Published: May 30th, 2012 at 3:38 pm ET
|
Uploaded by Goldieluvmj
Original by Irving Miller
Published on May 29, 2012
*English subtitles available. Click ‘CC’ button in toolbar of YouTube player.
At ~7:00 in
We’ve asked an expert who designed the earthquake-resistant nuclear power plants.
Masashi Goto (ex-Toshiba engineer, designed the nuclear reactor containments)
Even though the walls exist, there is no simple way of knowing the stability of it.To what degree has the stability been compromised due to the high temperature of fire?
Essentially, all data are required when you work out a structural calculation.
Everytime when TEPCO releases data, they always say “We’ve calculated these, This is the result of what we’ve done therefore it’s safe”.
But they have never released a data which a third party could use to re-check their findings.
Subscribe to Goldieluvmj here
Published: May 30th, 2012 at 3:38 pm ET
|
sending...
It's a worldwide problem, and every country seems to be sitting back and letting an electric company try to deal with it.
Report Comment
+100
Report Comment
Does anyone think the heat damaged some of the spent fuel rods like the test which showed how rods are damage at temps over 700c? I guess no one will know until they remove the spent fuel?
Report Comment
Yes, the cladding was damaged on fuel rods… that is where mos of the hydrogen came from: the zirconium reaction with water and heat.
Report Comment
That's right I just watched an old video concerning 4 and temps reached 2200c I just have trouble recalling which reactor did what, where, when and how as so much time has lapsed. Thanks.
Report Comment
I'm hedging that R4 SFP self combusted due to a boil off…
… TEPCO are proven LIARS and when they say it was over bleed of R3, THAT'S A LIE!
I'm inclined to believe, by the recent tour and videos/pics of R4 SFP, that the top portion of the pool, itself, burned away and ergo, can NOT be filled to capacity.
Report Comment
Very interesting hypothesis.
Somehow they got the fire out?
This account would jive with my feelings that #4 spfp definitely burned at least once, and maybe several times.
Report Comment
SFP4 has been the subject of much study and speculation here for the past 15 months. After much thought on the matter, I find myself in agreement with Andrew, that zirconium cladding provided the hydrogen that blew up Building4. I agree with Max1 that TEPCO's announcement that the hydrogen that destroyed Building4 came through basement level tunnels from Building3 is a lie. TEPCO and the nuke industry don't want the public to know just how poorly zirconium cladding behaves at high heat, and that every spent fuel pool in the world has the potential to become humanity's Extinction Level Event. Cesium reacts explosively with water, and also with zirconium, and might have given the explosion the extra power needed to level Building4 so dramatically. If the explosion of Building4 originated inside SFP4 (cesium/zirconium explosion), I would expect to see more damage to the tops of the fuel rods and fuel racks, plus more evidence of burning on the concrete walls of SFP4. If, instead, SFP4 created massive amounts of hydrogen, that gas could collect in Building4, and the explosion might have left SFP4 in the condition it appears to be in today. Let me point out that I still cannot bring myself to believe that hydrogen in air is powerful enough to blow out the concrete walls of Building4 like that. Broken gas mains happen all the time, but do not seem to cause this sort of damage. Any thoughts on this?
Report Comment
As an observant (hopefully) layman, it appears to me in photos that #2 and #4 both had rectangular relief holes blasted out early on in the crisis. This may be why one cannot find their explosion videos on youtube. #4 also suffered major damage from #3's huge explosion which rained debris down on it. JoyB seems to agree that three types of explosions were involved – steam, hydrogen/oxygen, and nuclear detonation. And in the case of #2 and #4, as I surmise above, INTENTIONAL DEMOLITION with high explosives. And I will further speculate, based only on what I have seen hinted at here and elsewhere, that the political difficulty with transporting high-level nuclear waste along with the increasing scarcity of uranium has led to onsite plutonium enrichment efforts, hence the absurd placement of SFPs. And OUR glorious empire has more to do with it than they will ever admit.
Report Comment
The fact that the latest photos of SPF4 show it covered in plastic and we are not allowed to see the contents of the pool suggest to me that the thing is either empty of spent fuel, or there is so much damage to the contents of the pool they don't want it photographed. Take your pick. They ain't hiding it because it looks like new under that plastic.
Report Comment
..No need for containment…the pool in the backyard will do.
Just let the swimming pool tech take care of it…
Report Comment
They have the mini crane on the the refueling floor and are moving debris. For any kind of activity like that it would standard procedure in a nuke plant to cover the pool. The latest video before the pool was covered showed the fuel bundles and some debris on top of them. As I have stated and argued before there is no way any furl has been moved-impossible.
This latest video shows the most structural damage was over the fuel pool and it would seem likely that hydrogen gas from the pool is the source that led to the explosion. They reported twice there were fires on the 5th floor. What would catch fire in this area? Besides some small amounts of oil and fluids-nothing-all steel and concrete.
So the scenario that I believe most likely was that the water level dropped, cladding melted and caught fire and eventually gas built up and exploded. If you question the power of a gas explosion check out the photo's from the San Bruno (San Francisco)explosion a couple of years ago.
A lot of us who worked in BWR's used to wonder about their design and fuel pools especially. It seemed strange that they had no containment. But these plants were really designed over 50 years ago, and how many 1953 Chevies are running today.But that is the time they were designed. The design of GE's BWR's should be scrutinized right now by the NRC and our government.
Report Comment
confirmable data; that was once a reactor building? and; we dont know where the melted fuel is. additional data; fuku2 sustained damage.
Report Comment