4 Apr
2011
4 Apr
'11
3:44 a.m.
On 04/04/2011 05:54 AM, Hartmut Noack wrote:
They were waiting to see if it would be a waste of money or not... No
point trying to build it if the whole facility was going to go up anyway.
That what they want you to believe... Of course they have no reason to
tell lies and subvert the truth though do they? There is no vested
interest in protecting the Plutonium generating facilites of this world
from closure if people know that they are all potential Nuclear bombs.
When I say ignite I mean "with the power of a nuclear explosion". Maybe
I should have chosen the more technical term for such an event? What is
that? Combust, Explode, Erupt... Are you actually trying to tell me
that the open pits where they are storing the "spent" fuel rods are
impervious to a conventional explosion let alone a nuclear explosion of
upto 800 metric tonnes of burning reactor cores? Remember that just a
few kilograms of Pu-239 going up in a nuclear explosion is enough to
wipe Fukushima (the whole city, not just the facility) off the map...
The poisoning is the cancer. But: Plutonium has a very high
melting-point and it is the heaviest material known to be stable, it
is not good in spreading.
No. The Poisoning is a chemical process and the cancer is caused by cell
mutation due to hte effects of radiation.
Chernobyl is nothing in comparison to this event. Anyway you may want to
look at risk of getting cancer in the modern age. I'm sure that has
nothing at all to do with Nuclear pollution, absolutely nothing.
Yeah, I happen to be a Pacific Islander having travelled extensively
throughout the Pacific region and with family members and friends who
live in the Tropics and that callous disregard for nature by the
Japanese Authorities in my own backyard is a travesty I will never forget.
That is absolutely true. And to say, that this is the End of the world
does not help them in any way to get along with that desaster.
I know that it is one. You tell me what is the purpose of collecting all
that Pu-239 in one easy to get to location for 40 years? The reason it
defies logic is because they decided it was an acceptable risk not
because they couldn't get away with it.
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd.
Am 03.04.2011 18:46, schrieb Patrick Shirkey:
Sorry, but if that is the case then remind me how an ICBM works
please... Are we talking about the true speed of gravity or with the
resistance of a solid object that can withstand the heat of a burning
core included in the equation? Lets say for example there is a reactor
that melts down, the chamber is breached the meting core starts burning
it's way through the earths crust and along the way some of the fuel
gets trapped and delayed so now we have a radioactive pit of burning
fuel dispersed in clumps and say some of that fuel starts to drop in
freefall now what would be the calculated risk that it would only
explode with the force of a conventional weapon compared to a nuclear event?
On 04/04/2011 01:51 AM, Arnold Krille wrote:
No, it would not.
The greatest challenge whe building an atom-bomb is not to get enough
clean fissable material, It s the the question: "How fast can you
raise the mass from non-critical to critical?" Any mass of plutonium
that gathers to a critical mass with the speed that is feasible by
mere gravitation will simply go off in a *slow* burst of radiation.
On Sunday 03 April 2011 10:56:38 Patrick Shirkey
wrote:
How say you? Has anyone modelled how much non compressed Plutonium is
required for it to go to critical. Considering that it is melting
through the earths crust at more than 5000 deg C and it only takes a few
kilos of fuel to create Kilo Tons of explosive force it is a fairly high
risk of a worst case scenario whereby the much denser plutonium
seperates out and goes boom. On 04/02/2011 09:46 PM, Hartmut Noack wrote:
> Am 02.04.2011 05:27, schrieb Patrick Shirkey:
>> more time to enjoy your remaining days on this planet until the
>> nuclear
>> cloud of death from the impending atomic explosion at Fukushima of
>> 1760
>> metric tonnes of radioactive fuel blankets the earth and kills us
>> all.
> Could you elaborate on that?
>
> What makes you think, radioactive fuel could blow up in a "atomic
> explosion"?
What makes you think it couldn't?
The fact that there is not enough material
there to form a critical
mass.
That would be catastrophic for the area around the
place where this
happens but it will happen without a explosion.
Am I to assume that you have designed and built nuclear weapons in the
past and fully understand the processes involved then? Because if you
have then I guess I have a dilemma in that I now have contradictory
information about the processes involved.
Given how bad
it is already I would not be
surprised if it did go to critical and consume the whole facility.
I think it is absolutely unacceptable, that TEPCO did not start to
build a sarcophagus the first day after the tsunami.
Although I
have it on good authority that it is more likely to just
explode with the force of a conventional weapon instead.
This could be a simple hydrogen-explosion as had happened 2 days after
the tsunami. Catastrophic for the area yet not for the whole northern
hemisphere.
Even if it
only
makes it to that point it would make a very big mess. I'm hoping for it
to burn it's way deep enough into the crust so that it will effectively
be an underground nuclear test if it takes off.
So say we all...
I shudder to think of
the results if it is close enough to the surface to escape into the
atmosphere or ignite the whole facility.
There is nothing to ignite -- concrete does not burn and the fuel in
the facility is burning already.
The stuff in an atomic reactor is not as clean
and dangerous as the
stuff needed
for an atomic bomb.
There is more than enough Pu-239 in the melted cores each containing 160
- 180 metric tonnes of fuel to create a serious problem. In addition
reactor 3 had 5% enriched MOX to start with. That still leaves 890
metric tonnes of "spent" fuel rods which essentially means lots of
Pu-239...
The problem with the reactor material is when
something else blows
up and
spreads the radioactive material like a dirty bomb (this is also what
happened
25 years ago).
You mean like on Saturday 12 March or Sunday 13 March? Why do you think
the Ronald Regan decided to haul arse out of the vicinity and then
immediately swab the decks? It's not cause they were worried about a
little Cesium or Iodine that's for sure!
Another problem is that even the non-radioactive
plutonium and
uran are chemically bad stuff and poisonous for biological things.
Yep. Injesting Pu-239 will poison you first before you get cancer. Just
see Litvenenko for the results of that problem. However walking into a
cloud of Cesium or Iodine which is currently blanketing The US and
Europe will also cause you significant issues.
There is nothing even close to the clouds from the Tchernobyl-desaster
as of now. And there are people living today even in Kiev. Berlin is
as near to Tchernobyl as Kyushu is to Fukushima and we are still alive
too...
Remember that
just cos
the total amount of it is dispersed that doesn't mean it was dispersed
evenly. If I was in the Northern Hemisphere I would be staying away from
diary, meat and foods grown outside for the next few months and keep in
mind that Cesium has a half life of 30 years but the full life is more
like 300 years...
Dont get me wrong: the Fukushima case is indeed a catastrophe, that
will have its impact upon the whole earth. But it is not a EOTW-event.
It is one more good reason not to eat sea-fish though. But first and
foremost it is another evidence for the fact, that buisinessmen have
too much power in this world.
Carpe diem,
At least time is relative :-)
My heart goes out to the Japanese in this tragedy. They are the ones
suffering the greatest pain right now. It's absolutely categorically
heart breaking. I don't know how the elite can be so cruel to require
Fukushima as clandestine weapons program when there are already enough
nukes to kill us all anyway.
So you see yourself that there is no logic in such a "clandestine
weapons program" and still believe, there is one?
It just defies all logic and rationale.
exactly
best regards.
Something needs to change! This failed system we call the global
military industrial complex and their puppet governments is a complete
disaster!
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user