Video on what happens when spent fuel rods looses coolants and start burning

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81
Noob question for nuclear experts here: If spent fuel rods have *that* much energy in them still, why can't we use them to still power the turbines?
 

wuliheron

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
3,536
0
0
He repeatedly says things like "a few plants will catch fire", etc. He's talking about the absolute worst case scenarios if every nuclear plant in the world suddenly lost power. Lets just hope that even if they don't manage to tame this beast it doesn't turn into an absolute worst case scenario.
 

Sephire

Golden Member
Feb 9, 2011
1,689
3
76
Is this an accurate depiction on what will happen if the spent fuel rods are exposed to air without coolant:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91JZCbGLCvk

It definitely looks scary and I hope the brave Fukushima 50 will tame the beast :(

Yep, pretty much.

No "coolant" to maintain low temperature to keep the "spent" fuel from heating up.

Its happening NOW

Japan needs all available resources to contain this.

Shit just got real.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Here's something I'm failing to understand:

If they need industrial pumps, fire trucks, generators, diesel fuel tanks/pumps for all, HowTF was that not on site and ready to go in like 12 hours from when they lost power?

It takes nothing for them to airlift that shit in, they've got Chinook's and heavy lift helicopters. They've got the water source right there...I can only imagine in all of Japan, they've got the equipment they need.

Why didn't they just fly in the sh1t they needed and get it going???

Chuck
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
The operator doesn't have a reputation for being forthcoming, so that may have delayed understanding of what was needed.

Dealing with one of these reactor situations was a big deal at TMI, here there are 6 reactors and 2 storage pools, all of which usually require 100s of employees to manage when everything is working right. Now there are a fraction trying to deal with lots of problems with no power,no way to get close enough to see exactly what the issues are.


And there are 2 other disasters to deal with, the earthquake and the tsunami.

Imagine Haiti, Katrina, and 3 or 4 Three Mile Islands or Chernobyls, all at once.
 
Last edited:

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Noob question for nuclear experts here: If spent fuel rods have *that* much energy in them still, why can't we use them to still power the turbines?

It's my understanding that the fission byproducts act to actually slow down the normal chain reaction making the fuel rod more harmful to energy production than helping.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Noob question for nuclear experts here: If spent fuel rods have *that* much energy in them still, why can't we use them to still power the turbines?

Plants built for a specific output need, if the current fuel can't produce that safely then time to replace. Realize it isn't that often. On the carriers for the Navy they refuel reactors about every 10-12 years when they do the routine maintenance overhauls.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Here's something I'm failing to understand:

If they need industrial pumps, fire trucks, generators, diesel fuel tanks/pumps for all, HowTF was that not on site and ready to go in like 12 hours from when they lost power?

It takes nothing for them to airlift that shit in, they've got Chinook's and heavy lift helicopters. They've got the water source right there...I can only imagine in all of Japan, they've got the equipment they need.

Why didn't they just fly in the sh1t they needed and get it going???

Chuck
Maybe the company that owned the nuclear plant thought they could just buy that stuff when the time came and they needed it instead of buying it and just keeping it on standby losing money to maintain them. Or maybe the company thought the situation wasn't as bad as it was.
 

Modelworks

Lifer
Feb 22, 2007
16,240
7
76
Maybe the company that owned the nuclear plant thought they could just buy that stuff when the time came and they needed it instead of buying it and just keeping it on standby losing money to maintain them. Or maybe the company thought the situation wasn't as bad as it was.


It is BP oil spill all over again. The company is trying to protect the corporate image vs doing what is right. Same thing BP did for the first week or two.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,574
10,211
126
So regarding the video, what happens during the solar storms in 2012? If it fries our power grids, such that they cannot transfer power, and these nuclear storage facilities overheat and meltdown, the world will turn into a radioactive wasteland. God help us all.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Maybe the company that owned the nuclear plant thought they could just buy that stuff when the time came and they needed it instead of buying it and just keeping it on standby losing money to maintain them. Or maybe the company thought the situation wasn't as bad as it was.

It is BP oil spill all over again. The company is trying to protect the corporate image vs doing what is right. Same thing BP did for the first week or two.

Pretty much.

Honestly I'd think any country that has nuke plants would have national stores, and the implementation plans to go along with them, such that if there's a nuke cooling issue, which really seems to be the large point of concern at a nuke plant, that those backup cooling options could be airlifted in within a few hours at most.

There should be no company image issues, it should be considered a matter of National Security, and be done immediately - it should be looked at as good to enact, rather than a bad.

This sounds like just common sense stuff, so I've got to think there's a real technical - rather than cost and/or political - issue that made them not do it.

Chuck
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
Yep, pretty much.

No "coolant" to maintain low temperature to keep the "spent" fuel from heating up.

Its happening NOW

Japan needs all available resources to contain this.

Shit just got real.

what's with these brand new members and their fear mongering/trolling?
 

Kwatt

Golden Member
Jan 3, 2000
1,602
12
81
So regarding the video, what happens during the solar storms in 2012? If it fries our power grids, such that they cannot transfer power, and these nuclear storage facilities overheat and meltdown, the world will turn into a radioactive wasteland. God help us all.

I have only worked at 2 Nuke's so I can not speak about most. At those 2, as long as the diesel generators can run and water can be pulled from the river they can keep cool for a while. They do not have to be connected to the grid for a shutdown. Although it is preferred to keep outside power connections up. And 1 of those plants is supposed to be able to shutdown on back-up batteries.


EDIT: As to the Solar Storms frying the grid. If those storms fry all the transformers in all the switch yards of all the power plants including the the nukes. The only difference in getting caught in the radioactive cloud downwind of the melting Nukes and not dying from the from the cloud is the time we get to think about our end.

If i remember correctly there are about 10,000 of those transformers in the US. And the worldwide production is ~10 a year....


...
 
Last edited:

Sephire

Golden Member
Feb 9, 2011
1,689
3
76
"Some" good news as of right now. I'll wait for the mainstream news to pick it up.
 

Drift3r

Guest
Jun 3, 2003
3,572
0
0
He repeatedly says things like "a few plants will catch fire", etc. He's talking about the absolute worst case scenarios if every nuclear plant in the world suddenly lost power. Lets just hope that even if they don't manage to tame this beast it doesn't turn into an absolute worst case scenario.

The entire premise of the show has to do with what would happen to our infrastructure if humans were to go extinct over night. So yeah its a bit over the top.