Ahh ok, that would make more sense, I guess.
Though I do wonder how much better that would really work. Maneuvering the helicopters to position the hoses exactly where they shold go could be hard. I am not sure they can stay in place for to long either, due to the radiation. It definitely makes more sense now though.
Still, do wonder why they have not brought in the fire ships from that petrol factory fire yet.
Nuclear Reactors Hit By Earthquake In Japan
Anyone understand this? What would the US have done again? Dismantle? Don't they have to solve the same problems before they can dismantle?icarus wrote:According to the unnamed senior official, US support was based on dismantling the troubled reactors run by Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) some 250km north-east of Tokyo, the mass-circulation daily said.
BTW, where are the robots? Shouldn't there be robotic options to pull a long hose to a good spot? Clear a path to get hose to the correct spots? Robotic mining equipment?
How about this:
http://www.energydigital.com/sectors/en ... quipment-0
How about quickly rigging up a crane with robotic controls, driving it close and lifting the hose. A movie special effects guru could rig this up in a day.
It just seems like they aren't being creative enough. Maybe I sound stupid, but I just don't see why they can't get mobile generators, pumps, robotic equipment, and any other freaking thing they need to get the water into the pool and do it NOW! It has been a week!
Plenty of elementary questions to ask. Why are these pools not made of some rubbery non-crackable material, rather than concrete? Why use water at all, surely they could be held in a metal matrix and the heat heat-sinked away?
There is always a single-point failure mode in any system failure, and that is the person who says 'we've done all we can, and I'm not going to bother to ask anyone else's opinion now because I reckon I know best'.
There is always a single-point failure mode in any system failure, and that is the person who says 'we've done all we can, and I'm not going to bother to ask anyone else's opinion now because I reckon I know best'.
Seems to me that there is a single point failure in their response as well. We'll just get power online and it will all be ok. Running a cable now. All is good. Well, what if the pumps are broken? What if the pipes are damaged? What if the cladding was so badly damaged that fuel has fallen to the bottom of the containment vessel and has a chance of going critical? What if it takes way longer to get power back on than you thought.chrismb wrote:There is always a single-point failure mode in any system failure, and that is the person who says 'we've done all we can, and I'm not going to bother to ask anyone else's opinion now because I reckon I know best'.
They should have 8 plans and contingencies all running simultaniously. Heck, they should be organizing the chernobyl stile entomement right now, just in case.
I hadn't considered robots- good idea. At least for reconnaissance, the US has a bunch of small highly mobile robots, even some prototype remotely controlled small helicopters.
I doubt fire ships could get close enough and reach the top of the containment buildings. There is a break water in the way, and based on pictures from the oil storage fire., I don't think the water jet would reach the top even from close range. One thing I haven't seen or heard of is a Fire ladder truck. With the ladder extended to ~ 80 ft (?) a hose would be in much better position to reach the top of the containment buildings. Perhaps Japan doesn't use long ladder trucks, but a C 17 or C 5 should be able to transport one within a day . Of course the truck would have to be positioned, ladder extended and supporting hoses laid out. The near radiation may be to much to allow that now, even with only ~ 5-10 minute exposures. Also, can a ladder mounted hose be operated remotely, or does a fireman have to be on the end of the ladder?
Dan Tibbets
I doubt fire ships could get close enough and reach the top of the containment buildings. There is a break water in the way, and based on pictures from the oil storage fire., I don't think the water jet would reach the top even from close range. One thing I haven't seen or heard of is a Fire ladder truck. With the ladder extended to ~ 80 ft (?) a hose would be in much better position to reach the top of the containment buildings. Perhaps Japan doesn't use long ladder trucks, but a C 17 or C 5 should be able to transport one within a day . Of course the truck would have to be positioned, ladder extended and supporting hoses laid out. The near radiation may be to much to allow that now, even with only ~ 5-10 minute exposures. Also, can a ladder mounted hose be operated remotely, or does a fireman have to be on the end of the ladder?
Dan Tibbets
To error is human... and I'm very human.
Ever see a car rigged up for a movie stunt. Effects guys use actuators/etc to remotely operate the actual controls of the vehicle and they know how to rig this stuff up quickly. Pick any heavy equipment and I bet you could rig it up for remote control quickly enough to be of use. I favor a large mobile crane.D Tibbets wrote:Also, can a ladder mounted hose be operated remotely, or does a fireman have to be on the end of the ladder?
Which is why I suggested radio controled propellers pointing out in 3 or 4 diretions to allow the lower end to be pushed over the desired location.Skipjack wrote:Ahh ok, that would make more sense, I guess.
Though I do wonder how much better that would really work. Maneuvering the helicopters to position the hoses exactly where they shold go could be hard.
Wouldn't allow major offsets, but fine-tuning, I suspect so.
Yeah, I asked that earlier. I thought they had these robots (like they have for bomb squads) at every nuclear plant now. I sure would.BTW, where are the robots?
They would be very handy right now to get a better picture of what is actually going on inside the reactors.
I mean this is japan, if they dont have robots, who does?
Well, keep in mind how much the earthquake set them back:Skipjack wrote: I mean this is japan, if they dont have robots, who does?
Earthquake Sets Japan Back To 2147
Water pools are used as an enveloping heat sink, and most importantly a very thick shield. It is an all in one good answer. Also, the more metal you put around the fuel, the more activation issues you have later.chrismb wrote:Plenty of elementary questions to ask. Why are these pools not made of some rubbery non-crackable material, rather than concrete? Why use water at all, surely they could be held in a metal matrix and the heat heat-sinked away?
There is always a single-point failure mode in any system failure, and that is the person who says 'we've done all we can, and I'm not going to bother to ask anyone else's opinion now because I reckon I know best'.
Bottom line, water is one of the ultimate Hydrogenous materials, and as a bonus it absorbs and distros heat nicely. Hard to beat.
The concrete in the pools is sealed, however, as suggested, maybe some sort of a better liner can be thought up that can take the exposure over time without breaking down. Dunno.
Is that right? The fuel rods aren't emitting much in the way of neutrons (they do that whilst they are in the reactor, not when outside of it). If it were the case, magnesium and aluminium are fairly low on the neutron activation, or you could use tin which is a real neutron sponge, with a bit of cadmium. Plenty of reasonable materials for this application... or maybe a loss of coolant is a lower risk... yeah!!...ladajo wrote: the more metal you put around the fuel, the more activation issues you have later.
Yes, but neutron sponge does not good gamma sponge. And, using water you get no airgap with very inexpensive engineering.
There will be neutrons, just not as many when at power
The primary issue with disposal of plant components is activation. The more activated stuff you create, the more stuff you need in the storage shed down the road. That said, I think the sheilding issue is the more important. Water pools hold a clear advantage, especially with the ease of access to whats in it, as compared to poly, metal, and composite systems.
There will be neutrons, just not as many when at power
The primary issue with disposal of plant components is activation. The more activated stuff you create, the more stuff you need in the storage shed down the road. That said, I think the sheilding issue is the more important. Water pools hold a clear advantage, especially with the ease of access to whats in it, as compared to poly, metal, and composite systems.