in just a few years, plant workers reveal — “Tepco says it doesn’t know how long tanks will hold” -Reuters July 31, 2013
  3. New York Times: “Potential for huge spill” of highly radioactive liquid from many Fukushima tanks all at once, says nuclear design expert — Top Officials: Leaks from more tanks are “the biggest concern… We are extremely concerned” August 21, 2013
  4. Gundersen: Fukushima tanks releasing x-rays in very high quantities offsite — Exposure to people outside plant is very, very high from ‘Bremsstrahlung’ phenomenon — Hundreds of tanks could easily start leaking after quake (VIDEO) July 22, 2013
  5. Japan TV: Gov’t officials discover nuclear material flowing into ground at Fukushima; Releases thought to be ongoing for months — Expert: “No end” to problems with radioactive waste at plant; Public does not trust what they are being told (VIDEO) June 6, 2014

67 comments to ‘Massive cracks’ found at Fukushima plant; 2,100 Bq/liter of strontium-90 detected from snow blanketing area — Asahi: Cracks up to 40 feet in concrete near tanks of radioactive waste

  • Ontological Ontological

    I was worried about the heavy snow I watched on the cam the other day. Now I know why. Water permeates into cracks freezes and rocks crack, then break apart allowing more water in.


    Report comment

  • ftlt

    Freezing temps and water are a strong force on a crack


    Report comment

  • Dick Shenary

    Does anyone have an information about an ABC News crew filming inside Unit 4 Fuku? "Our intrepid reporters go inside Unit 4 Fukushima." The video shows a pristine interior. Now we hear that lead blankets have to be used to protect workers. Was this portion of the 20/20 segment faked? Or were these intrepid reports sacraficed?


    Report comment

  • weeman

    The most likely reason for the newly poured concrete cracking is not enough ballast stone in gravel bed? Or the soil is so liquified that it is not stable, but they should have known this and built accordingly.


    Report comment

  • Nick

    "Officials with Tokyo Electric Power Co. said some of the contaminated water from the melting snow blanketing the area may have seeped into the ground through the cracks."
    http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201402120042

    The way I read this it's the snow that is radioactive.

    Guess melting snow all over Japan is flowing into ground cracks everywhere.

    The core re ums? Um, never mind, just focus on the water tank charade.

    Like these massive cracks really matter in the greater scheme of things!


    Report comment

  • We Not They Finally

    Was it the cracking concrete that was supposed to last 100,000 years instead of just two? [sarc]


    Report comment

  • Michele

    This is not the story, of course, cracks and storage tanks are not the real focus. Especially when it has already been stated that the radioactive water in the tanks will be dumped into the Pacific with the world's apparent approval.


    Report comment

  • PhilipUpNorth PhilipUpNorth

    TEPCO is clearly loosing the battle.
    Japan better increase its investment in the cleanup by, let's say, an order of 10. And PDQ!


    Report comment

  • tsfw tsfw

    !2 and 8 respectively: is that width or length? Give me a break they can't even give real data when talking about a crack they can see with their own eyes.


    Report comment

  • Shaker1

    I remember reading that the concrete bases (Or are they the actual floor of these tanks which used embeds to which to bolt a bottom flange, with simple gasketing to accomodate an eneven surface?) didn't include much rebar, more on the order of wire mesh. And I wonder, too, whether what is normal procedure here for concrete in public structures was followed, batch samples taken and tested. That testing requires time, as the concrete not only has to set up, but achieve its maximum strength. And, if they did such a thing, would they actually break it up and start over, as I've seen in buildings which they've had to backtrack four floors when the sample fails? I'm no expert on concrete, but its setup process is an ongoing thing. It's not simply drying, but a chemical reaction. The presence of water and the chance of that freezing I think is a given in this situation.

    It can't be stressed that these tanks are temporary structures. They couldn't be serious thinking that flanged construction of this size with ground conditions and earthquake potential were anything but temporary. And that's excluding the fact they were likely put together by idiots. I find this part of the process sadly interesting, so I'll look into what I can find about these things. I've mentioned before that with the realization of water sequestration on this scale, that a basic manufacturing process as welded tanks should have been put together fairly quickly. I'd bet they could do that in war…


    Report comment

    • Shaker1

      I mentioned that the tank construction to me was sadly interesting, and doing just a cursory search of Tepco's more recent handouts made me even more sad. While the subject of this post is the concrete itself, one should be aware that the tank construction and integrity expressly rely upon the condition of the concrete. Incidentally, they have a steel bottom. I was also mistaken that it was 'sadly interesting'. Just these two PDFs made me sad. These were enough.

      This one and its pictures on pages 5&6 http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_130822_02-e.pdf we've seen before in reporting leaks, but another look doesn't hurt to a) realize all the work that goes into the flange system that may have been simplified and given to welding, and b) a view expressly of the flange/concrete interface. My guess is they chose the flange system simply because of the supply parameters at the site and ease of handling smaller sections.

      This next one http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/roadmap/images/d131025_01-e.pdf on page 2 shows cross-sections of construction features, both the perimeter flange and what appears to be internal flanges for the bottom. All I could think was 'oh, god'. In these conditions did they seriously expect this have extended integrity? The concrete may be cracking, but one has to realize that the water is coming from the containment above it. Without support, especially the internal, these are bound to fail.


      Report comment

    • We Not They Finally

      shaker1, looking through your verbage, I think I found the key word: IDIOTS!


      Report comment

      • Shaker1

        There has always been a distinct portion of the population for whom it seemed the best they could do was talk a good game. In some aspects, that's applicable to me, too, and I've assumed that most times some semblence of balance will enter a situation with action. Like Rufus below with concrete experience, I'm an older guy and I learned directly from older guys, but seems more and more the talk overwhelms the action and we're left unaware. One has to have trust, even if a damned genius, in some aspects in their life and it doesn't surprise me there is the vehemence that I see here at times that might not only be for Fukushima, but other areas of life in which their trust is violated. One has the right, and should be pissed off. I've mentioned before, though, that idiots can be taught, where in this instance the talkers can talk themselves out of just about anything, so they are lost. Looking at the cross-sections to which I linked, I immediately saw how they could have improved even this bolt-together scheme (which insults me) with no additional effort. Unfortunatly, with what I'd said above, I'm not surprised the mass of engineers and fabricators who worked on this didn't see it, too.

        The link below in a comment below by weegokiburi, if you haven't already read it, is well worth the effort.


        Report comment

  • Rufus

    The "massive cracks" in the concrete are from:
    1. Lack of sub-base compaction during construction. They probably didn't even bother excavating the loose soil under the tanks and just poured the concrete with out regard for the eventual weight of the filled tanks.
    2. Less than specified weight concrete. Even 5000 psi concrete has it's limitations (assuming they used 5000 psi)… more likely, they used the standard 3000 psi.
    3. Poor planning… so many tanks so close to each other multiply the forces on the ground. From the photo, the tanks are within 10 feet or so from each other, which does not isolate the downward forces, but multiplies them.
    4. The highly radioactive water in the tanks is affecting the concrete in ways they didn't expect. The tank bottoms were not radiation-proof, so the radiation is getting to the concrete.

    If cracks have appeared, they are going to get worse.
    If the cracks are close to the tanks, the total weight of the tanks and water has caused an earthquake-like liquefaction of the sub-base.

    This is very bad and only going to worsen.


    Report comment

  • Rufus

    I've been pouring concrete for 40+ years, and two years ago built two, 200,000 gallon tanks on the local Air Force Base.
    The ground under the tank farm they built was not properly prepared for the incredible downward forces of water tanks.
    Most likely, they did not even do a geological survey of the ground to see if it was able to withstand the forces they were preparing to set upon it.


    Report comment

    • Shaker1

      Thanks for your input, Rufus. They were built so hastily that you're likely correct.


      Report comment

    • bo bo

      The beauty if enenews… professional input from every angle.

      Rufus – I also read the concrete under tanks didn't have reinforcement


      Report comment

    • Johnny Blade

      Makes sense, unfortunately for the people & life forms near the site and the rest of us who will see these massive leaks & possible(even likely!)complete failure of the entire tank farm they decided to cut corners & cost on re;siting & construction when the more recent releases complete their journey and wind up in the food supplies of countries just across the sea from this gigantic clusterFUKu wreaking havoc on the sea,land and creatures including US who inhabit it! If they even have any idea of just how bad this shitium's gonna get as time progresses and the waves of releases keep on coming in & accumulate in our food,water supplies and it WILL until they figure out the impossible & isolate,entomb,teleport,whatever(?) theycan do to stop it! Even if they could-they probably won't.After all,in the words of US lawmakers,"money's tight" when it comes to just testing for the presence of the crap,much less actually trying to "fix" it at the source! You'd think that logic would prevail since they(we)can see what their "cost/corner-cutting" during NPP design,siting & construction resulted in,wth were they thinking when they tried being "cheap" with regard to the wastewater tanks & decommissioning??!!~The biggest piece of the massive crack is melting in TEPCO's crack pipe and they're running around geeking like a bunch of headless chickens!! I have to take my wife to the hospital in a minute(+2 more times before the weekend!)as a result!! :(


      Report comment

    • Cooter cooterboy

      Rufus,

      Where is the COE and the CQC guy? You said you pour concrete while I PLACE concrete. Your a concrete finisher and not an engineer. The 5,000 psi is what type of concrete as the standard is 2,750 psi as per COE standards? 5 sack will get you to 2,975 psi with or without air entrainment.

      I am a certified Army Corp. or Engineers, Quality Control Contractor and I watch you finish concrete. I make sure that all protocols of the COE are quantified and qualified. You failed to mention this procedure in your dissertation of "pouring" concrete.

      Any slab of concrete whether it be a runway pour or slab pour or rat-slab has been engineered by the COE along with the soil compaction rates certified by an independent testing lab along with test cylinders for ever concrete truck that shows up.

      Misinformation is worst than disinformation. You may be a great concrete finisher but are not an engineer to make these statements. The only thing you got right is that these cracks will expand and degrade the integrity of the concrete slab.

      I have over 40 years as a union carpenter with CQC qualifications, having worked for every branch of the military including the DOD. My certification is still current.

      Peace,


      Report comment

  • Rufus

    We did test bores every 500 sq ft, down to a depth of 30 feet, surrounding the tanks out to 50 ft beyond in all directions.
    No reinforcement?
    I'm surprised the concrete didn't crack as they were loading the tanks.
    As with everything related to Fukushima, this is another disaster in the making.


    Report comment

  • weegokiburi weegokiburi

    I built it and wanna confess before die.
    pThis tells all you need to know about build and maintenance.
    http://nomoreradiation.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-2.htmlq


    Report comment

      • fireguyjeff fireguyjeff

        Wish I had found this link so many years ago!!
        Awesome reality check (one I had more than suspected all along!)


        Report comment

      • SykeWar(DELETED) SykeWar

        From the link:
        When my talk was through at the end, I asked if anyone has questions, a girl in the second-year of junior-high school raised her hand, said the following, crying.

        "All of the adults gathered in this hall tonight are big liars, they pretend they are good. I came here to see their faces. I thought that with what kind of faces they will come. Adults, especially the adults here talk about pesticides issues, golf field issue, nuclear issue, whatever they say, they say that this is for our children, but they pretend that they are doing something. I live in Kyowa-cho that is next to the Tomari Nuclear Power Plant, I am exposed 24 hours a day. It is likely that babies are born with leukemia in Sellafield in Britain, the surrounding area of a nuclear power plant. I know this because I read a book. I am also a girl. I think when I’m old enough to marry, I will. Can I Give Birth to a Child?” She was crying and asking the 300 adults. But, no one was able to give her an answer.


        Report comment

      • mairs mairs

        From the blog:

        "There was a case where a large screw attached to a machine got loose in the operation of the nuclear power plant. Because the amount of radioactivity was horrendous when the nuclear power plant was running, we provided 30 workers to tighten the one screw. Lined up and ran up to the screw at about seven meters away. Go there, like you’re counting one, two, three, the alarm meter rang already. There was even a person who ran in and thought “where is the wrench to tighten the screw?” then it was over already. Just for tightening the screw it cost about four million yen, for a 160-person operation."


        Report comment

    • newsblackoutUSA newsblackoutUSA

      weegokiburi…thanks for posting this again…I read through until the end this time…the reality of how much poorly these plants are built is a sobering thought….All of these killing machines world-wide need to be shut down, and the focus needs to be on clean-up….that is our only hope to save earth and all lifeforms from nuclear death.


      Report comment

    • VanneV VanneV

      Norio Hirai: died in January 1997
      “…Besides, when a nuclear power plant operates, nuclear waste inevitably comes out every day. The low-level radioactive waste, the name is “low-level”, but some of them are such things, if you are next to this drum for just 5 hours, you can be exposed by a lethal dose of radiation. There are about more than 800,000 drums accumulated in the nuclear power plants across the country.
      “From the time Japan started nuclear power plants in 1969, all the nuclear waste has been stuffed in drums and dumped into the sea nearby. It was a normal thing at that time. When I was at the Tokai Nuclear Power Plant in Ibaraki Prefecture, the company put the drums in trucks and abandoned them off the coast of Chiba.

      “However, what made me think that nuclear power plants are a little strange was this matter. The first thing I thought was that the drums dumped into the sea rot after just one year, but what would happen to the radioactive waste in them, what would happen to the fish?…
      “Radioactivity is coming out from the tall exhaust towers in the nuclear power plants. It is not coming out, it is putting out; because it is putting out radioactivity 24 hours a day, people who live in the surrounding area are being exposed bathing in the radioactivity all day long. …
      “Besides, even though they seem to make electricity now, the nuclear waste that has to be managed for tens of thousands of years needs huge amounts of electricity and oil. There is no doubt…


      Report comment

  • OldFool

    Why are you people so surprised? TEPCO is only a profit seeking corporation. Of course they would use the lowest cost materials and the lowest cost engineering and the lowest cost designs and the lowest cost labor with the lowest level skill sets. No waterproofing or prep for the concrete, insufficient reinforcement for the concrete, flimsy or no metal rebar, flimsy plastic parts, flimsy piping, etc. etc. etc. etc. To do the job right would have cost several hundreds of billions of dollars that TEPCO will NEVER spend. This is yet another example why not pushing TEPCO aside on March 11, 2011, will go down in infamy as the greatest mistake the human race has ever made in all of recorded history. 10,000 future generations (perhaps living underground like the Mole People) will curse us with every feeble wheeze.


    Report comment

  • GQR2

    feebly wheezes

    sneaky bastards created Stepford like communities,infiltrated universitie, and launched the Nuclear Industry upon human kind sneaking it all in deepest secrecy telling the public it was safe and only for the noblest of purposes. clears throat. We were so stupid,distracted,green washed to trust them.
    Stupid to let Nuclear Industry to develop and be a part of the Military and now we live in the heart of darkness and the age of lies.


    Report comment

  • We Not They Finally

    They thought it was a garbage dump in New Jersey, right? There is not even moral concern that they are KILLING people, animals, plants, the world's oxygen supply, etc.

    If U.N. had any streak of decency (and I think that once a time, it did), they would censure Japan internationally and throw the whole country into receivership.

    But then what do we get? A bunch of corrupt bankers siphoning off money for themselves, instead of helping with evacuations and medicine and mitigation?


    Report comment

  • Cooter cooterboy

    Here's my take on the concrete slabs.

    TEPCO, in a hurry, placing concrete on pre-liquidfied ground, not compacted, because you can't compact mud, the use of welded wire mesh instead of rebar with unqualified concrete finishers to place the concrete is in it's self a disaster that will happen.

    I think TEPCO poured what we call "rat slabs" which are temporary slabs used to form up concrete "tilt" panels. They may be the right thickness but without in-place, mechanical bonds on unstable ground they would last maybe a year, if that. That in and of it's self is not a problem as long as the entire tank settles at the same rate and subduction. It just moves down evenly. When one side settles and the other does not then there are HUGE problems that will lead to a catastrophic failure, creating a domino effect.

    These tanks are bolted together, not welded, which means all of the stress is located at the joints of interception which is sealed with a gasket. Now the joints will leak and there will not be enough duct tape on earth to stop it. I can't imagine wading in radioactive water up to my ankles.

    This is why TEPCO wants to dump the water into the Pacific Ocean because these tanks are doomed to failure. Contaminate the site and not be able to work or dump it? They have no choice.

    If these tanks leak into the soil then what? If they burst then what? What if a big quake hits then what? More questions than answers abound all the while dancing around the issue…


    Report comment

    • VanneV VanneV

      Japan has been dumping nuclear waste in the ocean since the 1930s and 1940s from nuclear bomb testing, and since 1969 from commercial and experimental nuclear reactors.

      http://nomoreradiation.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-2.htmlq

      There is no place for a nuclear program on an island, or in an earthquake and tsunami prone area. There is no place on the earth for uranium mining or thorium mining or nuclear reactors no matter what the purpose might be.

      Iran is decimating itself. Israel is decimating itself. Arab ccuntries in the Middle East and Africa are next, etc., etc. The U is decimating itself. What good are nuclear weapons if you kill off all the inhabitants in your own country and destroy all the land and make it uninhabitable from nuclear man made radioactive contamination?

      The people of the world don't want nuclear energy or weapons. It is the bankers cabal which can only control the world by killing off all the inhabitants. Foolishly, their children won't live or inherit anything but a dead planet.


      Report comment

  • Lady M

    Maybe it's my imagination, but it seems to me that after almost three years of Tepco and Japan's minimizing of any ongoing problems at the Daichi plant, all of a sudden in the past few weeks we are seeing one serious revelation after another coming from, among others, Tepco and Japan themselves. We are hearing about serious new cracks, leaks, contaminants, etc — many of them things that apparently have been going on for a very long time and are just now being either "found" or made public. Is this in fact the case? And if so – I am wondering… WHY?? Is Tepco looking to abandon the plant? And wondering about that makes me wonder this too (perhaps some of you know the answer): What is actually keeping Tepco at Daichi? The plant can't be recovered for future use. So, why are they staying? Are they forced to stay by some contract or by the Japanese government? Are they bound by their conscience to try to keep northern Japan from needing to be evacuated (I doubt that one). Or are they just trying to keep things under control (read: under wraps) while they do their other business? And if the last suggestion is the case — then why all the revelations in the past few weeks? What if Tepco just decides to bail — could they do that? Would that be a good thing or a bad one? That is, would it enable someone else to take over the effort? And would anyone step up? Yikes.


    Report comment

    • Shaker1

      Again, Lady M, I respectfully think that distinction should be made. Tepco at this point is just an emblem of the impotence of the society in which they exist. As a corporation competently responsible for what we've seen they effectively ceased to function on or about March 16th, 2011. I see the current measure of what might be closer-to-the-truth data as a collective power structure of Japan call for help. Those of us who truly care about the situation but might not care about such power structures will be suckered into doing the dirty work by them and their related power structures around the world.


      Report comment

  • Rufus

    Cooterboy…
    I am not a finisher, I am Construction Super with equal time in as you say you have.
    The tanks I erected for the Air Force sat on a slab of 5000 psi #57 rock mix 12 inches thick, reinforced with a double mat of #8 bar.
    That's where I got my info from… actual experience.
    From what I see, there wasn't any planning nor control of the concrete pours.
    Pour / place … different parts of this country use different terms.
    It's wrong to insult people here.
    I have worked as a Super on various Military bases for 15 years, and have supervised the construction of roads, bridges, hangars, runways, shooting ranges, clinics, Command centers and even a golf course. I have a Red-Line Clearance.
    I don't believe TEPCO used an engineer or testing lab if their slabs are fracturing. From what I read, it was done in a hurry. If I'm wrong, well then, I'm wrong. But insults aren't necessary, especially when you don't know me.
    On Base, we laugh at the work done by the Army Corps. It's ALWAYS substandard and 10x the cost. we get called into fix their work.
    I have more practical knowledge than any engineer.

    We do agree on the future prospects of the concrete in question.

    I also know how to treat others with respect.


    Report comment

  • Cooter cooterboy

    Rufus,

    I meant no disrespect as I don't know you. If your a super then so state this, as your qualifications mean a lot to those who read the blogs presented in this forum. It is not bragging to present your qualifications but a basis for presenting you thoughts as your expertise can be used by others to formulate a conclusion. I misinterpreted your language and apologize for this.

    I like you can attest to the incompetence of the COE and cost overruns. I have had many a heated argument with their field engineers as I was representing the contractor.

    I also don't believe that TEPCO had any quality controls. I question the concrete composition, however the bottom line are the cracks. This entire site was built on an alluvial fan and built up on top of hard pan clay. Any soil on top of this would only get to 95-97% compaction at the best not knowing the fill material used. This soil configuration is a disaster to place such a large building on.

    Your assessment of placing these tanks so close together is spot on in particular when the soil is already compromised.

    Something I have a hard time wrapping my head around is the 7.3 meters of concrete, supporting the reactor vessel and now the corium is in contact with. TEPCO states they don't know where this corium is. I've tried to find information about the heating of concrete and the closest I came was a Thermite test. Any thoughts on this and how it could burn through 24 ft. of concrete?

    Peace,


    Report comment

    • omniversling

      Apols for the re-re-re-repost for those who've already read it, but this is for Cooterboy…

      At 2400-2800c corium burns through concrete at the rate of 5cm per hour, and the base of the concrete dry well beneath the pressure vessel is about 8m as far as I can discover (anyone with better knowledge?). The time it would have taken the corium to burn through that thickness is about 160 hours. There are 24 hours in a day so 160 hours is 6.6666 days. There's one for the numerologists amongst us! Debbil's work for sure..

      So let's say that after the fuel to start melting following the main cooling system failure during the earthquake (not tsunami, earthquake that fractured the cooling pipes), within about a week the corium would have been into the ground. Providing of course the thermal power of the corium was not exhausted by the concrete as is passed through.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corium_%28nuclear_reactor%29
      
http://enenews.com/new-asahi-doc-nisa-team-knew-of-triple-meltdowns-by-march-18-nisa-kept-secret-until-tepco-admitted-it-two-months-later-melted-fuel-not-fully-submerged-in-water

      Also, Arnie Gundersen puts the temperature of corium closer to 3500C, so could go through even faster, and who knows how fast or far it may have gone through the rubble that FukuSteamer was built on…plus, how many fractures or cracks in the foundations now from hundreds of tremors since…does the rise of the tide now contact the coriums and (cont)


      Report comment

      • omniversling

        (cont) contact the coriums and create all the steam that is rising from the ground and between the reactors still?

        I assume that a fully blobbed blobbium, that had taken the path of least resistance thru the 'control rod' holes in the bottom of the PCV, taking out the control rods (hence the 'cold shut-down 'conditions') and exiting the control rod drive cavity, quite probably enlarging the holes as it flowed. See:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reaktor.svg

        If the blobium stayed blobby and didn't form random elephant foot stylee sculptures as it took the first steps on it's journey to the centre of the earth (remember glasshopper, it's the journey not the destination – unless you're late for the loo!), it COULD by now have:
        5cm per hour x24 = 1.2 meters per day
x 910 days = 1092 meters = 1.092 kilometers (ish)
        Buts that calculation was for concrete, not conglomerate sand/mudstone that has been washed through by, oh, about 1000 tonnes (1000 cubic meters) of ground water and cooling water per day for 910 days… (update: now 1017 days on 15/03/2014).
        So who really knows…but I dont reckon it'd be 4km…maybe the doctor knows better…Doc?


        Report comment

  • Cooter cooterboy

    newsblackout…

    Thanks these are great pictures. I'm impressed by the hole in the vertical concrete wall. This wall appears to be 3 ft. thick and the re-bar at the top of the opening is bent 180 degrees.

    Concrete ratio's are 1 part cement, 2parts sand, 3 parts aggregate, a 1:5 ratio overall,less water.

    If heated to 3,000 degrees C the rock and sand will melt and expand breaking the heterogeneous matrix (clinker) of the cement which would fracture, under the weight of the corium and be incorporated into corium along with the molten rock. This would add to the total weight of the nuclear mass pressing into the concrete.

    So the short answer, will concrete melt, is that concrete will decompose rather then melt when heated. Which brings me full circle and now the question is;

    How much clinker is needed to stop, solidify or incorporate into the corium to slow it's progress? Or is this even relative in the presence of tons of fissionable material at 9,000 F? Finally is radiation a factor in the compressive strength of concrete. The answer is partially contained in the link below, with all things being relative.

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1010971122496#page-1

    Boy does my brain hurt. Thanks again newsblackout for the links.

    Peace,


    Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.