Showing posts with label disaster. Show all posts
Showing posts with label disaster. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Video: Visualization of How Fukushima Meltdown Could Reach Groundwater

Can anybody translate this? As far as we know, the melted fuel has cooled so that it won't be eating all the way through the concrete into the ground and water table, but the 3D visualization of the meltdown with a man standing gives you a pretty good perspective of what happened as it's fairly certain fuel did melt onto the concrete containment floor



This frame shows presenter showing us what meltdown looked like full-size. Excellent job.


Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Fukushima: Atomic Arnie Goofed - Fuel Racks Unit 4 Were Not Exposed to Air

Fukushima: Arnie Goofed - Fuel Racks Unit 4 Were Not Exposed to Air


In this March 31, 2011 video, Arnie Gunderson who is practically worshipped by the anti-nuclear movement as probably the most credible source (and the tip of an iceberg of considerably less reliable war-on-Israel+west  / conspiracy theorists who are absolute crackpots) clearly goofed when he declares that the big green refueling platform has collapsed into the fuel pool, and that structures nearby are tops of fuel racks that are exposed to the air, leaving them unshielded so that the skyshine effect would scatter gamma rays all over the site. He's still talking about skyshine, but in the event that the pools drain or collapse, which is indeed a remote, but not impossible probability.

Later pictures clearly show the refueling platform was largely intact sitting on top of an intact pool, and cameras showed the fuel racks look pretty much good as new with some debris here and there on top:



from http://www.zerohedge.com/article/skyshine

Skyshine

Here's the newest video by nuclear expert, Arnie Gundersen.  For previous videos, and regular updates, visit Arnie's site: Fairewinds Associates, Inc. 
In the video below, Arnie shows and discusses the problem with the fuel rack in reactor building 4 being exposed to air. You can see in the video, the "boxes," the at top of nuclear fuel racks. Those are supposed to be under 30 feet of water. But they are not, they are in air. So at least the top of the nuclear fuel is exposed to air, perhaps more. The water that is being sprayed into the pool is creating steam, but not filling the pool.
Water is for the purposes of both cooling and shielding. The lack of water means the nuclear fuel is unshielded. Its gamma rays are rising into the sky and bouncing off air molecules through a phenomenon called "skyshine." (That sounds prettier than it is - "scattered radiation of a primary gamma radiation source generated by aerial dispersion.") The gamma rays rain back on the site as background radiation, which is much higher than normal, making work on the refueling pool potentially lethal. In addition, the nuclear fuel is extremely hot and the plutonium inside can become volatile. The fact that the nuclear fuel pool doesn't have water means there might be a clean path for the heavy elements to escape from the building. Arnie would recommend increasing the evacuation zone. - Ilene 

New Images Reveal Nuclear Fuel Rack Exposed to Air

Fairewinds Chief Engineer, Arnie Gundersen, analyzes new video from the Fukushima Daiichi Plant. Gundersen determines that the fuel rack in reactor building 4 is exposed to air. Original Ustream Video: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/13684184 

http://www.fairewinds.com/content/new-images-reveal-nuclear-fuel-rack-exposed-air



Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Fukushima Wreck of Refueling Platform #3 Spotted in Fuel Pool

[Fukushima NukeBlog Index ]

Wreckage of fuel refueling platform in Fukushima Unit 3 spent fuel pool

from this by Ian Goddard who has the most detailed explosion scenario for unit 3. It was thought the explosion might have blown this bus-sized structure into the large holes in the turbine building, but this sure looks like some kind of platform. This photo also appeared in SimplyInfo, but it was thought that this really wasn't the crane at that time.

This from simplyinfo is what the crane used to look like showing the cattle chute slot that the channel for one fuel rod assembly to travel from the pool to the reactor core.





Here's video footage of the Unit-3 refueling-crane trolley I point out before in a photo. This video shows where it is and adds some additional structural details: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He-PdEJA2QY&hd=1

trolleyUpperDeck.mp4
7 views

Goddard no longer believes explosion was in the pool - light stuff fell in the pool, as well as the refueling platform. He still believes it was a steam explosion, so no need for a prompt critical as theorized by Arnie Gundersen


Saturday, December 17, 2011

Rest in Peace Ford Ranger: Cash Cow Neglect Case #5

Say goodbye to the Ford Ranger, which has been pretty much the same with minor facelifts since it was introduced in 1982. It appeared soon after the Ford Escort to replace the Mazda-based Ford Courier which WAS a compact Japanese pickup similar to the Toyota and Datsun pickups. This was a BEST SELLER for a long time, then they just ... left ... it ... alone.
Ford Courier (Mazda)

Ford has long history of neglecting cash cows to death:

Ford Taurus which was the one car that made Honda change its Accord to better copy the Taurus

Crown Victoria / Grand Marquis / Town Car dominated the cab and police and limo markets after GM dropped the Caprice
Crown Vic Successor to Checker


The Ford Windstar / Freestar was the first successful aerodynamic front-drive minvan which suffered greatly from a lame name change and ineffective update.

Forgettable Ford Freestar











Because it was never redesigned, the Ranger was the only true compact left as all of its competitors had grown up to "mid-size" pickups like the Dodge Dakota.

2011 Toyota Tacoma Double Cab (US)"The Tacoma was a compact pickup until a model redesign in 2005 when it was reclassified to a mid-size. "

Ford makes a terrific up-to date Ranger for international markets, but it is nearly the size and probably more expensive than the larger F-150. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger_(T6)  The T6 replaces two regional Ranger platforms: theMazda BT-50-derived model sold in the Latin America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific regions and the North American model sold in select Latin American markets.[1]Although the T6 Ranger will be offered in 180 markets, it will not be sold in the United States or Canada. This is due to the new global platform being too close in size and price to the F-150 and overall declining sales of compact pickups in North America.
Ford T6 Ranger 2010 1.JPG
2011 Ford T6 Ranger at the Australian International Motor Show 2010



The other story is that the tall-roof Focus-based Transit Connect vans that look like shrunken Dodge Sprinters are what Ford hopes to offer businesses that need a small fuel-efficient fleet truck. 



2010 Ford Transit Connect (US)
Transit Connect 

The Ranger was the basis for the too-short tippy high-CG Ford Bronco II, and the more successful Explorer which redefined the SUV market, but the Explorer got the more advanced engineering while the Ranger stayed the same, and now switched to the soft crossover platform
First generation Ford Bronco IIFord Explorer Eddie Bauer 4-door

see http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2011/12/last-ford-ranger-rolls-off-line-at-closing-auto-plant/1

Ford's Twin Cities Assembly Plant in Minnesota.. offered high-wage manufacturing jobs for 86 years and produced everything from Model Ts to Country Squires.. Ford is pulling out of the small pickup business in the U.S. Over the years, the plant produced 6 million vehicles and most recently employed about 800 workers."


http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/62263--it-s-the-end-of-the-road-for-ford-s-ranger-pickup

introduced in 1982 to fight small pickups from Japan...peaking in the mid-1990s, sales of the Ranger have fallen over the last decade, hurt by neglect as Ford focused on more profitable large pickups. The Ranger's styling grew stale, it lost its fuel economy edge and the price wasn't much lower than beefier siblings like the F-150.... sales of small pickups topped out at 1.2 million, or 8 per cent of all vehicles sold in the U.S., in 1994, 
... as Ford gradually added features, like upgraded transmissions or satellite radio, prices crept up. A top-of-the-line, two-door Ranger with a V6 engine starts at $22,340, or just $600 less than a base model F-150. 
he Ranger, which offers a four-cylinder engine, can get up to 27 miles per gallon on the highway. But an F-150 with a more powerful V6 can get 23.
..Small pickup sales dropped by nearly half between 2007 and 2009.
...expects many Ranger customers to shift to F-150s, which are nearly 4 feet longer and sit 10 inches higher than the Ranger
The plant has produced more than 6 million cars and trucks since 1925,