I know it's an old story at this point, but the comment section of my post on highly radioactive debris from the Reactor 3 operating floor piqued my interest again.
The worker who tweeted from Fukushima I Nuke Plant, "Happy", said in his interview with Tokyo Shinbun that right after the explosion of Reactor 3 building on March 14, 2011, there were people who were coated with black soot that came from the explosion. Unlike the explosion of the Reactor 1 building, the Reactor 3 explosion emitted a decidedly dark, black smoke skyward, with what looks like several huge chunks of structure (concrete?) blown up and then falling down.
Video of Reactor 3 explosion; after more than 2 years since it took place, there are still many Japanese who have never seen the footage:
The camera is looking at the Reactor 3 building from west. The flicker does seem like it's from the Spent Fuel Pool or close to it. Here's Reactor 3's SFP (covered, as of 4/22/2013) and the operating floor plan (from Ian Goddard's article that appeared on Lewrockwell.com on 9/3/2011; H/T reader Atomfritz) oriented the same way as the explosion video:
Was the explosion ex-vessel? In one of the very early meetings after the explosion, one of the US NRC people casually mentioned that it was ex-vessel. Others, in an unofficial capacity, have insisted that the explosion was nuclear, from the Spent Fuel Pool that they say went critical.
I'm personally more inclined to Mr. Goddard's theory that it was an ex-vessel steam explosion when the molten fuel escaped the Reactor Pressure Vessel and dropped in the water that had accumulated in the Containment Vessel, and the pressure from explosion lifted the reactor cap flange, gas escaped through the gap and ignited the hydrogen gas generated and accumulated in the Spent Fuel Pool.
If those black smokes were black because they were from the Containment Vessel after the molten fuel dropped, the smokes and the soot from the smoke must have been very radioactive. I wonder if any measurement of radioactivity exists of the smokes or the soot.
(I do believe more contaminated debris will be found when TEPCO attempts to remove them from the area above the reactor well cap. I'm trying to locate the document again, but TEPCO released a while ago the measurement of radiation in all the reactor buildings and turbine buildings at Fukushima I Nuke Plant. In that, at 2 to 3 meters above the area where the reactor well is located, the radiation was over 500 millisieverts/hour. The measurement must have been taken using the crane boom during the air sample collection.)
-----------------
New York Times reported on April 5, 2011 that "fragments or particles of nuclear fuel from spent fuel pools above the reactors were blown "up to one mile from the units"", quoting the then-confidential NRC report that the paper obtained.
However, the NRC report dated March 26, 2011, later released, says on page 10:
Fuel pool is heating up but is adequately cooled, and fuel may have been ejected from the pool (based on information from TEPCO of neutron sources found up to 1 mile from the units, and very high dose rate material that had to be bulldozed over between Units 3 and 4. It is also possible the material could have come from Unit 4).
Comparing the New York Times description and the NRC report, it looks the New York Times writers took the "neutron sources found up to 1 mile" from the reactor buildings to be fuel fragments.
The way TEPCO reported at that time was that neutron beam was detected at the main entrance of the plant on March 14, 2011, which is located at about 1.5 kilometer, or about 1 mile, west of the Reactors 3 and 4.
Checking TEPCO's revised data from that day (from TEPCO's 2011 data archive), neutron beam was not detected at the main gate on March 14 until 9PM (0.01 microsievert/hr). The explosion was at 11AM. Neutron beam was detected again later that night, at 11:20PM, 11:50PM, 11:55PM, then intermittently during the early hours of March 15, 2011. It seems to me that they coincide more with the dry vent of Reactor 2 that the plant was attempting.
(I have seen this "up to 1 mile" of neutron beam detection morphing into "fuel fragments scattered several miles outside the plant".)
-------------------
In the Reactor 3 explosion, there were also streaks of white smoke (or steam?) from the lower part of the building, much like the explosion in Reactor 1.
Professor Takashi Tsuruda of Akita Prefectural University thinks that's the steam from the Suppression Chamber, and the Suppression Chamber of Reactor 3 (and 1) is broken. Personally, people like Professor Tsuruda, expert in explosive reactions, should be sitting in a committee at the Nuclear Regulatory Authority trying to figure out what exactly happened at the plant on March 11, 2011 and after.
There are so many loose ends, after more than two years.
30-Day free trial by following the link.
Tokyo Time
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
39 comments:
And after 20 years, there still will be loose ends, but the nuke boys of the IAEA will hapenly deny that they know what really happened. You do not want to slaughter a chicken that lays Golden Eggs...
The photo you show above ties all of the "loose ends"
In it, in the lower left corner, you can clearly see the edge of a hole where the reactor well is . Since there is no containment cap and no pressure dome in the hole, then we can assume that either through a steam explosion or a nuclear explosion, the #3 reactor, or at least its contents, exited the reactor well in that explosion.
Of course this was obvious from the start - seeing the vertical nature of the explosion - like the explosion was shot out of a gun; seeing the reaction of the managers on-site who ordered the site to be abandoned; seeing the reaction of the USS Ronald Reagan as it encountered the MOX fuel cloud from the explosion; hearing about fuel being scattered all over and them bulldozing over it; seeing them immediately order everything coated with "greeen goo"; seeing piles of what looked like fuel rods laying scattered all over the north end of the #3 building, and later seeing periodic steam/smoke events from that location; etc.
It all pointed to exactly what we see plainly here for the first time.
And there are so many who have worked diligently to cover it up.
Perhaps now with the truth exposed, we can start moving toward dealing with the truth, rather than covering it up....
James
The reactor well and cover are still buried under debris in that photo. The big refueling crane sits atop the entire mess. So you can't tell if the cover and containment cap are there or not yet. There was a glimpse of the reactor well concrete cover on the side where the tool pit is in some videos released last year.
The mentions in the article make some really good connections. I wondered also about Happy's statement of being covered in soot and if that has any connection to the black sand being found that is highly radioactive. The neutron beam connection could be big. There was also a big release of radiation around March 19-21 when unit 3 was belching dark smoke out of the reactor well area.
Sorry Nancy, you are incorrect.
Very clearly there is a round hole which you can only see the edge of, because it is mostly covered by the very large bridge crane. You can see that it is a deep hole, with nothing in it. You can see that it is very large and round by the shape of the edge - which is mostly visible.
The refueling crane was found inside the spent fuel pool, draped over the still intact fuel assemblies.
I will point out that the floor diagram that is shown above is incorrect. That diagram is for one of the other fuku reactors - 5 and 6, I believe . It shows the reactor well shifted toward the east side of the building, whereas in Unit 3 it is almost centered in the building with the spent fuel pool and the machinery pool both offset to the east.
The industry will be desperate to discredit this photo - which clearly shows what we have not seen, but knew was the truth all along.
Old story ?
No, not to many people. A lot of our "fellow citizens", whichever country we are from, still don't know how serious (that minoring it) the accident(s) at FD were... They have NO idea. You can see it on their face when you tell them. They look like "Wth is she talking about ?"
Repetition is the usual weapon of propaganda. We need to do that too...
Looks like a deep empty hole to me. Where is the refuelling crane usually located when in it's parked position? Over the reactor or SFP? Neither?
A good question to ask the Japanese / World Gov'ts:
If this is all over, cold shutdown and all, do we get back public access to the data from the Nuclear Test detectors all around the globe ?
See what their numbers are now ?
No ?
What do you mean, no ?
:)
Anon at 11:20AM, the crane is to the left of the TEPCO's photo above, I think. I remember reading TEPCO saying something to that extent. I'll look.
There are two cranes: a very large bridge crane - which bridges across the entire width of the building and runs on rails attached to the outer columns.
In #3 explosion, this bridge dropped off its rails and landed directly on top of where the reactor well is. If you listen to the explosion video you hear three distinct booms then a crashing sound - the crashing sound is this bridge crane and the roof structure - with all its concrete blown away, falling back down on top of the building. I believe it probably opened up like a sardine can as the top of the reactor exited through the roof, then flopped back down where it still lies today.
The second crane is the refueling crane - it is an A-frame type crane that is slightly wider than the spent fuel pool and rides on rails in the floor.
In the #3 explosion, this crane was missing. Underwater photography has shown significant portions of it ended up down in the spent fuel pool laying on top of the fuel racks, which is another indicator that the explosion couldn't have come from the pool, because it would have blown debris out from the pool instead of them falling into the pool.
In the photo above, the refueling crane is not visible - because it's under the rust covered plates they've placed on top of the spent fuel pool - or possibly they pulled it out of the pool before putting the plates on.
The bridge crane is visible in the extreme lower left of the picture, running east to west (the photo is rotated a bit) and covering the reactor well opening - all except the black area that you can see as an open well with no concrete plug and no pressure dome.
The version of the explosion above does not have the sound track, where you can hear the power of the blasts.
The photo confirms they are lying when they said the pressure vessel is still intact - obviously it's not intact if the reactor well is empty.
It's was also impossible for them to have pressure readings as the narrator states - 12 minutes after the explosion - for three reasons: 1. The explosion destroyed the control center for units 3 and 4 - which was located at the base of #3 in the NW corner. 2. No instrumentation could have survived that blast - none The entire building was destroyed - there's not a pressure sensor made that could survive that. 3. They had no electrical power to the plant for another couple weeks. The only water cooling after this explosion was from fire hoses directed over the building.
Therefore anyone claiming that this was not a catastrophic failure of a MOX fueled nuclear reactor has now been proven to have lied. And - my feeling is that the people of Japan should file criminal charges against those who instigated and perpetuated those lies.
Because this lie has caused the people of Japan for two years to not take action that they should have taken.
Thank you LaPrimavera for this again-great article!
Thank you also very much for tracing back how this rumor legend of reactor fuel being splashed miles around the plant came to live.
In the first days, when communication was difficult due to the eaertquake's consequences, the delaying hierarchy, the resistive behavior of the Japanese bureaucracy, and not to forget the language barrier, even the NRC experts were unclear about the extent of the accident.
At that time, even the NRC then was unclear whether the reactors were contained or their contents sploshed out into the vicinity like at Chernobyl.
Soon these worries calmed down because of the (comparatively) low radiation readings at the Fukushima plant, which excluded the possibility that the reactor containment was completely lost like at Ch.
There must be kept one important thing in mind: in contrast to the monolithic 2000-2500 tons heavy Chernobyl concrete reactor plug the Fukushima reactor plug consists of smaller bars instead. Thus, there was much more gap space available to release the pressure.
When the pressure was released by lifting these concrete bars, they got damaged at some points (indicated by the IR images) resulting in steam leaks well visible in IR.
Thus, I think that the Chernobyl design was way better in the sense of damming the explosion to intensify its impact. You can verify the fact that the Fukushima concrete reactor seal is NOT a single monolithic piece of concrete by looking at the pictures Tepco released from Daini (in surprisingly high detail, by the way...): http://photo.tepco.co.jp/en/date/2012/201209-e/120910-03e.html
And then look again at Figure 3 of the link from lewrockwell.com. You notice three hot spots on the IR image are being associated with the "ejection vectors". I don't know whether this were the actual ejection vectors, but it seems apparent that these hot spots on the IR images appear to coincide with the fumes that emanated from #3. First blackish-greyish, then white.
And now, keeping in mind the GE design concrete bar reactor plug design, look again at the IR image. Exactly above the middle "ejection vector" you see another line where heat escapes. It is on the same gap line between concrete blocks.
Thus, you see the concrete plug(s) are still in place, but damaged. If they weren't in place, but shattered in debris pieces, wouldn't one expect the very hot reactor insides being highly visible on the IR image?
They are not visible. And the radiation is so low that fuel debris escape can be ruled out with high probability, I think.
Ahh atomfritz your continued quest to deny is admirable, but futile.
Look at the picture - see the hole where a reactor should be - see that there is no reactor - know that the reactor blew up.
That simple and indisputable.
No contrast between Fukiushima and Chernobyl at all. They both blew up and spewed radiation. The real contrast is that Fukushima has lost control of around 100X as much nuclear material as Chernobyl
The only real difference is that at Chernobyl they didn't spend billions of dollars on a containment system that didn't contain.
Oh, and the second difference is that they chose not to lie about it for two years, so they had to organize and contain it as best they could.
Thanks for the link to daini pics atomfritz. They reveal much information.
Given the current (cleaned up) state of reactor 3 building, the reactor well cap should be clearly visible. Perhaps the well cap had been removed before the explosion (very doubtful). Lets say it was removed, then judging by the depth of the yellow dome, it too should be clearly visible. Both are clearly not visible at this moment in time. Where have they gone? The infrared images suggest to me the hotspots are in fact just remnants of the molten core. At first, black smoke as molten core tends to give off black smoke. Then, white steam from the water injection efforts.
It would appear both yourself and goddard are mistaken.
Radiation levels deep inside that hole would be in the vicinity of 200-300 Sv/hr.
Chernobyl after explosion http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f6/Chernobyl_burning-aerial_view_of_core.jpg/170px-Chernobyl_burning-aerial_view_of_core.jpg
Daiichi 3 after explosion http://www.enduringamerica.com/storage/JAPAN-QUAKE-reactor3burns.JPG?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1300126298543
Look similar? Why the mystery?
I recall them saying the reactor was operating at the time of the earthquake, I would hope the well cap would have been on it.
It is obviously not on it now.
This is very concerning. Why have we been told over and over that it was a hydrogen explosion when it clearly was not?
So the well cap is made up of 3 massive slabs of reinforced concrete. How many massive slabs of reinforced concrete fell back to earth after the explosion? Oh look, the answer is 3. hmmmm
The issue of the reactor 3 hole has also been discussed in the Physics Forum more than once. People there focused on pictures with debris still covering the hole to discern what may or may not have gone through the debris and what may or may not be underneath it. In fact, it's been discussed more than once, but it is a huge threat and difficult to find the individual posts over time. (A separate threat specifically regarding the reactor 3 explosion seems to meanwhile have gotten lost.) Following is a link to part of one discussion for those that might be interested.
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3295054#post3295054
*mscharisma*
That is certainly an interesting thread discussion, it seems the poster was showing a pathway where the RPV would have exited the roof structure - and it looks legitimate to me.
Of course that hole is not the same nor as significant as this hole.
This hole is a void where the actual RPV is supposed to reside - an empty well, and it is clear as can be.
But the two holes support one another; put the two together and you get a pretty good argument that we've been duped for two years.
James
Reading further in the physics forum thread linked above, that poor fellow had strong evidence of the RPV ejection back in May of 2011, and was ignored by the others in physics forum.
Sad.
To me it seemed that the holes in the thread and the one discussed here were the same. And contrary to you, anon 5:51, I was left with the impression that the photographic evidence strongly contradicted the ejection theory, with the "poor fellow" not providing any supporting documentation for his theory.
But then, I'm not a technical person and I don't understand the half of all this ...
*mscharisma*
There seems to be a few people making big statements that don't understand the pieces of equipment involved. The refueling crane is in the spent fuel pool. There is plenty of photo evidence of that. The overhead crane fell across the reactor well. Between misc. debris and that crane you can't see the rim of the reactor well on the SFP side yet. That should become visible soon as they are pulling debris off that side. The OTHER side of the reactor well has a tiny section of the rim of the well visible. On that side you can see the concrete reactor well cap is visible. So at least that section of the concrete cap is still intact. Nobody knows for sure what is under the debris pile and overhead crane where the reactor well is.
The best assumption I have seen so far is that the gasket failed and the gap between the cap and the containment structure opened. This is a known phenomenon of the BWR reactor. Estimates on the Peach Bottom reactor showed that the bolt pattern used at Fuku will allow the bolts to stretch under high heat and pressure making the cap like a pressure cooker relief valve.
So it is possible to have the massive blast AND to still have the containment cap intact. The radiation levels also hint that it is intact. The 500 mSv/h range found on the refueling deck is lower than the 800 mSv/h range readings found on the refueling deck of unit 2. If the cap was gone the readings would be higher.
U3's containment is pretty wrecked. The assumption I saw in a JAEA report thought that the back containment hatch or another low part of containment in that area leaked hydrogen causing that side of the building to be so damaaged. If you look at all the inside images together you can see that part of the blast moved from one side to the other of the building. IE: things on the SFP side are pulled or pushed toward the other side of the building in those lower levels. The control room is still there, it sits in the building between the reactor building and the turbine building.
I do wish they would install some sort of webcam so work to remove debris on 3 could be watched. We all should have some answers when they get to the point of removing the overhead crane. As for people claiming they can see the refueling well hole, it is a big opening. This is a floor plan of unit 4 (similar to unit 3) that shows the outline of the pool and reactor well http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8233/8588322439_f26335c024_c.jpg
BTW, I initially assumed the containment cap was gone as others are trying to assert. Information as it has come out over the last two years makes that concept less likely.
I didn't make it clear, there is a concrete reactor well cap (cover) and the big yellow containment cap below that. This diagram shows the structures involved http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8146/6960178076_8e6fdc4317_o.jpg
Nope, not the same at all.
That thread was talking about a hole punched into the roof structure - the guy shows pictures where something bent the straight roof beams round in a circle during the explosion .
This hole is the reactor well. Look at the photo above. You can see directly into it - no containment cap, no pressure dome - just a black hole that you can see down into.
Fortunately if you don't understand half of this, then the photo above makes it very easy.
Look at the photo - see down into the reactor well. See that there is no concrete plug and no pressure dome - know that the explosion was the reactor blowing up.
So Nancy - if the bridge crane does not allow you to see the reactor well on the SFP side, then
WHY CAN I PLAINLY SEE DOWN INTO THE REACTOR WELL IN THE PHOTO ABOVE?
yes, only the edge of it is visible as most is covered by the crane, but it's plainly visible.
If you cannot see it, I can only venture that you must be a favorite admirer of the emporer's new clothes.
I'm trying to follow the discussion but I don't see the photo anon is referring to, which supposedly shows a hole where the reactor cap should be. The photo included in the article does not show the reactor well cap; it would be further to the left.
Nancy, I really agree, there should be a webcam observing the progress on #3.
Tepco didn't disclose what kind of debris was so radioactive. Small or large? Concrete, metal or plastic? Where taken from? Item already identified or just a piece of debris nobody knows where it was from?
Thus I am not sure whether we really can assume that the radiation at #3's reactor floor at the reactor plug is less than the at least 0.8 sieverts like at #2.
I think the only conclusion we can draw up to now is that there is good reason to assume that the radiation at #3 floor definitely tops 0.54 Sievert.
Regarding the high neutron ("beam") measurement reports, and putting that together with LaPrimavera's suggestion that maybe there could be a connection with #2's venting in addition to #3's explosion, I had to think about the many decay chains of short-lived fission nuclides. There are hundreds of them, and normally not looked at in accident studies because they decay in the course of a few days or weeks.
If there are neutron-decaying short-lived fission products, this could easily explain the neutron radiation being observed at various points distant from the power plant when the radiation plumes from the black fumes, the dry venting or of some yet-undisclosed releases passed by.
Oh Atomfritz It's so beneficial to know there are those like you with the intellectual superiority to speak of decay chains of short-lived fission nuclides.
It took me minutes, but I've translated paragraph by paragraph for those of us less blessed with your obvious mensa level talent:
1. You agree with Nancy.
2. Tepco is hiding information
3. You don't know what's happening at #3.
4. You don't know what's causing the radiation.
I have a little simpler mind: Look at the picture. Look at the hole. See there is no plug on #3. Know that there was a MOX explosion at Fukushima.
@ anon 7:48
OMG I am no way "intellectual superior".
I mean, what I am talking about are just the basics. Every good introductory book about nuclear technology handles these basics.
Instead of spreading baseless rumors that any detection of neutrons must be a sign of (re)criticality, people should try to find out how this unexpected measurement could have been caused, imho. Because, what if it turns out that there might be a very simple and no esoteric cause like mysterious "neutron beams"?
Personally I find its very dangerous and contraproductive when nuclear-critics base their "message" on wrong, sensationalistic exaggerations or outright lies.
This is very damaging to the anti-nuclear movement.
It makes them appear as a bunch of crackpots at a whole just because a few of them ridicule it with outright wrong claims.
Just a saddening example:
Enenews had a headline a few days ago: "Gundersen: Extremely radioactive rubble on Fukushima Reactor No. 3 has to be nuclear fuel... from either spent fuel pool or reactor! — Can’t be from simple hydrogen explosion"
However, this was NOT what Gundersen said.
Gundersen said: "It has to be from fuel... either the SFP or the reactor! A simple hydrogen explosion would not dislodge this much radiation."
Do you see the suggestive, manipulative effect of the headline?
Enenews made people think Gundersen said that fuel fragments were lying around. But Gundersen only said that the radiation has to be from fuel. Thus he points to either damaged spent fuel or vaporized/aerosolized reactor fuel.
Exactly, he talked of dislodged _radiation_ and not of dislodged fuel.
(So, indirectly he again points at the possibility that even some nuclear runaway reaction could have been involved in the #3 explosion, too)
Do you see how even Enenews damages and ridicules even Gundersen with such manipulations, making people think Gundersen actually said what Enenews attributed to him?
(However, I am not accusing Enenews of willful manipulation or even outright lying. They probably believe that #3 exploded like Chernobyl and thus bent Gundersen's message in that favor. But this is no good journalism. In search of the truth one has to be neutral and open for new findings, not narrow-minded in his beliefs.)
I agree with your last sentence and I will clarify:
In search of the truth, you have to be willing to concede that when the truth is revealed it is the truth.
Uncovering the empty reactor well is indisputable - #3 reactor did blow on March 14th.
I could care less what Gundersen says. The fact that the industry keeps pushing him to the forefront and he keeps saying stupid stuff like you quote is proof enough to me that he was bought off long ago.
The hole to the lower left (in the photo) of the SFP doesn't look to me like where the reactor well cap is. It should be further to the left, shouldn't it? Rectangular thing above the hole is the skimmer surge tank.
So you agree its a hole?
That's precisely where the edge of the reactor well is. If you magnify the photo you can see that the hole is large and round - about 7 meters across if I remember correctly.
There's certainly no other holes in that location. It's all reactor containment other than the well itself.
There is a removable "door" between the spent fuel pool and the reactor well so they can refuel the reactor without ever exposing the fuel rods to air. They remove the "door" (which isn't exactly a door, more like a several foot thick passage) then they lift the fuel out of the racks - and move it over to the reactor with the refueling crane - completely underwater.
This is why the reactor is fairly close to the fuel pool.
Isn't the reactor well cap circular, though? http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/nu/fukushima-np/handouts/2013/images/handouts_130422_08-e.pdf
The "hole" you are talking about, which can be just a shadow or an area with less debris after the removal, doesn't seem to correspond to the reactor well cap.
I am quite certain that the blackened area on the photo (the "hole") starts just _outside_ the circular concrete reactor well plug, as anon 5:31 also seems to think.
The concrete reactor plug itself appears intact and not blackened at this spot, even though still being covered by debris.
I am now purely speculating:
Maybe this is indeed a small hole where some concrete from the reactor pit boundary wall has been broken away by the vectored explosion blowout?
Another strange thing is when you look at the photo:
You see that the blackened trace goes from the reactor circle to the lower right, in an angle of about 140 degrees (4:45 o'clock).
From the lower left of the pic you see a ceiling bar in an angle of about 45 degrees (1:30 o'clock) crossing and burying the blackened area, cutting it in two sections.
Thus, I ask myself: Was the blackened (hole?) thing already there before the ceiling fell back?
Because, if the blackened thing is because of stuff billowing out from the reactor depths _after_ the building collapsed, wouldn't then one expect the area _behind_ the fallen-down bar less blackened?
Thus, I could well imagine that a part of the operating floor has been blown away from an explosion inside the containment, creating a hole, or at least a wide crack.
I really wish Tepco would release real hi-res pictures instead of low-res thumbnails to save people from speculating about things which actually might be only shadows due to the lighting conditions at early morning...
It cannot be kept secret forever.
Anon 6:36 yes the reactor well is round - about 7 meters across.
You cannot see the entire well in this picture - because the bridge crane fell down across most of it.
You can only see the edge of the well - like a sliver of the moon. Blow the picture up. Look at the lower left corner of the picture. Find the piece of roof steel that Atomfritz is describing as laying at an angle of 140 degrees. It is not laying across the hole nor splitting the hole. The reactor well is immediately to the left of it.
See the deep black between the bridge crane at the left edge of the picture and the 140 degree beam - this is an empty nuclear reactor well.
Trace the outline of edge of the well arcing next to the beam. It's a large arc that disappears under the bridge crane at the top and has some debris still on it at the bottom.
See there is some sort of square piece of metal hanging down into the reactor well - but beyond that is the black abyss. There is no concrete cap - that would be flush with the surface. There is no yellow pressure dome - it would be visible in the hole - even if the yellow paint were burned off. This is where the explosion you've seen in the video came from.
Atomfritz - I know that you know exactly what I'm describing and exactly what this is, however you seem to have some obligation not to acknowledge it - which I will accept.
Let me ask you a Hypothetical: If this is the reactor well that we are looking into...
Do you personally have any children? Any grandchildren? Any nieces or nephews?
Tell me Atomfritz: Do the innocents of the world deserve to have this thing that this photograph proves to have happened - do they deserve to grow up in a world where well educated and responsible adults cover this kind of thing up, rather than acknowledge it and fix it? Or is there some way to justify covering this information up and endangering them?
I'm curious as to you feel personally - hypothetically, of course...
James
Even if that black area is a "hole", and it does not look like hole to me, it would not allow you to see the yellow pressure dome, which would be further left and up from that area.
I think you are getting confused by the cover of the spent fuel pool, which is larger than the pool itself.
After two years, people just see what they want to see...
Anon 10:10
There are a total of three caps in the 7 meter diameter hole - On top is the thick concrete containment plug - which someone above says was in three sections, which would make sense.
Next is the yellow containment dome, which sits directly under the concrete plug, and then finally the RPV cap, which in Unit 4 was painted red and is smaller in diameter and sits under the containment dome.
Obviously the concrete plug is gone because there is a hole. It installs flush with the floor. The Yellow cap is almost the same diameter as the concrete plug and would be plainly visible in the hole if it were there.
The RPV cap is smaller in diameter than the yellow cap and nests inside it. It is more like 5 meters, because it is bolted directly on top of the reactor, which is inside the containment. So it would be slightly to the left in the hole. Unless the reactor shifted in the well or sunk down, it would still be visible.
The reactor well would not be shifted upwards in the picture, because on reactor 3, the well is approximately centered in the building - in contrary to the diagram shown above next to the picture. I believe that diagram is for units 5 and 6 which were built later.
Here is a photo for reference - I believe this is an American reactor, so ignore the direction designations, but you can see the parts, and you can see there is no other holes in the floor near the reactor. The reactor well is the only hole possible in this location of the building. Everything else is thick concrete containment.
http://i2.minus.com/jjU8wO.jpg
It is 100% certain that the hole you are looking at is the reactor well.
In addition to the comments made here about Physics Forums, I would like add, not much critical thinking going on there in the Fukushims threads and if any is displayed, is it is banned. You'd think some of the regulars are geniuses but I found out a member(called Drakshit or something) who was argueing with me is just a highschool kid with one fucking swelled head the size of Kansas. Bring up some obvious points disparaging the nuke industry's lack responsibility and blatant wrong doing and you won't last long.
I'd rather suffer Finnish troll rants and Karen Sherry Brackett's (sp??) spelling fiascos than a fucking arrogant highschool kid who can crunch numbers but can't see beyond the pimple on his nose.
Post a Comment