They got an earthquake, a tsunami, and now the threat of a nuclear meltdown. I hope nothing happens, they've had a bad enough weekend as it is.
| Metal Reviews https://metalreviews.com/phpBB/ |
|
| What Are The Possibilities Of A Nuclear Meltdown In Japan? https://metalreviews.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=19683 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | MetalStorm [ Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | What Are The Possibilities Of A Nuclear Meltdown In Japan? |
It seems the news is making this a very grim situation. So what are the chances of a complete meltdown of the reactor core(s) at the nuclear plant that got hit by the tsunami/earthquake in Japan? |
|
| Author: | Rhys [ Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well they've had to vent some radioactive gas as far as I've heard, and they're pumping seawater in, which experts are calling "desperate" according to the news, so I'd say it's at least a 50/50. It's been rated a 4 out of 7 on some kind of nuclear disaster scale. Three mile island got a 5 and Chernobyl a 7, so make of that what you will. But then again, this whole thing will probably be distorted into a wider debate about the safety of nuclear power in general, forgetting Japan. In Australia we've already got groups rallying against Australia using nuclear in the future because of this, and politicians have had to answer queries on it too. |
|
| Author: | Legacy Of The Night [ Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
They got an earthquake, a tsunami, and now the threat of a nuclear meltdown. I hope nothing happens, they've had a bad enough weekend as it is.
|
|
| Author: | Goat [ Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
It's a terrible situation. I've come around to nuclear a little more after once viewing it with pretty undisguised horror, but events like this are a reminder that we're playing with some pretty dangerous things. I hope there's no meltdown... awful. Speaking of energy sources, went to an interesting meeting yesterday with the UK energy secretary Chris Huhne. He suggested that Britain should press ahead in getting the first viable carbon capture plant working, since we're behind France in nuclear and other places in others, etc. We're going to need lots of them in order to supply energy over the coming years. Plans to switch over to an electric rather than oil-run economy over the next 50 years sound interesting. Simpler and cheaper in the short run to switch to gas, but they're trying to avoid that as a non-green option. |
|
| Author: | MetalStorm [ Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110314/ap_ ... ear_crisis Doesn't look good guys
|
|
| Author: | traptunderice [ Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
 Fucking japan pushing labor off the front page.
|
|
| Author: | Rhys [ Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
That shit's gonna get into he atmosphere and travel all over the joint
|
|
| Author: | Thomas [ Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
There will be several of powerful aftershocks as well, that probably won't improve the situation. Things are looking rather grim. Three explosions in three different reactors as well as one more where the content is boiling. And now the cooling systems of reactor 5 and 6 are failing. Luckily, Norway is FAR away, but this is a potential global catastrophy. Not good. |
|
| Author: | traptunderice [ Tue Mar 15, 2011 3:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jesus Christ. I feel like there should be some kind of a technical solution out there for bullshit like this. But there isn't.
|
|
| Author: | Rhys [ Tue Mar 15, 2011 3:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Use helicopters or planes to drop millions of tonnes of concrete on it? |
|
| Author: | noodles [ Tue Mar 15, 2011 5:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
scary |
|
| Author: | dead1 [ Tue Mar 15, 2011 11:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Rhys wrote: Use helicopters or planes to drop millions of tonnes of concrete on it?
I think they did that at Chernobyl. |
|
| Author: | traptunderice [ Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
All the technology we have and turning Japan into a giant cinder block is all we got? This makes the whole story much sadder. |
|
| Author: | dead1 [ Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
traptunderice wrote: All the technology we have and turning Japan into a giant cinder block is all we got? This makes the whole story much sadder.
Actually you dump the concrete on the reactor housing. You do not concrete the whole of Japan. I ocne read that the quickest way of using up radiation is an atomic explosion. While reactors don't explode, would dropping an atomic weapon on the reactors work? The idea being that the atomic explosion uses up the nuclear energy stored in the rods. Pretty drastic but better than a big chunk of Japan becoming a no go zone. Residual radiation is an issue, but it does subside - for example Bikini Atoll was declared habitable by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). Radiation is higher than normal but not dangerous levels. Furthermore radioactivity is less than in some areas where natural occurring radiation is present. |
|
| Author: | Rhys [ Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Except Japan has no nuclear weapons, so they'd have to somehow borrow a nuke from someone. Plus I doubt the only nation to experience having an atomic bomb dropped on its population would go for such a plan. |
|
| Author: | dead1 [ Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Rhys wrote: Except Japan has no nuclear weapons, so they'd have to somehow borrow a nuke from someone. Plenty of US nukes lingering around the Pacific. Rhys wrote: Plus I doubt the only nation to experience having an atomic bomb dropped on its population would go for such a plan.
Very valid point. Having no idea about physics, I have no idea whether it'd work either. Anyone here got any clue about physics? |
|
| Author: | Thomas [ Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
*waits for Adveser to chirp in* |
|
| Author: | MetalStorm [ Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
dead1 wrote: traptunderice wrote: All the technology we have and turning Japan into a giant cinder block is all we got? This makes the whole story much sadder. Actually you dump the concrete on the reactor housing. You do not concrete the whole of Japan. I ocne read that the quickest way of using up radiation is an atomic explosion. While reactors don't explode, would dropping an atomic weapon on the reactors work? The idea being that the atomic explosion uses up the nuclear energy stored in the rods. Pretty drastic but better than a big chunk of Japan becoming a no go zone. Residual radiation is an issue, but it does subside - for example Bikini Atoll was declared habitable by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). Radiation is higher than normal but not dangerous levels. Furthermore radioactivity is less than in some areas where natural occurring radiation is present. Man I don't know. Sounds like the same concept of putting out a fire with gasoline. It sounds like it would make it worse than better. Or as in the case the cure worse than the disease. |
|
| Author: | MetalStorm [ Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
metal_xxx wrote: *waits for Adveser to chirp in*
Eh I think he's busy auditioning for worlds most powerful singer. |
|
| Author: | traptunderice [ Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
dead1 wrote: traptunderice wrote: All the technology we have and turning Japan into a giant cinder block is all we got? This makes the whole story much sadder. Actually you dump the concrete on the reactor housing. You do not concrete the whole of Japan. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 1 hour |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|