Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: justa-hairyape
Do you have pictures of that? Is it fact or speculation? The data I have seen indicates that the most likely exit points from the PV are the instrument tube penetrations, which are not terribly large in size, but there are a fair number of them. The heat load calculation that was done at both NRC and INL indicates that if the entire core mass ended up in the containment sump the concrete degradation would be on the order of a few inches out of the six feet of thickness of the containment structure. There is additional concrete below the containment in the form of the basemat and concrete embedment. Based on the drawings I have from GE, this added thickness seems to be about 18 feet. It forms the foundation of the entire building, so it is quite a thick slab. These are calculations, not actual measurements since no one has been in there.

Aftershocks in a region that experienced a major seismic event are not uncommon. What was the result of that 4.2 other than the camera failure? I have seen nothing on the NEI or IAEA news feeds. If its limited to a camera failure, I won't worry too much about it.

56 posted on 02/09/2012 8:09:09 AM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: chimera
Have you seen this?

Inside Fukushima I Nuke Plant Reactor 2 Containment Vessel - Longer Version (1/4)
58 posted on 02/09/2012 11:56:45 AM PST by J Aguilar (Fiat Justitia et ruat coelum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson