Massive Quake Hits NE Japan

[Docfeelgood]

If they dump cold water on a hot surface will this not cause a steam explosion?

[germanos]

Can you explain what you mean by this? You fear recirculation or you fear heat rise? Obviously recirculating the stuff in direct contact with the core is ideal, but if it's not possible then why do you believe that external cooling will be insufficient with a damped core?

I read Ogie's post as that they would recirculate seawater in and out of the plant. If it means internal plant recirculation I see no problem.

[Docfeelgood]

Lets say that there will be no meltdowns, how will the material be disposed of after the crises is over?

[KrazyHorse]

I read Ogie's post as that they would recirculate seawater in and out of the plant. If it means internal plant recirculation I see no problem.

Uhhh....what?

It's not "recirculation" if you use it and then dump it in the ocean.

[germanos]

Why does the flow matter?

If the flow of coolant doesn't reach all the hot parts it's not very efficient.

[Docfeelgood]

I read Ogie's post as that they would recirculate seawater in and out of the plant. If it means internal plant recirculation I see no problem.

Would the seawater be contaminated?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The intention is internal recirculated through RHR hx on the cooling side of the RHR hx would be the ultimate heat sink ie ocean

[KrazyHorse]

germanos

I think you're confusing the coolant and the moderation aspect. Unless the neutron flux is so intense that it actually manages to use up the boron nuclei too quickly for flow to replace it (which seems unlikely to say the least) the boron just has to sit there. It is a static problem.

[germanos]

Lets say that there will be no meltdowns, how will the material be disposed of after the crises is over?

They could just leave it there and build a new containment around it. (like [very small font]Chernobyl[/very small font]) Probably the best solution: why move toxic stuff from one place to the other where it would also need a containment? (This happens quite a lot with severe chemical pollution)

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Hot side = reactor contents

Cooling side= ultimate heat sink ocean

No contamination passes through RHR hx tubes

[Docfeelgood]

TY

[germanos]

I think you're confusing the coolant and the moderation aspect. Unless the neutron flux is so intense that it actually manages to use up the boron nuclei too quickly for flow to replace it (which seems unlikely to say the least) the boron just has to sit there. It is a static problem.

Yeah, I hadn't realized the boric acid they add. With the flow required to cool the thing they would run out in minutes I suppose.

[KrazyHorse]

The intention is internal recirculated through RHR hx on the cooling side of the RHR hx would be the ultimate heat sink ie ocean

Right, seawater + boric acid on the internal system brought into thermal contact with seawater which is dumped. The only thing that seawater gets is some tritiated molecules (which you can actually just go ahead and drink)...

[Docfeelgood]

They could just leave it there and build a new containment around it. (like [very small font]Chernobyl[/very small font]) Probably the best solution: why move toxic stuff from one place to the other where it would also need a containment? (This happens quite a lot with severe chemical pollution)

True

[Docfeelgood]

Now, I assume we are talking about one reactor, what about the others?