Page 2 of 4 [ 50 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,932
Location: Adelaide, Australia

22 Jan 2014, 12:00 am

Inventor wrote:
While some elements do have a short life, in others the half life is over a hundred thousand years.


I'm not an expert in such matters but wouldn't the elements with extremely long half-lives be far less radioactive than the ones with short half-lives? Wouldn't the most radioactive of elements already have been through their half-lives several times over in the last 34 months and now be less radioactive?



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

22 Jan 2014, 4:14 pm

Some of the reactors were fueled with MOX, Plutonium. That stuff lasts forever.

It was used in reactor fuel as there is no way of unmaking it.

All the Bluefin Tuna are now radioactive. Being on the top of the life chain does that.

The reactor 4 building has sunk 31 inches as the ground below it has been subsiding into the hole made by the meltdown. The 180 tons of spent fuel on the forth floor is still there. Without ground support, a minor earthquake and the whole building can crumble into the hole.

I too am not an expert, but the decay products are often worse, as they are less stable, and better able to migrate in the groundwater.

The news has been blacked out, but there is a lot on the web. The freeze the ground project has not even started, is doubted as hot water on bed rock will find a way.

The news to date, nothing has been done, a constant stream of radioactive water is entering the ocean, and will for thousands of years. It can get worse.

The fuel will not explode, but it can burn. That puts particles in the air. Also water can flash to steam, also becoming airborne. The surface air currents drive the Japanese Current, to the west coast, and the jet stream also flows that way.

It could be good, if the Pacific seafood was not to be eaten, for thousands of years, the ocean might recover. Also, it might change, less surviving on the top of the food chain, whales, tuna and such. It also may die, taking all life with it.

This is one of the Big Lies, like Tetra Ethel Lead in gas, which poisoned the cities, Lead does not go away. The US suffered a Lead Poisoned generation or two, where IQs were below expected, and disorders of the central nervous system became common.

We know from bomb tests that rare conditions became common.

Chernoble was a one time event, with declining effect. This is going to be a long term event.

We have little idea of what the effects will be.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

22 Jan 2014, 4:51 pm

Inventor wrote:
Some of the reactors were fueled with MOX, Plutonium. That stuff lasts forever.

It was used in reactor fuel as there is no way of unmaking it.

.


The Marianas Trench is 36,000 feet deep. Dump it there. Out of sight out of mind.

ruveyn



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

22 Jan 2014, 11:54 pm

First you have to catch it. The cores of three reactors are somewhere under the buildings.

The spent fuel rods are still in the buildings. Only robots go in there.

If anyone could, the Japanese are most likely to build huge Mecha, massive robots that could tear down the buildings, sort out the fuel rods, and pack the rest in radiation casks.

Transport to the trench would call for another robot ship, as no one would crew that cargo.

Digging out the cores will take removal of all the earth above, redirecting the groundwater, and technology we do not have to get the melted cores into some containers.

Another problem, it was built on a paleo river. Last ice age sea level was 450 foot lower, the river cut to bedrock. As sea level rose it filled, and now the plant is barely above sea level. At twenty foot down ocean water starts coming in.
The cores are most likely below sea level.

Dredging a harbor and disposing of all the spoil, perhaps several cubic miles.

None of this job would be safe for people.

We have talked of building robots to build space stations, or bases on other worlds.

We have drones that can kill someone, and anyone else around, on the other side of the world.

Reactor Barf, we got nothing but hire some wineos with brooms and dust pans.

Also, there will be the "Save Our Trench" people.

There is a UN Ocean Treaty, everyone owns it.

I would only bid the job at cost plus. A Trillion dollar down payment I can start next month.

This is going to take a top team of comic book artists, and science fiction writers.

First some ideas, then some engineering.



sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

23 Jan 2014, 1:23 pm

Inventor wrote:
Some of the reactors were fueled with MOX, Plutonium. That stuff lasts forever.

It was used in reactor fuel as there is no way of unmaking it.

All the Bluefin Tuna are now radioactive. Being on the top of the life chain does that.

The reactor 4 building has sunk 31 inches as the ground below it has been subsiding into the hole made by the meltdown. The 180 tons of spent fuel on the forth floor is still there. Without ground support, a minor earthquake and the whole building can crumble into the hole.

I too am not an expert, but the decay products are often worse, as they are less stable, and better able to migrate in the groundwater.

The news has been blacked out, but there is a lot on the web. The freeze the ground project has not even started, is doubted as hot water on bed rock will find a way.

The news to date, nothing has been done, a constant stream of radioactive water is entering the ocean, and will for thousands of years. It can get worse.

The fuel will not explode, but it can burn. That puts particles in the air. Also water can flash to steam, also becoming airborne. The surface air currents drive the Japanese Current, to the west coast, and the jet stream also flows that way.

It could be good, if the Pacific seafood was not to be eaten, for thousands of years, the ocean might recover. Also, it might change, less surviving on the top of the food chain, whales, tuna and such. It also may die, taking all life with it.

This is one of the Big Lies, like Tetra Ethel Lead in gas, which poisoned the cities, Lead does not go away. The US suffered a Lead Poisoned generation or two, where IQs were below expected, and disorders of the central nervous system became common.

We know from bomb tests that rare conditions became common.

Chernoble was a one time event, with declining effect. This is going to be a long term event.

We have little idea of what the effects will be.


A little too much internet "news" in this post. The bluefin tuna is not radioactive. The biggest danger (isotope-wise) was radioactive iodine, all of which has decayed since then. The next biggest risk is Cs-137, which is heavier than water and has a short biological half-life (meaning that it is not readily absorbed after ingestion). The only seafood that could pose even a moderate danger would be bottom feeders in the immediate vicinity, and even those have been tested and found to be well below dangerous levels. If you want to worry about seafood, be concerned about mercury. Mercury has a much higher biological half-life, and is in the oceans at higher concentrations than all radioactive material (natural and man-made combined) by several orders of magnitude.

There is plenty of research out there about the effects of radiation exposure; radiation is the most studied carcinogen of all time. We know that despite the fact that plenty of radioactive material escaped that there is no real danger to anyone's health. This is not going to be any more of a long term event than the spent reactor fuel being stored on site at nuclear plants, no matter what the internet fear-mongers are trying to peddle. There is no news blackout, there is just very little to report.

The decay products from the reactor meltdown are for the most part more stable. Much more stable. The whole reason we use certain isotopes for power generation is the fact that they are unstable enough for us to get chain reactions going. Even if every single radioactive atom from Fukushima leaked into the ocean, it would barely make a measurable difference. Water is an excellent moderator and radioactivity shield, and diluting the radioactivity severely limits the possible negative effects.

The civilian areas around Fukushima are well below the background levels for many different heavily populated geographical locations around the world.

Some further reading:

http://deepseanews.com/2013/11/true-fac ... -disaster/

http://blog.safecast.org/2014/01/radiat ... a-beaches/

http://guardianlv.com/2014/01/fukushima ... -debunked/


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

24 Jan 2014, 3:07 am

Well that solves everything, all those people can just move back home.

A ten fold increase of radiation in the ocean, is harmless.

Sounds like it was funded by TEPCO, and GE.

They said the same about Tetra Ethel Lead.

Then in 1972 lead was pulled from everything in a panic.

It looks like cherry picking a few isotopes.

Lead was claimed to be safe, and when city kids showed up with large doses, the claim was they ate paint chips.

Those areas still contain lead, in the dirt, dust, and coating everything.

When the bomb drifted fallout over inhabited areas, they denied the excess deaths from rare medical conditions.

They also sent the cattle to market.

DDT, PCBs, the by products of Agent Orange, were all declared safe.

Government, Industry, and the studies they fund are not to be trusted.

BP claimed their blowout did not harm the Gulf. They too funded studies.

Just because as your reports say, the ocean will only be ten times as radioactive, it will still be within safe limits.

That is saying they did no harm, of the kind they would have to pay for.

For a bogged down mitagation of ongoing damage, no plan except a comic book freeze, I have to doubt anything they say, or fund others to say.

All reactors are being questioned, and the long term management of radioactive material.

Now back to the Industry Spokesman.



sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

24 Jan 2014, 8:11 am

Inventor wrote:
Well that solves everything, all those people can just move back home.

A ten fold increase of radiation in the ocean, is harmless.


Since there is no 10-fold increase in the amount of radiation in the ocean, I am not certain how to respond to this.

Inventor wrote:
All reactors are being questioned, and the long term management of radioactive material.


As it should be. There is no doubt that radioactive material can be quite dangerous. That is one reason that it is the most heavily regulated hazardous material in the world, and likely always will be.

You can continue to drone on about conspiracy theories and apocalyptic doomsaying, but there are plenty of independent groups that have concluded that the terror over Fukushima has been blown way out of proportion. The NCRP, ICRP, IAEA, DOE, IRPA, and UNSCEAR have all come to the conclusion that there are very limited dangers at this point, and those dangers are to those who would be involved in the clean-up effort.

Or you can use random internet sources that base their scientific knowledge of radiation on watching Godzilla movies and re-runs of the Simpsons.


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


Woodpecker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,625
Location: Europe

25 Jan 2014, 5:37 am

I hate to have to say this but both the inventor and sonofghandi have made major errors.

1. The fact that cesium has a high atomic mass does not make it go to the bottom of the sea and stay there. Once it is in solution it can diffuse around like any other solute.

2. The reactors contain plutonium, however the MOX is likely to have Pu in the form of PuO2 which is very insoluble in water. If it has all melted into a big lump which has now become solid then it will be very hard to ever dissolve the Pu.

3. The Pu threat does not last forever, the worst of the Pu isotopes gram for gram is Pu-238. The radiotoxic threat posed by reactor grade Pu is larger than bomb grade Pu when you consider the two on a gram for gram comparision. The Pu-238 has a half life of about 90 years, a typcial stainless steel drum could last for 1000 years thus if the waste is put in drums then the Pu-238 will decay away before the drum leaks. Also Pu is not mobile in soil or rocks, it absorbs onto surfaces. As long as it is well buried then it is not that dangerous.

The fission products such as Sr-89, Cs-137 and Sr-90 are a bigger problem. The good news is that the majority of the strontium would have stayed in the fuel as the accident was a simple loss of cooling accident rather than a violent explosion in the core. The cesium tends to bind strongly to clay minerals so it may well end up mostly in the solid part of the soil rather than the soil water. This reduces its spread into the drinking water and into plants. The key thing is that as cesium moves slowly through the soil layers it is important to avoid eating anything with a shallow root system.

Also if the soil in Japan is low in potassium then it is a good idea to add potassium to the soil to reduce the transfer of cesium into plants. In general plants which are grown under low potassium conditions are more able to collect radioactive cesium from the soil and transfer it into the parts which people eat. A lot of work has been done on grass and the other crops which are grown near to Chernobyl but I do not know how much is known about rice which is the classic food crop in Japan.

4. The London convention all but bans the dumping of radioactive waste in the sea so it is unlikely anyone will ever dump in a deep trench in the sea.


_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity :alien: I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man !

Diagnosed under the DSM5 rules with autism spectrum disorder, under DSM4 psychologist said would have been AS (299.80) but I suspect that I am somewhere between 299.80 and 299.00 (Autism) under DSM4.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

25 Jan 2014, 8:25 am

Woodpecker wrote:
I hate to have to say this but both the inventor and sonofghandi have made major errors.

1. The fact that cesium has a high atomic mass does not make it go to the bottom of the sea and stay there. Once it is in solution it can diffuse around like any other solute.

2. The reactors contain plutonium, however the MOX is likely to have Pu in the form of PuO2 which is very insoluble in water. If it has all melted into a big lump which has now become solid then it will be very hard to ever dissolve the Pu.

3. The Pu threat does not last forever, the worst of the Pu isotopes gram for gram is Pu-238. The radiotoxic threat posed by reactor grade Pu is larger than bomb grade Pu when you consider the two on a gram for gram comparision. The Pu-238 has a half life of about 90 years, a typcial stainless steel drum could last for 1000 years thus if the waste is put in drums then the Pu-238 will decay away before the drum leaks. Also Pu is not mobile in soil or rocks, it absorbs onto surfaces. As long as it is well buried then it is not that dangerous.

The fission products such as Sr-89, Cs-137 and Sr-90 are a bigger problem. The good news is that the majority of the strontium would have stayed in the fuel as the accident was a simple loss of cooling accident rather than a violent explosion in the core. The cesium tends to bind strongly to clay minerals so it may well end up mostly in the solid part of the soil rather than the soil water. This reduces its spread into the drinking water and into plants. The key thing is that as cesium moves slowly through the soil layers it is important to avoid eating anything with a shallow root system.

Also if the soil in Japan is low in potassium then it is a good idea to add potassium to the soil to reduce the transfer of cesium into plants. In general plants which are grown under low potassium conditions are more able to collect radioactive cesium from the soil and transfer it into the parts which people eat. A lot of work has been done on grass and the other crops which are grown near to Chernobyl but I do not know how much is known about rice which is the classic food crop in Japan.

4. The London convention all but bans the dumping of radioactive waste in the sea so it is unlikely anyone will ever dump in a deep trench in the sea.


Radioactive material is embedded in borated glass slugs. Boron has a large absorbtion cross section. The glass slugs are then encapsulated by lead and titanium cylinders. That is what should be dumped into the Marianas Trench. Nothing is going to float to the surface.

ruveyn



Woodpecker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,625
Location: Europe

25 Jan 2014, 2:32 pm

Yes borosilicate glass is a great matrix for radioactive waste, but you need to reduce the amount of uranium present by using reprocessing before making the glass. The other problem is that the Fukushima fuel was mixed up with sea water which is high in sulfate. I have no idea how much sulfate contamination there will be.

If after reprocessing the high level waste has too much sulfate then it causes a problem as barium sulfate forms, this then seporates from the glass which lowers the quaility of the final waste form.

Good quaility borosilicate glass will take about 1 million years to dissolve in a typical waste store, thus it can hold the radioactive waste in the drum while decays.

Lead is not needed, if the glass is placed in a stainless steel drum it will be OK. But the stainless steel can will need a shielded overpack to allow transport unless you wait about 300 years for the Cs-137 to decay away.


_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity :alien: I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man !

Diagnosed under the DSM5 rules with autism spectrum disorder, under DSM4 psychologist said would have been AS (299.80) but I suspect that I am somewhere between 299.80 and 299.00 (Autism) under DSM4.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

25 Jan 2014, 3:43 pm

Woodpecker wrote:
Yes borosilicate glass is a great matrix for radioactive waste, but you need to reduce the amount of uranium present by using reprocessing before making the glass. The other problem is that the Fukushima fuel was mixed up with sea water which is high in sulfate. I have no idea how much sulfate contamination there will be.

If after reprocessing the high level waste has too much sulfate then it causes a problem as barium sulfate forms, this then seporates from the glass which lowers the quaility of the final waste form.

Good quaility borosilicate glass will take about 1 million years to dissolve in a typical waste store, thus it can hold the radioactive waste in the drum while decays.

Lead is not needed, if the glass is placed in a stainless steel drum it will be OK. But the stainless steel can will need a shielded overpack to allow transport unless you wait about 300 years for the Cs-137 to decay away.


Put briefly, if we can shut up the Eco-nazis long enough to dump that stuff into the Marianas trench (36,000 feet deep) the problem, for all practical purposes, is solved.

Bob Kolker



Woodpecker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,625
Location: Europe

25 Jan 2014, 4:19 pm

Who is Bob Kolker ?


_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity :alien: I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man !

Diagnosed under the DSM5 rules with autism spectrum disorder, under DSM4 psychologist said would have been AS (299.80) but I suspect that I am somewhere between 299.80 and 299.00 (Autism) under DSM4.


Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

26 Jan 2014, 12:59 am

There is still the little problem of recovering the high level waste for reprocessing.

Over two hundred tons, somewhere in the ground under the buildings.

It most likely has formed a solid, mixed with the soil, a dirty hot several hundred tons each.

Twice that is still in the spent fuel pools in the buildings, and it have not been removed.

Fuzeing waste in glass has been proposed, but has it ever been done?

Nothing ever went to Yucca Mountain, long term storage, it is all stored onsite at Hanford, Oak Ridge, and at the plants.

Humans cannot get near it, have no way to break it into movable chunks, and there is nowhere set up to reprocess the results of a meltdown.

Remove the spent fuel, remove the buildings, remains of the reactors, dig a big hole to find the meltdown, find some way to break it into pieces that will fit in a shipping cask, run it through a rock crusher, hammer mill, then through a rod mill, to reduce it to a powder.

Then the chemists can process out the high level wastes.

All of the byproducts are radioactive waste. Thousands of tons, tens of thousand, and it all has to be recovered and processed in a way that will not spread it.

Then borosilicate glass to reduce the spread. but that factory does not exist, and has nowhere to send its product. All of Japan is volcanic, subject to earthquakes, and not suited to million year storage.

Japan does not have long term waste storage. After several years in the spent fuel pool in the buildings, it was moved to another on site larger spent fuel pool. All of the waste of all the reactors from day one is stored there.

They all seem to be waiting 300 years for the Cs-137 to decay away.

This may be a worst case, but all reactors have the same long term problem. The answer has been, something will be done after I retire.

The Industry knows that demands for a plan of disposal will bankrupt them.

No reactor has ever been decommisioned. The best plan was we will fill it with cement. That was the building after the higher level waste was removed by someone and taken somewhere. So far, there is no one and no where. Then the building would just sit there forever.

In the event of another war, reactors will be target number one. The reactor is not the best target, the long term spent fuel storage pool being hit with a ton of conventional explosives would be.

Then you leave a running reactor that is to hot to get near.

An electro magnetic pulse would destroy all the computers, backups, and switching gear.

This is like building your cities with blocks of TNT.

If you think no one would ever do it, the US and Israel have been threatening Iran and and North Korea with bombing their reactors. Japan is within range of North Korea.

Atomic power has not been cheap, after we were told it would be too cheap to meter.

The disposal cost is more than all of our unfunded pensions combined.

Spent fuel should not be stored in the open, it should be removed, fuzed in glass, and disposed of deep in the earth. It is a dirty bomb waiting to happen.

Dumping in the ocean is not going to happen, as next dumping in rivers will be tried.

The problem has made its self known, now all radioactive waste needs to be secured.



Woodpecker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,625
Location: Europe

26 Jan 2014, 1:27 am

Sorry inventor but it is rather hard to follow your train of thought, you are writing in the form of a series of bullet points.

I would like to point out a error in one of the statements you have written, reactors have been decommisioned. I know that a training reactor which belonged to the UK's Royal Navy which was at Greenwich near the Thames has been totally dismantled and removed. While it is a small reactor it does make the statement that "No reactor has ever been decommisioned" a false statement which is not true.

While borosilicate glass might (or might not) be the best matrix for the Fukushima waste I know that it will be an expensive job to decommision the Fukushima site and clean it up. However it is not likely to be an impossible task, the idea of filling a defueled disused reactor with cement is not a totally bad idea. It would fix many of the radioisotopes inside the reactor thus reducing the spread of contamination.


_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity :alien: I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man !

Diagnosed under the DSM5 rules with autism spectrum disorder, under DSM4 psychologist said would have been AS (299.80) but I suspect that I am somewhere between 299.80 and 299.00 (Autism) under DSM4.


Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

26 Jan 2014, 2:03 pm

OK, one down and the rest to go. Is the ground now safe for children to play?
Dismantled and removed means placed somewhere else to be a long term problem.
The US has cut the reactor section out of subs, and moved them to Hanford.

Recovering the high level waste at Fukushima takes technology we do not have. Nothing is impossible, just very expensive.

Filling with cement, decomission in place, is being used with underground gas tanks. Above ground, after fifty years of use, the land is gone for hundreds of years, and even when the cement decays, it will not be clean ground. Chernoble was buried in place, but the core stopped and became solid in the basement, and is not going in the groundwater and the ocean.

Yep I write a scattered mess, but it comes down to not having a plan of disposal for all of the grades of radioactive waste produced. The stuff has been piling up for seventy years, and the paperwork has lost a lot.

Being created for the Top Secret Holy Bomb, covers up the problem. I see it as what to do with the bomb production waste. Atoms for Peace has its downsides.

We are now faced with one of the worst case issues. but it will not be the last. it is at least somewhat confined. An attack on a spent fuel pool could be much worse.

The defense against fallout, stay inside, tape up the cracks around doors and windows, stay inside for three hundred years.

Clearing farmland, scrape off the top six inches of soil, dispose of it.

Disposing of the waste as produced seems a missing plan.

They are building a field of holding tanks, but did not build one to make sure they could cool the reactor by gravity.

One man powered valve would have prevented this.

Run away and deny everything is not much of a plan.



Woodpecker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,625
Location: Europe

26 Jan 2014, 4:48 pm

Inventor wrote:
OK, one down and the rest to go. Is the ground now safe for children to play?
Dismantled and removed means placed somewhere else to be a long term problem.
The US has cut the reactor section out of subs, and moved them to Hanford.


I still can not follow you, are you asking if the land where the navy's training reactor is clean. I would say it is likely to be clean and suitable for any use.

Inventor wrote:
Recovering the high level waste at Fukushima takes technology we do not have. Nothing is impossible, just very expensive.

Filling with cement, decomission in place, is being used with underground gas tanks. Above ground, after fifty years of use, the land is gone for hundreds of years, and even when the cement decays, it will not be clean ground. Chernoble was buried in place, but the core stopped and became solid in the basement, and is not going in the groundwater and the ocean.


I think that worse things have been recovered already from some sites, a good quaility cement will last for longer than it takes for the cesium to decay away. Also it can maintain an alkaline state for 1000s of years. Most metals are less mobile when the pH is high, thus it is a good idea to use a cement.

Inventor wrote:
Yep I write a scattered mess, but it comes down to not having a plan of disposal for all of the grades of radioactive waste produced. The stuff has been piling up for seventy years, and the paperwork has lost a lot.

Being created for the Top Secret Holy Bomb, covers up the problem. I see it as what to do with the bomb production waste. Atoms for Peace has its downsides.

We are now faced with one of the worst case issues. but it will not be the last. it is at least somewhat confined. An attack on a spent fuel pool could be much worse.

The defense against fallout, stay inside, tape up the cracks around doors and windows, stay inside for three hundred years.


That is a bit of an overreaction and an underreaction in the same sentance. If fallout arrives near your home it is vital to add as much gamma shielding around where you are sheltering. A classic is to put a strong table in a corner (load bearing internal walls are best) and then to pile earth and heavy household objects around the table and on top of it. You then shelter under the table. Another classic is to dig a trench, park your car on top and fill the car with sacks of earth.

Taping up the cracks in the wall is not a important thing when compared with stacking concrete blocks around the part of the basement which is above the ground, or using shielding materials in the basement. I suspect that in a film it looks less sexy to be using a spade to fill a sack with earth than it does to be taping things up.

On the otherhand after a bomb detonation you would only need to shelter inside for two weeks even in a heavy fallout area before you can leave the shelter for a short time each day (to get food / water).

Inventor wrote:
Clearing farmland, scrape off the top six inches of soil, dispose of it.

Disposing of the waste as produced seems a missing plan.

They are building a field of holding tanks, but did not build one to make sure they could cool the reactor by gravity.

One man powered valve would have prevented this.

Run away and deny everything is not much of a plan.


For farm land what you do to clean it up depends on what has happened.


_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity :alien: I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man !

Diagnosed under the DSM5 rules with autism spectrum disorder, under DSM4 psychologist said would have been AS (299.80) but I suspect that I am somewhere between 299.80 and 299.00 (Autism) under DSM4.