Published: November 16th, 2012 at 5:45 am ET
|
Interview with Nuclear Engineer Chris Harris
Nutrimedical Report
Nov. 15, 2012
Chris Harris, former licensed Senior Reactor Operator and engineer: One of the Tepco releases that really intrigued me was that there is something called ‘curing material’.
Now that means, to me it means they know about a tear or a rip in the spent fuel pool liner.
And they don’t come out and say — a lot of this stuff you have to read between the lines — there’s something called ‘curing material’ [...] what it means to me is they tried to repair with some sort of epoxy and something that needs to cure or cure time on it before they can proceed. Which means that water’s actually being held in not by the stainless steel liner, but by the concrete structure around, that’s not really a great situation to be in.
They didn’t come flat out and say it but I’m going to stick my neck out and say if they’re trying to seal up cracks and everything else, that’s how I would do it too. And so that’s happening now, we’ll see where that comes and I’ll stay on top of it.
Follow-up to: Tepco to try and remove steel debris on top of fuel racks in No. 3 pool -- Concern about liner? (PHOTOS)
Published: November 16th, 2012 at 5:45 am ET
|
sending...
Or could it be that they are pre-emptively putting a reinforced liner over the existing liner so that when they try and lift the beam out the risk of the liner being damaged by the beam as it comes out is reduced?
Report Comment
It would be interesting to know what they call it in Japanese… The TEPCO handout clearly shows a diagram of their "curing material", which is described as "unit comprised of single-lumen pipes in rectangle shapes" with a mysterious note of "3 assembled in 1" attached. The other images simply stress that this will be something *hanging* from beams on the edge of the pool.
If taken at face value, TEPCO is describing installation of underwater light fixtures (which makes sense as the whole thing with the cooling circulation interruption and the handout was about testing visibility!) an not anything to do with "curing" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curing_%28chemistry%29
Of course the light fixtures would provide some protection were the steel beam be smashed against them. But what I am left wondering is how is the installation of these three light fixtures going to be LESS dangerous operation than yanking out a single steel beam? And as others are pointing out, what about the hundreds of other steel beams and crane that fell in the pool during the explosion?
Report Comment
When the roof girders and crane fall into the pool, damage is certainly a possibility.
Report Comment
I believe U3 SFP crane is already in the pool, since 311…
The Message of Fukushima Unit Three
http://everist.org/archives/Fukushima/20120430_Message_of_Fuku3.htm
Fukushima Daiichi Reactor 3 refueling machine spent fuel pool1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrkTfst7atE
Fukushima Daiichi Reactor 3 refueling machine spent fuel pool2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fscr0olCp70&feature=relmfu
Fukushima Daiichi Reactor 3 Fuel rack the spent fuel pool
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-rvLSlPsOo&feature=relmfu
U3 steaming frm T-Hawk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnJy7P5n8aU&feature=endscreen
Peace on (rad-free) Earth ……(please..!)
Report Comment
I also believe that SFP 3 was involved in the original explosion of 3.
I think SFP 3 is the LOCATION of the rubble of SFP 3..
Crane.. cherry on top.
Report Comment
I seem to recall from March and April 2011 that there was a lot of evidence that sfp3 was involved in the original explosion.
Report Comment
Arizonan, had to have been for chunks of mox pellets to have landed in the parking lot. I agree.
Report Comment
What really happened at Fukushima? via A Green Road http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-really-happened-at-fukushima.html
How Dangerous Is 400-600 Pounds Of Plutonium Nano Particle Dust Liberated By Fukushima? Via A Green Road http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/how-dangerous-is-400-600-pounds-of.html
Report Comment
Whichever, TEPCO will do things by the guidelines in the existing book and not deviate from that, so that should be the clue. In removing spent fuel pool rods from a damaged tank, do you reinforce the tank first for extra safety, or do you only make repairs if damage already exists? Or, given the butterfingers incident that already happened, reinforce the pool because it was just THAT close?
Report Comment
"They know about a tear?" "Reading in between the lines?" "I'll stay on top of it?"
Report Comment
I like how, in the illustration above, the spent fuel racks are green.
Report Comment
Something lost in translation again, curing probably means solution.
Fukushima Diary lays it out as the pipe contraptions hanging in the pool suspended by cables connected to those deadweight beams are protection for the sidewalls of the pool while an attempt is made to remove the fallen beam pushed in by the grabber. Looks like the fallen beam fell right on top of the fuel racks. Goes on to say, a filter system within a pump has been clearing the water for better visibility…whadda nightmare.
What happens if the protection gets dragged into the pool or ends up getting in the way?
Doesn't seem to be much fuel left in the pool to worry about heating up from decay heat.
This link has drawings and video of the refueling crane location in SFP 3 or least where they think the pieces are laying.
http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/10/tepco-investigated-the-inside-of-sfp3-location-of-refueling-machine-state-of-the-fuel-are-still-not-known/
Report Comment