Japan Nuclear Coverage

[egbert]

I'm NOT one of those "twin towers brought down by explosives" conspiracy theorist wingnuts.
But I am, in this hitech age, disappointed in the news coverage of the Japan nuclear crisis.
Allowance has to be made for the chaos that must exist after this nightmare, but the media coverage raises more questions than it answers.
Understandably, the grid collapsed after the earthquake, and nuke stations had to rely on emergency generators, diesels in this case, since these were old 70's and 80's plants, for power to standby reactor cooling. We're told that these diesel generators failed. Since this ocurred at five generating stations, obviously there was a gross design flaw. The nuke stations, of GE design, supposedly were designed to withstand Japan's well known susceptibility to earthquakes. Souldn't the emergency backup generators have been designed for protection from tsunamis?
Well, later reports indicate the diesels ran for an hour, and then failed. This would be understandable if they were swamped by the tsunami, but none of the newsreel footage shows the nuke plants engulfed by water. Such would be understandable, since they are obviously located on the coast because of cooling water requirements, but again, none of the footage has shown tsunamis overrunning the nuke plant sites.
One last observation - the "explosion" at one nuke unit - we're assured that it was NOT the reactor that exploded. Well, what the hell did explode then? What else in the reactor building exists that might explode?
The BBC online video of the explosion clearly shows the shock ave expanding outwards at the beginning, but ALL the videos on television news omit this, as if conveying the impession of a much slower "venting."
Is this deliberate misinformation, or limitations of video media?
One can only feel total empathy for the victims of nature's happenings. And, for the employees of Japan's nuclear power industry. I wouldn't want your job, right now, for a billion dollars an hour. May you go home unscathed!

[devogue]

I think the media coverage is shit as well.

A couple of well-aimed Tomahawks would help that reactor on its way and the TV tonight would be awesome.

[Feck]

No the reactors all shut down when there is an earthquake I presume they drop control rods into the core PDQ ! ,in one of the reactors the diesel generators didn't start .

If the core is not cooled even with the control rods in a previously active pile generates a lot of heat , in sealed cooling system this causes a fuck of a lot of pressure , something thing blew . Hope that the core is still encased and hasn't melted but it's very probably not the core itself that blew .

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The explosion was most probably in the cooling system, a hydrogen-oxygen reaction. That's consistent with what I've seen in the footage. Let's try not to jump into fucking conspiracy theories at the first opportunity, shall we?

[egbert]

but it's very probably not the core itself that blew .

Then what did explode??

[Thumpalumpacus]

Yes, from what I've read, it was overpressurization that caused the explosion.

I'm pretty sure that the cloud would be shaped different if the core went up -- if it could at all.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Let's try not to jump into fucking conspiracy theories at the first opportunity, shall we?

Well, that's no fun.

[egbert]

Yes, from what I've read, it was overpressurization that caused the explosion..

Explosion of what?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Let's try not to jump into fucking conspiracy theories at the first opportunity, shall we?

Well, that's no fun.

[FBM]

The explosion was most probably in the cooling system, a hydrogen-oxygen reaction. That's consistent with what I've seen in the footage. Let's try not to jump into fucking conspiracy theories at the first opportunity, shall we?

Well, somebody combined all that hydrogen with all that oxygen at just the right ratio to make it decouple at just the right temperature into highly explosive gases.

[egbert]

"Pay no attention to that explosion - everything is under control."

[Warren Dew]

The explosion was most probably in the cooling system, a hydrogen-oxygen reaction.

Where would the unreacted hydrogen and oxygen come from?

Most likely the explosion was the result of steam overpressurization of the secondary containment building. Keeping the core cooled during the residual heat period involves letting it boil water, and likely the resulting steam was escaping into the secondary containment. A cubical structure, as the secondary containment was here, wouldn't be able to withstand much internal pressure.

It wasn't a nuclear explosion as happened at Chernobyl. However, we should expect substantial radiation release now - not as much as Chernobyl, perhaps, but still a lot more than all other nuclear accidents combined.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The explosion was most probably in the cooling system, a hydrogen-oxygen reaction.

Where would the unreacted hydrogen and oxygen come from?

Most likely the explosion was the result of steam overpressurization of the secondary containment building. Keeping the core cooled during the residual heat period involves letting it boil water, and likely the resulting steam was escaping into the secondary containment. A cubical structure, as the secondary containment was here, wouldn't be able to withstand much internal pressure.

It wasn't a nuclear explosion as happened at Chernobyl. However, we should expect substantial radiation release now - not as much as Chernobyl, perhaps, but still a lot more than all other nuclear accidents combined.

What the fuck do you mean by "unreacted", please?

[Warren Dew]

The explosion was most probably in the cooling system, a hydrogen-oxygen reaction.

Where would the unreacted hydrogen and oxygen come from?

Most likely the explosion was the result of steam overpressurization of the secondary containment building. Keeping the core cooled during the residual heat period involves letting it boil water, and likely the resulting steam was escaping into the secondary containment. A cubical structure, as the secondary containment was here, wouldn't be able to withstand much internal pressure.

It wasn't a nuclear explosion as happened at Chernobyl. However, we should expect substantial radiation release now - not as much as Chernobyl, perhaps, but still a lot more than all other nuclear accidents combined.

What the fuck do you mean by "unreacted", please?

I mean not already in the form of water. Water doesn't burn.

[Gawd]

I don't know what kind of idiots design nuclear power plants, but requiring persistent power to ensure that there isn't a meltdown or explosion is monumentally dumb. When power is cut, the nuclear reactor should have fail safe mechanisms to cool the core down for a duration needed to reach safe temperatures. Requiring mechanical pumps that use power to do so and are prone to hiccups is a death sentence. What should be required is a water tower that stores water at elevation. It would be connected to the cooling system of the core but would be held back by solenoid values that require power to stay closed. When the power goes out, the solenoid valves open and the water from the water tower pours in to cool the reactor. The valves are sized so that a persistent rate of flow is obtained for the time needed. THIS IS WHAT IT MEANS TO BE FAIL SAFE.