Published: August 31st, 2012 at 5:29 am ET
|
Interview with Nuclear Engineer Chris Harris
Nutrimedical Report
Aug 30, 2012
Transcript
Chris Harris, former licensed Senior Reactor Operator and engineer: … two new fuel assemblies [were removed] from the Fukushima Unit 4 spent fuel pool… actually it’s not a spent fuel pool, they’re in their own storage area. So it wasn’t indicative of what’s going on in the spent fuel pool, that’s where you store new fuel.
h/t MsMilkytheclown1
Listen to broadcast here
Published: August 31st, 2012 at 5:29 am ET
|
sending...
Ha ha ha Fukushima is the Daily Soap from Japan
Report Comment
And?
Report Comment
Read: "it wasn’t indicative of what’s going on in the spent fuel pool"
Yet all reports up to this point say it was indicative. See why this is important news. Or do you just like to try and post snarky comments all day every day?
Report Comment
Sleight of rod. "Keep your eye on the fuel assembly, round and round it goes, where it stops…."
Report Comment
I worked in about 10-12 different BWR's from Fukushima to Vera Cruz and numerous sites in the United States. I never saw a separate storage area for new fuel,so I have no idea what this guy is talking about. It is hard to remember but I think some PWR's have these separate storage pools. But as far as fuel pools these different kinds of reactors not at all similar.
Report Comment
I agree chrisk9, that is odd. I remember reading that TEPCO did say that they chose these particular rods because they were unused and visually undamaged. I thought they also said that they selected them from a corner of the SFP 4 that looked in the best condition and with the least amount of debris because this is where they would like to begin the process of removing the rods, which is the whole point of the inspection. It will be easier to get the intact rods out first, while devising a plan to get the ones that look like pick-up-sticks with fallen debris on top of them last. I also think that from their point of view – can they pick up the fuel rod without it breaking into tiny pieces – any rod that stays intact will be considered undamaged and removable.
Report Comment
I agree to ChrisK9, too.
And Vic's remarks are interesting, too. Could be indeed true when watching the SFP map you can find here: http://ex-skf.blogspot.de/2012/04/fukushima-i-nuke-plant-reactor-4-spent.html
Maybe the guy (Chris Harris) is probably referring to the common spent fuel building with its 6000+ assemblies storage space?
Maybe he said that from the viewpoint that the SFP in the reactor buildings were not intended as a long-term (decades) spent fuel storage, only as a cool-down temporary storage (around 5 years) before shipping the used fuel to a reprocessing plant?
Else I don't understand what he meant.
Report Comment
The Japanese Leadership must be quaking in their shoes because they all stand to lose their Nuclear Payback* because TEPCO is doing such a lame job!
* http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Nuclear+payback
Those that support nuclear power because nuclear power somehow supports them; no matter what the health implications or other "costs" are for others.
Report Comment
Good point, CaptD. So, wanna bet that representatives from other energy industries are taking these guys out to dinner and sweet talking them? I hope it's the solar, wave, and wind businesses that get on their dance cards first.
Report Comment