Response to RobertEarl (Reply #12)
Thu Apr 19, 2012, 12:07 PM
FBaggins (12,314 posts)
15. And yet more errors.
Last edited Thu Apr 19, 2012, 12:34 PM - Edit history (1)
1 is fine... 2 leaves off the actual damage caused (and there was an explosion), but isn't a big deal...
3... Huge explosion with dark colors in the clouds leading one to believe that the actual core itself exploded.
Leading one to believe? You don't by any chance thing that the fact that the RPV is still there and not, in fact, exploded makes that a pretty silly idea? I mean come on... some nuts online tried to sell this line over a year ago. When it actually was "too dangerous to approach" so they couldn't be as easily proven wrong... but it's been clearly wrong for quite some time now. Arnie's "prompt criticality" BS was ridiculous at the time... but now there's no doubt.
4... Core was empty. Fuel pool contained fresh spent fuel and building melted because of fires and excess heat.
Look... if you don't want to bother to pay attention, that's fine. But what makes you think you can just make stuff up and nobody will notice? The building never "melted". There was an explosion there on 3/15/11. Since there was no fuel in the core people (including many of us here) wondered where the hydrogen could have come from and speculation began around the possibility that it was from the SFP (and that was one of the reasons that pumping operations focused on that unit at the time). That speculation ended two weeks later when they got a chance to actually look into the pool. From that point on there was no doubt... yet over a year later you're making up nonsense about melting the building??? There are dozens of videos available for you to look up from inside that pool. There's absolutely no chance that there was an explosion in there. Zero.
Unit 3&4 shared a venting system. Hydrogen from unit 3 vented into parts of unit 4 and eventually exploded.
Plutonium from core #3 has been found spread around the world.
Nope. There's that "imagine" again. Plutonium doesn't come with labels of origin and has a very long half-life. The only way that you could possibly identify plutonium from Fukushima is to find it somewhere in greater concentrations than what already existed pre-fukushima. There is nowhere (off of the reactor site) where plutonium has been discovered in levels above what was already there from nuclear weapons (& their testing). On edit - you could tell the "age" of the plutonium to some extent by measuring the ingrowth of daughter elements. So that part is a little wrong. But the foundational point remains.
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
And yet more errors.
Please login to view edit histories.