Re: [FRIAM] Apocalypse in Japan
I am not sure what is more dangerous for the environment, oil spills or radiation leaks, but the NIMBY syndrome is not uncommon ;-) I guess the two main problems are a) catatrophic accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima can not be ruled out completely b) there is no final storage place or ultimate radioactive waste repository Chernobyl happend 25 years ago, and a large region around the nuclear power plant is still uninhabitable. Some isotopes of plutonium have a radioactive half-life of a million years. I have read today in the newspapers than Japan stores the used nuclear fuel rods near the nuclear reactors, because it has no final storage place for them. The US has no final repository, either. Nuclear waste generated in the U.S. is stored similar to Japan at or near one of the 121 facilities across the country where it is generated, see http://bit.ly/dPF3Vt In Germany, a town named Gorleben at the edge of the country was selected as a storage unit for radioactive waste when the country was still divided into West and East Germany. Then the unification came, and suddenly the repository was in the center of the country, and the NIMBY syndrome appeared: nobody wanted to be the final storage place for radioactive waste. The NIMBY problem is similar to the free rider problem for public goods: in the former case, nobody wants to have the public evil, in the latter case everybody wants to profit from a public good without paying for it. -J. - Original Message - From: Gillian Densmore gil.densm...@gmail.com To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 12:18 AM Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Apocalypse in Japan in the US the problem isn't just saftey it's NIMBY. (not in my back yard). I'm far far far from being an expert on whats bog standard practice to store spent rods. That being said the very few physics i've talked to have said right off theoreticly you could store spent cells just abount anywhere sighting that these days that you get more exposer to harmful radiation over the course of a cross countery plane trip than about a year of 'leaked' radiation from spent rods. IF it's politicly viable to store Japans spent rods i'd think they'd apraciat any assistance at all. As to news papers: meh. i'm not sure nuclear has THAT much of loby strength more likely that it's wall street journal taking a conservative tone to writing.(caveat: i haven't read any news papers re: the situation in japan). Just as a side note: you do realize that ironicly oil spills cause more environmental damage radiation leaks? FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] Apocalypse in Japan
Jochen and everybody, hi, I don't know if it has already been covered on this thread, and I understand that the following comment is not central to the main theme. But to group Chernobyl with other reactor failures has one element that is potentially problematic. Chernobyl was a carbon- moderated reactor, in contrast to (as far as I know, all other) modern reactor designs, which are water-moderated in one way or another. The problem, of course, with carbon moderation is that if the reactor overheats, the carbon doesn't reduce that, and if it hits flashpoint, the carbon is inflammable and ultimately explosive. So you get this massive chemical explosion vaporizing and distributing your fuel/waste mixture. In contrast, water-moderated reactors, if they overheat, boil off the moderator. Since, in either of these reactors, the point of the moderator is to slow neutrons to an energy that can be captured for fissioning, when the moderator is lost, the neutrons remain fast, and mostly escape, which should mostly or entirely shut the reaction. This isn't as complete a quench as the cadmium absorber rods that can be used for some kinds of active control, but it should still make most of the difference that keeps the reaction within what the containment system was designed for. There are a lot of details about this that I don't know, so I don't understand what the modes are that lead to continued reactor heating even when the moderator should have been removed. This includes not understanding what went wrong in the research facility in Japan a few years ago, that led to the bubbling pot of fuel that had to have holes shot in it from high-powered rifles outside the building to sufficiently spread the material to go permanently sub-critical. For me, the most worrisome reactor in the world right now is in St. Petersburg. it is the same design and age as Chernobyl (I believe), and is not only a potential disaster for Russia, but for Finland, Sweden, and northern continental Europe. That would be my candidate for replacement. Eric FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Re: [FRIAM] Apocalypse in Japan
Everytime one of these reactors has a problem we hear the refrain: - oh that's an old/foreign/crap design which noone makes anymore - the people running the reactor are poor/corrupt/stupid/culturally different - and this would never happen to any of our other reactors the cynic in me thinks how many other badly design reactors are out there being run by people who are - either now or in the future - not up to the task? Regards, Saul On 18 March 2011 14:22, Eric Smith desm...@santafe.edu wrote: Jochen and everybody, hi, I don't know if it has already been covered on this thread, and I understand that the following comment is not central to the main theme. But to group Chernobyl with other reactor failures has one element that is potentially problematic. Chernobyl was a carbon-moderated reactor, in contrast to (as far as I know, all other) modern reactor designs, which are water-moderated in one way or another. The problem, of course, with carbon moderation is that if the reactor overheats, the carbon doesn't reduce that, and if it hits flashpoint, the carbon is inflammable and ultimately explosive. So you get this massive chemical explosion vaporizing and distributing your fuel/waste mixture. In contrast, water-moderated reactors, if they overheat, boil off the moderator. Since, in either of these reactors, the point of the moderator is to slow neutrons to an energy that can be captured for fissioning, when the moderator is lost, the neutrons remain fast, and mostly escape, which should mostly or entirely shut the reaction. This isn't as complete a quench as the cadmium absorber rods that can be used for some kinds of active control, but it should still make most of the difference that keeps the reaction within what the containment system was designed for. There are a lot of details about this that I don't know, so I don't understand what the modes are that lead to continued reactor heating even when the moderator should have been removed. This includes not understanding what went wrong in the research facility in Japan a few years ago, that led to the bubbling pot of fuel that had to have holes shot in it from high-powered rifles outside the building to sufficiently spread the material to go permanently sub-critical. For me, the most worrisome reactor in the world right now is in St. Petersburg. it is the same design and age as Chernobyl (I believe), and is not only a potential disaster for Russia, but for Finland, Sweden, and northern continental Europe. That would be my candidate for replacement. Eric FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org -- Saul Caganoff Enterprise IT Architect Mobile: +61 410 430 809 LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/scaganoff FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
