This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Following Core Meltdown, Reactor One At Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Explodes - Video
Following a report earlier that the Uranium at the Fukushima Power Plant may have melted, we sadly bring you this video of the explosion at Reactor one of the nuclear site.
A before and after picture, showing the loss of Reactor 1
From BBC:
There has been an explosion at a Japanese nuclear power plant that was hit by Friday's devastating earthquake.
Pictures show a blast at the Fukushima plant and initial reports say several workers were injured.
Nuclear expert, Malcolm Grimston told the BBC that nuclear materials may have been able to escape .
And as predicted by Zero Hedge first yesterday, the power plant has just announced that there is indeed a meltdown at the plant.
The core at Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant's No. 1 reactor may be partially melting, the nuclear safety agency said Saturday.
Radioactive substance cesium was detected around the reactor, it said.
Alas, as many may be affected by fallout, we present the wind data for Asia for Saturday:
»
- 32787 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
This isn't going to be good for uranium stocks.
This isn't going to be good for a lot of things. A lot of nightmares coming true right about now.
Look at the bright side. This will be good for the economy. Sing along...
(countryish song, bum, buh-bum, buh-bum)....
Verse:
We're trying to inflate, it's another retake
The Bernake's in a corner, while (sentor) Paul's enraged
The QE they say, it's a gotta go
Can't wait for the next thing to blow
Chorus:
They say we're in a fix...
Just a runnin' out of tricks
Oh lord, what to do?
Please give us all a clue
(pause, deep country voice)
Try HAARP -- it's a better tool...
bum, buh-bum, buh-bum
On the other hand, it could be very good for uranium stocks if they actually get through all this without any significant problems. Hard to tell right now what is actually going on, Vs media hype. Something blew up here, but some reports say it was an exterior shell. Who knows what's true?
If things do get really ugly here, I'll probably BTFD on uranium stocks. Short of an energy revolution we're probably going to be desperate for power at some point sooner or later.
There is speculation that the explosion was not a steam explosion of the vessel, but rather a hydrogen gas explosion in the containment building, indicating the vessel may still be intact.
"The nuclear reactor is surrounded by a steel reactor container, which is then surrounded by a concrete building," Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said.
"The concrete building collapsed. We found out that the reactor container inside didn't explode."
...
Edano said due to the falling level of cooling water, hydrogen was generated and that leaked to the space between the building and the container and the explosion happened when the hydrogen mixed with oxygen there.
http://www.forexyard.com/en/news/Japan-to-fill-leaking-nuke-reactor-with-sea-water-2011-03-12T123704Z
thanks for the info.
That is the most "expressive" collapse I have ever seen, and I have seen many C4/semtex "collapses".
Watching Canadian news - huge disinfo and we are usually pretty good at news. In trouble - powers that be be are covering up (and to what degree).
Pretty sure reports will soon surface here that US government operatives (and likely GWB & Cheney in particular) were behind the cause of the explosion.
We would never do HAARP their Nip asses, would we Bobby?
I heard it was a Jap suicide cult jumping off their chairs all at the same time with rising sun bandanas around their foreheads, yelling banzaiiiiiii!
Californians have tried it before, as did Lex Luthor, but back then they didn't have GPS available to synch up their jumps precisely enough. The Mayans predicted the perfection of timekeeping technology ending the world in 2012, and this is how it goes down.
GWB and Cheney are certainly suspect-being the world's biggest terrorists. If it were a nuclear reactor in the U.S. or one of our occupied countries, we would be safe to assume that halliburton may be behind it.
Right. The earthquake was a cover for their real motive of sabotaging a particular reactor in Japan built forty years ago. They picked that one out like the crazy phonebook sniper in The Jerk you know, picking out one reactor at random that had to die, and setting off a giant earthquake to cover for their controlled destruction of the building. That's how smart they are, and how evil they are. Bwahahahahahahaaaa
LOL...careful T...Russian News has footage of "an object" protruding from the front of the tsunami wave as it came ashore...also a UFO sighting over it.
Should be right up GW's alley ;-)
nah, it was the aliens, or al quida...or maybe <gasp> it was alien al quida.
Yahoo! front page desperately spinning this.
A building filled with explosive gas will explode radially, the force of the explosion going in all directions.
If you examine the video footage you eill see an explosive jet shoot straight up where it appears to form a "lens." This if followed by a debris cloud as the cladding separates from the structural framework.
I interpret the jet and lens effect as being due to the top cover of the containment vessel having separated from the walls of the containment and having gone straight up. This suggests the core is open to the atmosphere and lacks cooling.
I see what you're saying. I thought the lens was odd as well, but if what they say is true, it is possible it was caused by the building structure itself (weak spots in the roof). I hope this is not another Chernobyl, but it sure does look like one.
That looked like a powerful shock wave to me, straight up...doesn't look good at all.
Chernobyl burned, people, because the core was mainly graphite, i.e. pure carbon. They couldn't make this worse than Chernobyl if they were trying to make it worse.
That looked like a shock wave to me. It takes significant over-pressure to do something like that.
TOKYO, March 12 (Xinhua) -- The Japanese government confirmed Saturday that while an explosion did occur at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant earlier in the day, the blast did not happen at the location of its No. 1 reactor.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said at an emergency press conference convened in Tokyo that owner and operator of the nuclear facility, Tokyo Electric Power Co., has confirmed that the steel container housing the reactor is intact.
Edano said that the blast, which occurred at 3:36 p.m. local time (0636 GMT), destroyed the roof and the walls of the reactor's outer container.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-03/12/c_13775295.htm
"A building filled with explosive gas will explode radially, the force of the explosion going in all directions."
OR, like all buidlings designed to contain possible explosions in proximity to workers, the roof was designed to blow off more easily than the sides of the structure which is what I suspect is the case here. It's just that the H2/O2 explosion in this case was much bigger than the small one it was designed to handle without having the walls blow off, too.
And the H2O dissociation into H2/O2 indicates that the core is melting or has melted since it takes temps of 2780 F and up to do that.
Dissociation seems likely.
That puff out the top he noted actually looks like a shockwave.
Ionizing radiation can easily split a water molecule too.
I extracted all the images from the zoomed RT video of the explosion. It looks like there is a yellowish front preceeding the shockwave. This is bizzarre because if it was a hydrogen fire, it should be very light blue, if even visible. I don't know what to think of that.
This is why I have been saying that we are being pumped full of fear, and that most of what we are hearing is BS. These reactor's are not as fragile as what the media would have you believe. They are considered the most over engineered systems in the world for a reason. The level of safety and control they have rival's the economic control systems in the US.
Apparently, this particular reactor is a GE design. So expect a rally if the situation turn's out to be better than what was stated.
What, a rally in GE stock? Cool.
Watch for a GE rally on monday if there is no nuclear catastrophe. Or, expect a GE rally on monday if there is a nuclear catastrophe. I love this market.
So GE's check cleared? Spend it wisely.
"Apparently, this particular reactor is a GE design. So expect a rally if the situation turn's out to be better than what was stated."
Anti-social personality disorder or what one used to call a psychopath. We may have and I stress may have just lost a freaking reactor core and the thing that goes through your polluted little mind is GE stock? Sick puppy.
Could not have said any better. Thanks. Some people think life is all about stocks/money-money money (fuck you all)... People are actually dying and will die.
They are behaving like a Gangster Banksters. Pretend you're listening in on a conference call with Lloyd and Jaime who are congratulating Jeffrey Immelt for a job well done.
Every living human will die. Get over it.
Whatever you've been saying it hasn't been long considering you've been registered on ZH for 2 weeks and commenting for 4 days. Good luck with that.
People weren't listening at his last venue, so he comes here hoping for a more sympathetic audience. Ooops.
No shit, I'm starting to get the feeling we're being loaded up with sockpuppets here.
+1 pets.com sockdog
I have been awfully grateful for the last 36 hours for all th ex-nuke plant workers, ex-miitary nuke experts, and nuclear engineers who hang out here.
why would the building explode and the container remain intact? it's the container that holds the explosive potential here or no?
i suspect the government is purposely understating things...
A 'nuclear' explosion (aka mushroom clouds) is a difficult thing to achieve. Impossible in fact in a functioning reactor. If the reactor core 'melts down' you may get a chunk of material large enough to explode but it will not be in the configuration to explode.
There is a lot of other material that could possibly explode resulting in an 'explosion at a nuclear facility' ( like Chernobyl ).
An hydrogen explosion is very likely and reasonable.
Hydrogen.
As I recall, one of the problems encountered at TMI was that hydrogen built up in the containment dome. The source was apparently a chemical reaction between overheated metal plumbing and remaining cooling water. At TMI they managed to vent the hydrogen, but obviously Fukushima did not.
If the core temperature can not be contained, Fukushima is fukued.
should have replaced
the oxyegen
with nitrogen...
We are all living beyond our means. We only have this one rock we share together. What will it take to clue us in?
I am so sorry. I am going to spend some time today thinking about how to downsize my life more. There is nothing else to do.
I can recommend a wonderful Interior Designer. New curtains always helps.
Lead cladding with faux satin is the latest trend in window coverings. A small Godzilla offering shrine is also tres chic.
+1000 It works for my wife. :))))
What do you mean what will it take to clue us in? There are two choices, you either bomb people into submission or you let things naturally take their course. Until we are willing to bomb other countries into submission for waste/pollution practices, our earth will continue to be polluted (and doing the same to ourselves of course). This is what the greenies don't understand about their views... they necessarily require armed conflict to come to fruition, save a universal volunteering of inefficiency.
What's going to make us snap out of it? Evolving past the human condition...
Agreed.
Every time a country experiences an accidental radiation leak we should nuke them back into the stone age.
That will show them what "higher evolution" is all about.
Completely irrelevant and that whiffing noise was my post going over your head... it was a responsive post... see the post I was responding to in order to find context.
Macho, it's not us really. Not even US. It's cycles, large cycles, too long for us to feel, perhaps even remember.
We are actors as much as we are spectators to the game.
Nothing will change us. Only we can change us.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com/2011/03/12/fukushima-blessed-island-trinity-unleashed/
Your point is valid, but I think there's still room for differentiation between "leading" by example and coercing with fear.
MachoMan, you are absolutely correct. National sovereignty yields the global advancement of "progressive" ideals (compelled on others, whether founded or not) impractical, especially on a global scale without a global military. The second we sign some kind of envivornmental treaty with China or any other independent poor nation, guess what- they will use it as an economic advantage over us by not complying with it. The UN is a failure on inception for the same reason. Some people espouse one global government & currency? Give me a break- even if that conspiracy does exist- that can't even be accomplished in Western Europe, much less the world. The sooner Americans come to the understanding, let's not spend the money policing the world, lets not subsidize anything, lets protect our borders, our water & our natural farmland, and let's accomplish advancement of global standards of living by intellectually producing affordable market tools to do so- the better we all will be.
Isolatonism has not ever been the strong suit of the U. S.
Don't expect miracles in this area.
Rocky, the opposite of intervenionism is noninterventionism. The US does not have to be isolated to the world. We're pretty good humanitarians- thanks to our wealth & ability to mobilze it, we should keep it at that. Speaking of that, now that a no-fly zone and inevitable occupation of Libya are on the table... do the people who want to do this, for good reason I might add- to protect innocent life- realize that if the USA does this, it will actually decrease our national security? Want another 9/11? Start bombing and occupying more countries in the Middle East. Start picking more dictators.
We are witnessing a non-violent deposition of repression throughout the world. the more these dictators bomb their people, the more valuable liberty becomes. arming both sides of a conflict will only produce more bloodshed and shift this into a political fight of strength rather than a fight for the indivudual by individuals.
The revolts in these arab countries cannot result in any sort of recognizable liberation on their own. These countries are infected by Islam, which means "submission" and codifies every godamned aspect of life, commerce, and government along seventh century standards. Secular dictatorships are better than that. Something like the (now failing) Ataturk approach could result in a modicum of prosperous liberty and non-craziness. Or, a good century or so of occupation by an advanced western country could do it, if we cared to bother. The British stayed in India for two centuries, and now they are the world's biggest democracy. They skipped occupying these arab shitholes, so they remain extra shitty.
Some animals need coercitive religions.
I reject those two choices as the only choices. Over half the population is comprised of women. I'm not sure they'd see a repressive secular dictatorship or a radical islimist regime as the only two options, either.
Even if we assumed your two choices are correct, and the question is American involvement, is supporting secular regimes at the cost of $trillions and national security risk worth the difference of accepting an islimist region and maybe paying a little more for gas (I actually think we'd be paying less)? The answer is clearly no, not that it is a choice really given our economic situation.
"My 14th century standards are morally superior to your 7th century standards." Whatever.
As long as candidates for POTUS in the US (or their equivalents) need to pander to the brainwashed masses of the Judeo-Christian ideal of the West, you'll remain a prisoner in a slightly less stinky cage.
No it doesn't.
Just make people poor.
My wife and I have been talking seriously about going off the grid here, mostly because it would enforce a lot more austerity. I wonder if we would then be the only urban household in the US not tied to the electrical grid? We already have a tiny footprint in the world (no travel, no buying sprees, no new cars, shop at thrift stores, I'm remodeling the house myself) and have raised our kids to be frugal. Everyone is happy with all that. But there is always more.
The human race is headed back to a solar-based existence. Life always came from the sun, to that life we must return. I'll probably buy a 3Kw solar kit this summer to ease the transition, a small battery array for nighttime lighting, and then pull the electric meter. Good bye to that era!
Like it or not, it's headed our way too. Embrace the whirlwind ...
++++.
Nope. There are hundreds if not thousands already (not mine, but many).
I admire your commitment (and no, I don't mean the $18k for the PV array).
Can you get by on 80kWh/month?
FauxNews is saying roof collapsed. If that is the case, we need to start dropping roofs on Al Queda, daffy, the whole MENA and anyone else who won't accept the dollar or who is trying to sell oil for other currencies.
Exactly, this has the distinctive stench of Mossad all over it.
Fuk -u -shima.... Think people.
congrats, you have the first "mossad did it" post with regards to the current disaster.
ps- i hope you get luekemia.
fuk - u - judy.
Some of the tsunami clips they now show on Sky News are horrifying. Much worse than the 2004 clips I saw.
I watched the one where the flow destroyed the town and you can see cars in the background on the road. My God, cars stopped on the road and I'm in my chair watching in horror yelling at them "GET OUT OF THERE!". I couldn't believe what I was watching... I felt absolutely awful. That flow was moving incredibly fast; as fast as the cars were traveling. It was just unreal.
I felt the same way. While you would think that flight would be the usual reaction to the fear of seeing a wall of water and debris coming straight at you, for others they became frozen in the on coming headlights.
I saw one car back up a little, then go forward a little, then just stop on the road. Forward and backward was parallel to the coming tsunami and wouldn't help. Too late the driver realized s/he could try to get off the road and drive into the open field and away from the oncoming rush.
We are trained to see our world a certain way. Some drivers only saw the option of driving their cars on the road and never had a chance. I read the same reaction being discussed in airplane accidents where many survive the actual crash, but died in the smoke and flames. The vast majority stand up in the aisle and wait to exit. The ones in back who survive climb over seats and other people to get out.
The vast majority of us can't see our conditioning because we are.......conditioned.
This video shows the power behind the Tsunami, stunning. The camera man cut away before the wave swallow several cars who were obviously trying to escape.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjorLr5MUvc
We watched the same video. I thought that car did a back up and go deal, but wasn't sure. Either way, I felt like the 1 person in the horror moving screaming "DON'T OPEN THAT DOOR". I still can't get the scene out of my head.
Obviously anything that happens in Japan would get massively photographed and videoed.
I'm wondering if they used the bell curve distribution to calculate the probability of an accident and decided that this was a 6 sigma event, so go ahead and build it. Whoops, wrong probability distribution! Probably got Moody's or Fitch to calculate the odds.
With the historical data being so plentiful (not), The data significance must have been on par with the chance of a derivative meltdown. This creates a conundrum: Go with the insufficient data to reach a far from bullit proof safety option, or have the world live in more poverty because of the high cost of energy. The derivatives were not necessary, while nuclear facilities probably are.
Essentially we believe what we wish to believe and then arrange the scientific, economic and social reasoning and justification to support the desired conclusion. I've read some of the "impact" studies for nuclear plants in the USA when they were being planned in the early 70's. These types of events were always concluded to be so remote that it was an "acceptable" risk. Acceptable that is until it happens.
My heart goes out to the average citizen in Japan, particualry those in southern Japan where the effects of the earthquake were relatively minor, who are now beginning to wake up to an extremely unfamiliar world. They won't be able to point to physical destruction to explain the suddenly frightening world. The rest of the world's turn is just around the corner.
And 'experts' wonder why people are a bit leery of nuclear power.
Oooh, I got junked.
Probably by an 'expert'.
Why do people care about getting junked? Makes no difference to me I can still see your posts.
According to CNN it was just a hydrogen explosion...no need to worry.
Meltdown = Uranium melting = Zirconium Dioxide creation = Hydrogen gas liberation = EXPLOSION.
This is likely the definitive sign that core is melting!
Here's another thought . . . is there anyone willing to get close enough to see what the status is? Any volunteers . . . ? That film was taken from quite some distance.
I would put forward that no one knows yet.
If no one is willing to get close, how do we fix it?
'...No need to worry'?!?
Are you some kind of shill or a simple polyanna? Nuke plants exploding is not a no-worry scenario! It means they do NOT have the situation under control. A nuke plant that is not under control is definitely cause for worry. Read up on Chernobyl and you'll see the outcome of an exploding nuke plant. And the Japanese nuke plants are much more powerful than Chernobyl, thus a similar outcome would be MUCH worse.
Wouldn't a full meltdown also imperil the reactors right next door? Once "free" is their enough radiant heat to threaten the neighbors?
Any nukes on here? Nothing over at TOD ...
Cooter
Chernobyl burned. This is getting old, but here goes again: That reactor was made of graphite, i.e. pure carbon, which burns really well in contact with atmospheric oxygen, of which plenty was available, because the reactor had no secondary containment at all. The reactor we are talking about here is not constructed of materials that are easily and energetically flammable.
There goes Alternative Energy, I hope the world does not institute a nuclear moratorium for the next few decades
Nuclear moratorium? As peak oil strikes? That will go down real well. More likely is a bunch of uneducated greens will be slaughtered as they protest human life.
When was the last time we built a nuke plant in the States? According to Google it was 1996. Sure looks like a moratorium to me.
But we are building lots of coal plants. What does that tell you?
It tells us that we prefer slow radiation release from radioactive material in coal to fast radiation release in a meltdown scenario.
CW
+100000000
Of course they will under play the event, be lax in evacuations in the fallout zones, and governments attempts to cover up the initial severity of the issue will eventually cause more deaths and harm than necessary. Just like with the GOM, bury the truth as fast as possible.
Shanky,
This is my concern as well. Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see. BTW, love the new domain and blog.
Well you better believe this one:
"Lady Gaga Creates Prayer Bracelet to Benefit Disaster Relief in Japan"
To cut costs it was made in China out of depleted Uranium.
http://www.popeater.com/2011/03/12/lady-gaga-designs-japan-tsunami-brace...
Fallout Map: link to img847.imageshack.us
10 days to reach the USA. Japan says meltdown possible at nuclear plant
Chernobyl map for morans:
https://qed.princeton.edu/getfile.php?f=Radioactive_fall-out_?from_the_C...
Stay away from 4chan. That image is a complete fabrication. 5000 rads for about 10,000sqm?! bahaha.. I'd venture to say there wasn't even 5000r/hr in the rubble of Chernobyl on the day it blew.
[link to qed.princeton.edu]
That explains the revolutions in MENA more than anything. What does each dot stand for? Without a legend it's short on usable info.
Jet Stream Analyses
squall.sfsu.edu
Animated jet-stream map:
www.stormsurfing.com
"Morans" huh ? :)
Found a picture of our jingoistic friend: http://www.obscureprotest.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/get_a_brain_mor...
Its a wonkette thing...
I passed it on to Terry and his gang. He says "Thanks."
If you do a search for "Australian Radiation Services" - you'll get no hits... the 'map' is a hoax.
Fallout Map: link to img847.imageshack.us
I didn't try yet, but was wondering. The jet stream moves much faster than the map shows.
Search harder.
http://www.australian-radiation-services.com.au/index.php?page=20
Still think the map is suspect, even though the Aussie place is legit. Photoshop of their logo on a fake map?
You mean no hits showing that map on their website.
Produced by the Australian Radiation Services with a big fat logo, but no mention at all on their website?
Very suspect.
that link led to an attack on my machine.... not safe computing....
congratulations on redefining fail.
I thought these places were safe these days?
Why didn't the have a petrol generator, a pump, and a piece of pipe ready to dangle into the sea, or am I being a bit simplistic.
Yes, this is why these things can't happen. We're just SOOOO much smarter than those dumb Russkies.
OUR engineers have considered EVERY contingency. It could never happen here!
Million to one chances happen nine times out of ten
- Terry Pratchett
They did, actually diesel not petrol. The tsunami destroyed it.
Something doesn't sound right about this. Japanese engineering skills are superb. They're usually right on top of things like this.
Getting emergency electrical power to run pumps should have been doable.
It appears now there was more serious structural damage from the quake. Perhaps major piping damage inside the containment building where 1000x radiation level prevented people getting in there and doing repairs.
Don't forget that this was the largest earthquake in Japan's history - 8000 times more powerful than the one in Christchurch, New Zealand. Just wait until the monetary earthquake that has been building ever since December 23rd, 1913 - now THAT will be something to write home about.
+1
The problem appears to be the tsunami shoving 37 trillion gallons of water and debris into all that "safety" equipment.
200 backup generators full of debris and ocean salt water does them zero good.
The facility design is completely absurd, and any honest, rational non-scientist could have figured that out. Japan has big earthquakes, Japan has major tsunamis now and then. Yet they built this facility (and apparently most of their nuclear power facilities) literally on the coast or actually extending out into the water.
When government and large corporations issue reports authored by literally bought-and-paid-for scientists, those reports are pure 100% rationalizations. And not just in the USSA, either.
They should have had their risk analysis performed by Moody's or Fitch.
+10
Agree. Even the containment buildings could have flooded with all that water. How do we even know the control room was still functional? The forces and scale boggles the mind.
Cooter
-
Superb? They built the reactors on a freaking beach... How's that for superb...
"How's that for superb"
He's in the glass business.
And at the concurrence of THREE fault lines...
Hmmm...
Oh well, while I'm at it..
1. Something wonky here..Look at pictures..
'Containment' buildings are round, with domed roofs, with thick concrete walls..(to 'contain' something..like pressure differential..) not cross braced steel construction with cladding..
And yes the book, from years ago, re: the event at Chernobyl is good, informative reading..
I'm sure one could dig up pix of many nuke projects to validate the above..
IF they hadn't already worked at a few, as I have..
And, yes re: Chernobyl, first response of home gov't was denial of any problem..(Matter of record..) Lot of folks gave their lives to 'contain' that mess..
This thing was built in the 70's.
That huge reactor building just vaporized like a little toy.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/art-levine/report-explosion-at-nucle_b_834765.html
0:45 to 0:50 shows a close-up; notice the shock waves.
I saw zero flames, so probably there was not hydrogen gas exploding or any other flammable exploding.
What it looked like was somehow a large quantity of water and the superhot fuel came in contact, and the water vaporized instantly, which expanded at a hypersonic rate and literally vaporized that entire huge building in a tiny fraction of a second.
Now, that could have been the fuel burning through the vessel. But it is a bit strange that they have showed no additional activity in that location (unless they've suppressed everything after that explosion).
Assuming the vessel is still in tact, that explosion was huge, and that means the cooling tubes that go in-to and out-of the vessel are now probably just open holes.
That means no system exists to control anything. If that's true, then presumably the next step is for the super-hot fuel and/or fuel by-products to burn right through the bottom of the vessel.
Once the fuel hits water in the building below the vessel or the water table 10 or 20 meters below ground, there will be a massive explosion of steam and radiative particles into the air.
Not good.
They say on Sky News that they consider drowning the reactor in sea water/borium, rendering it useless forever. Expensive decisions like this aren't considered unless the situation is seriously bad, surely.
If the meltdown already happened, it is too late for that.
If the meltdown did not happen, and the vessel is still somewhat intact (albeit with 2+ huge holes where the connections for intake and output of coolant used to be), then that is one tricky prospect logistically. I don't know enough to say it is impossible, but I sure don't see how they'd be able to do that before the super-heated fuel melts through the vessel, especially in the environment that must exist there now.
Expensive? They don't know what expensive means. But we might all know fairly soon if events continue as they have been.
I saw zero flames, so probably there was not hydrogen gas exploding or any other flammable exploding.
Agree. Had to be a steam explosion.
My guess reactor vessel and containment structure blown to bits, uranium everywhere, massive radiation release.
I don't believe you will see flames when hydrogen burns, particularly from that distance and inside the building.
you can not see hydrogen burning
Clearly you've never watched a Saturn V rocket take off.
Because the fuel for those rockets is pure hydrogen and pure oxygen. But just take a look at the tail end of one of those rockets when they take off. You see nothing? Wow!
I've burned hydrogen before, in chemistry lab. And I can assure you, I certainly did see flames!
Maybe if you burn hydrogen very, very slowly in tiny little quantities you might be correct. But that certainly was not a teenie, tiny explosion we saw.
SaturnV first stage was RP-1/LOX, which is basically kerosene. Not sure what made you think its hydrogen. Perhaps you are referring to the 3rd stage? LH2/O2 there.
I think it is high time to make a reliability index for ZH commentary. So many folks may rely on the "factual" nature of these comments, when the person making the comment or the rejoinder is talking out their ass.
In many cases the article itself is severely challenged and can easily be dismantled as a crock.
Does that mean that the author is welcome to contribute more crap to ZH? It certainly seems that way from the continued contributions of non-factual crap that is offered.
I think ZH needs peer review, but I don't see how we can make that happen, any suggestions?
ZH does have a peer review, it's called the reply button... and, it helps when you actually say who is the poster talking out his/her ass. And, at least conceptually, it's what the junk button is designed to help.
What I would like is the ability to toggle certain parties off (a little +/- icon next to the avatar) so that when I get *my* page these posters are there but "collapsed" by default. My choices would never impact another community member. That way I don't have to listen to HarryWanger or Math Man or some of the other tools that camp the first post into oblivion. I often find myself scrolling down through the page trying to escape those threads. Typically its just a couple retards going in circles with their hands on each others meat. If this were the case, and a respectable community member has a compelling response to something I don't see, I could just expand up the chain to learn more.
ZH has a wonderful community of people who share unique opinions and insights, contrary or not. Sometimes the trolls are just too much work to sift through.
Simply stated, it's a time management thing.
Cooter
<aside>If my "negative toggles" were saved on the server with my profile, this list could be loaded once as a cached resource and used by a local JavaScript to toggle stuff on the client. This could be implemented at almost zero cost in terms of server CPU and bandwidth.</aside>
I'd vote for that.
+1
We need a junk button for the original post.
And for the record, I'm not an expert on anything.
Slash (Slashdot.org) has a robust peer moderation system. I think zerohedge.com is run on Drupal, and Drupal has at least one comment moderation module: http://drupal.org/project/comment_moderation, but I don't know if it incorporates peer moderation.
You asked.
When I signed up for ZeroHedge, I donated some money and asked for a user ignore feature. Since that time, not only have annoying posts increased, but the quality of the content has declined. I think that authors and posters have the responsibility to find and correct their own errors. These days, if something is annoying, or if I need to take pause to understand poor writing, or if I find that the facts are incorrect or misrepresented, I move on to another site. Why bother to use an inconsequential junking feature?
One of the nice things about Slashdot's moderation system is that users are free to post any crap they want. However, if readers want to filter the crap, they can. It's not a perfect system, but it's the best I've seen.
Actually, I sort of enjoy how the community self-polices, in the sense that an errant poster may be shown to be a fool by a following comment citing credible sources, after which the errant poster's reputation becomes nil.
On the other hand, you can be a political or scientific troglodyte and still have something interesting to add to the discussion on PMs.
I'm sure you've never mis-remembered anything, right?
I did mis-remember.
However, I just watched a launch of the Delta IV with 2 (??? or 3 ???) hydrogen-oxygen engines, and it had plenty of flames spewing out too... though perhaps somewhat less than the Saturn V rockets.
So my point about burning hydrogen + oxygen is correct... and is even more correct (slightly) when hydrogen and atmosphere burn, since the atmosphere contains other "junk" (particulates, pollutants, etc).
I also believe in first-hand observation, and I have burned pure hydrogen. That's the best proof of all for me.
It is not a problem to mis-remember, and it is healthy to correct and come to a more solidly based conclusion as a result. But how much of the material on ZH is mis-remembering? How many folks have been professionally trained to "know what they are talking about?"
/lol/
"So my point about burning hydrogen + oxygen is correct... and is even more correct (slightly) when hydrogen and atmosphere burn, since the atmosphere contains other "junk" (particulates, pollutants, etc)."
The difference in the presence of atmosphere is slight, but important as you note. The major emission is still going to be dominated by the Fuel (H2) in the case of the Hindenberg and the Fuel / Oxidizer in the case of the Delta Heavy. In the case of the D-H the "only" reaction (emission in the red that is visible) is H2/O2 combustion.
- come on guys, the Space Shuttle has hydrogen/oxygen main engines, with two solid rocket boosters strapped on each side - every notice that big orange liquid hydrogen/oxygen tank the shuttle rides piggy back on?
Go back and review a few shuttle launches.
Right, and thanks. It bothers me too when people allow themselves to totally ignore observation in favor of some theoretical idea they have.
If what caused that MASSIVE reactor building to explode in a fraction of a second was indeed hydrogen and [oxygen in the] atmosphere, I'd like to know why we can barely see the upward thrusting shock wave without any signs of flame or red or anything whatsoever from either the hydrogen burning or anything else in that building burning that must have been vaporized in a flammable type explosion.
Part of the point is, that was a very fast, very powerful explosion, not unlike the power of those booster rockets (though the rockets keep burning for a lot longer, of course). Why the difference?
Also, we should ask the nuclear facility experts in the crowd, "Why in freaking hell would any nuclear reactor building have large quantities of hydrogen?". That seems incredibly stupid to me, not to mention the fact that I can't even imagine why they want or need hydrogen. And if they do have hydrogen there, is it in gaseous form? If so, there wouldn't be enough to vaporize that building so visciously. And if they keep large quantities of liquid hydrogen in such a facility, they must be completely and totally out of their freaking minds!
- Good points honestann, yes it was definitely a powerful explosion