General Discussion

Throckmorton

(3,579 posts)

60. well, for one thing, if they have never been critical, they are only alpha emitters.

Thu Nov 21, 2013, 10:53 PM

Nov 2013

No daughter products emitting high energy gammas. Physically, there is little difference between a burned and unburned assembly. Rad safety wise, there is a world difference between the two. Before I left nuclear power last year, I was frequently on refueling teams.

I rarely post on these topics, because I just can't stand all the hate mail. Those of you that accused me of being a monster will be glad the hear that I am working on microgrids now. Trying to sole the conundrum of how we make them safe, a harder task than you might think.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

79 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Fuel rod removal: Fukushima�s most dangerous operation yields first successes [View all] MineralMan Nov 2013 OP

To add: There were lots of predictions of disaster MineralMan Nov 2013 #1

Not Predictions. The odds simply didn't look good. Katashi_itto Nov 2013 #68

K & R malaise Nov 2013 #2

Thank you. I hope so, too. MineralMan Nov 2013 #3

Something they should have done a year ago. Baitball Blogger Nov 2013 #4

I think the planning process was done very carefully. MineralMan Nov 2013 #6

Wait what? Egnever Nov 2013 #5

Almost all of those stories were from advocacy websites and publications. MineralMan Nov 2013 #7

I think being an opponent of nuclear power is great! Egnever Nov 2013 #8

That's a lesson that advocacy groups rarely learn. MineralMan Nov 2013 #9

Agreed and it is very unfortunate Egnever Nov 2013 #11

Ive learned to take Arne Gundersen's hyperbole with a grain of salt Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #52

Nope not even close madokie Nov 2013 #10

oh really? Egnever Nov 2013 #12

Operative word here is 'could' madokie Nov 2013 #13

LOL thats just one of many hair on fire world is going to end Egnever Nov 2013 #14

do show me more madokie Nov 2013 #16

Why so you can continue to stick your fingers in your ears? Egnever Nov 2013 #18

go pound sand madokie Nov 2013 #20

Even so, the statement was an exaggeration. MineralMan Nov 2013 #15

I don't think you are a nuclear expert MM madokie Nov 2013 #17

I would not call myself a nuclear expert. MineralMan Nov 2013 #19

Plus, people sniping from the sidelines is not good form. longship Nov 2013 #23

From the "sidelines?" 99Forever Nov 2013 #30

It also dissipates with distance. That's how it works. longship Nov 2013 #50

Thanks for that. MineralMan Nov 2013 #48

The problem is that this was never even close to rational FBaggins Nov 2013 #32

Excellent. pa28 Nov 2013 #21

They're doing the easiest stuff first Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #22

Thank you for that clarification.n/t dixiegrrrrl Nov 2013 #24

exactly. furthermore, reactor 4 is the easiest of the reactors to remove the fuel from... magical thyme Nov 2013 #25

Plenty to celebrate FBaggins Nov 2013 #35

perfectly normal except manually operated and the easiest of the rods to be removed. magical thyme Nov 2013 #37

Manual doesn't really make it harder FBaggins Nov 2013 #42

Sorry, but I'm taking the word of people who actually do the job of fuel removal magical thyme Nov 2013 #44

Like who? FBaggins Nov 2013 #46

Like Toshio Kimura, former Tepco technician magical thyme Nov 2013 #49

I figured that's who you were thinking of FBaggins Nov 2013 #55

thank you for the source links to back up your claims... magical thyme Nov 2013 #56

They might not remove those. Warpy Nov 2013 #27

According to TEPCO, they've already started removing them Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #28

Yes, from those pools but not from the reactor Warpy Nov 2013 #29

Why would the unused fuel rods be easier than the spent ones? FBaggins Nov 2013 #34

This video explains why Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #36

Could you translate the key point? FBaggins Nov 2013 #38

I can't listen to it right now Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #41

??? FBaggins Nov 2013 #43

I have watched the video before Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #45

Ok. Thanks. FBaggins Nov 2013 #47

well, for one thing, if they have never been critical, they are only alpha emitters. Throckmorton Nov 2013 #60

That doesn't make them harder to remove. FBaggins Nov 2013 #61

Never said you did, Throckmorton Nov 2013 #72

These are MOX rods, Pu239 undergoes spontaneous fission Sirveri Nov 2013 #73

No they aren't. FBaggins Nov 2013 #75

Scratch that, double checking the numbers you're right. Sirveri Nov 2013 #77

I'm sure. Yes. FBaggins Nov 2013 #78

Right, due to U-238 activation via neutron flux you'll have Pu-239 Sirveri Nov 2013 #79

I listened to it again-- twice Art_from_Ark Nov 2013 #74

Yes, of course. When faced with MineralMan Nov 2013 #39

Thank you for this, I am a bit relieved Warpy Nov 2013 #26

It's just silly to call this the "most dangerous operation" FBaggins Nov 2013 #31

It is dangerous RobertEarl Nov 2013 #53

Not to the rest of the world FBaggins Nov 2013 #57

Aww, you are such a dreamer RobertEarl Nov 2013 #58

I'm not the one with the active imagination FBaggins Nov 2013 #59

Hey, you almost got something correct. RobertEarl Nov 2013 #62

Lol! You're the entertaining gift that just keeps on giving, aren't you? FBaggins Nov 2013 #63

Quit yer dreaming, FBaggins RobertEarl Nov 2013 #64

Stop... I can't take it. FBaggins Nov 2013 #65

Heh RobertEarl Nov 2013 #66

You shoud just stick with that "I don't get it" FBaggins Nov 2013 #67

"the entertaining gift that just keeps on giving"... SidDithers Nov 2013 #69

A start. 99Forever Nov 2013 #33

Yes. MineralMan Nov 2013 #40

Storage is a MAJOR ISSUE. Tikki Nov 2013 #51

Just the beginning..... Bennyboy Nov 2013 #54

Good job, Japan. Bonobo Nov 2013 #70

Nuclear power generation was very, very attractive MineralMan Nov 2013 #71

Keeping fingers crossed. Warren DeMontague Nov 2013 #76