linuxaudio.org

On 04/04/2011 09:04 PM, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:

quoted text
> On 04/04/2011 08:42 AM, Patrick Shirkey wrote:

>> On 04/04/2011 04:14 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

>>> Patrick Shirkey wrote:

>>>

>>>> So just to make sure I am correct here... All nuclear weapons

>>>> require an

>>>> assisted explosion?

>>> Yes, you need both high heat and high pressure to force the fissile

>>> material into the required chain reaction.

>>>

>>

>> So, just having enough Pu-239 in one location is definitely,

>> categorically not going to be able to cause a nuclear explosion? Not

>> even a little one that might cause a rapid escalation?

>

> no. and to see how hard it actually is: there were news of a botched

> nuclear test in north korea a while ago, where international observers

> found evidence of an explosion (by satellite or seismic measurements)

> that was vastly less than what was anticipated. such a situation is

> called a "fizzle", and what happens is that you bring the two halves

> of sub-critical material together too slowly or in the wrong way, and

> the chain reaction then heats it up and tears the material apart again

> before the entire mass has started to react.

When it comes to news about North Korea who do you trust?
>

quoted text
> when you pile up too much plutonium or uranium, criticality accidents

> can occur, but there is no possibility of an explosion even remotely

> comparable to a fission bomb. which is not necessarily a good thing:

> iiuc, a good clean atomic bomb test can be more "environmentally

> friendly" than a botched one, because a fizzle explosion distributes

> the material over a large area and could even lead to greater

> contamination than the fallout of a full explosion.

>

In the case of Fukushima it will be very nice if the whole facility

doesn't go up in a nuclear explosion. 1760 metric tonnes of fuel would

be entirely cataclysmic.
> all this information can be found all over the web, in wikipedia, and

quoted text
> various physics textbooks. for instance, there's a very interesting

> anecdote where richard feynman claims he had to show the uranium

> processing guys at oak ridge labs how to avoid criticalities (during

> the manhattan project) - they had been kept in the dark about this

> problem because some nuthead top-brass figured they had no "need to

> know". turns out they were keeping large cauldrons of enriched

> material lined up against a dry wall, and guess what a second team was

> doing on the other side of this wall? yup.

>

>

> btw, there have been reports cropping up every now and then that

> re-criticality incidents have indeed happened in fukushima after the

> cold shutdown, either due to overcrowded spent fuel pools or the

> melting of one or more core.  this was substantiated by traces of very

> short-lived decay products that should not have been detectable

> anymore if no more chain reactions had occured after the cold shutdown.

> this is of course reason to worry, because criticality would pose a

> great danger to the crew who has to mop up the mess, due to extremely

> high and uncalculable radiation peaks.

> but it also shows that criticality != fission explosion.

>

But what it doesn't prove is that the situation is not getting worse.

And btw, there is not and has not been a cold shutdown of the 4

reactors. They have not got the situation under control and they will

not fix it any time soon. Therefore all the radionuclides that are

spewing out of the earth as the cores work their way down to the mantle

will continue until they cover them up by pouring tonnes of concrete

down the radioactive pits. Until that point there is every possibility

that the situation could get substantially worse with a large "fizzle"

explosion of 870 metric tonnes of melted cores. In the meantime the

Japanese are being subjected to insane amounts of radioactive fallout

and the Pacific ocean is also being polluted beyond belief. It is a

catastrophe of teh like we have never witnessed before.
One idea we are kicking around over here to protect against a massive

explosion or even just the constant explosions that are happening at

this very moment is to create a dome and pump it full of two or three

phase gases/solid mix. Something along the lines of  barium infused

concrete with reinforced steel for the dome. Similar to what they use to

create nuclear weapons bunkers.  The first layer will be a shell of

concrete and the second will be used to contain the gas/liquid mixture.
The point being that it will buffer against the explosions as the cores

descend into the earths mantle.
>

quoted text
> i'm as pissed as you at the nuclear industry and current energy

> politics (and in fact, it looks like that at least in germany, the

> political climate will now finally allow us to retire nuclear energy

> for good and fully replace it with renewables).

> but spreading vague fear and misinformation is really not helpful at all.

>

> there is a very clear danger, but it's important to get the facts

> straight, otherwise it's too easy for proponents of nuclear energy to

> re-spin the current outcry into irrational fearmongering - which is

> going on alright, but the fact remains that fukushima is a huge

> environmental fuckup and the source of much human tragedy.

>

> and if you continue to go on record with perpetuum mobile schemes and

> other easily refutable statements, you will not only be wasting your

> and other people's time, but also ultimately discredit your vote and

> work against your own political ends. (meta-conspiracy theory anyone?)

I don't buy that. There are very real results and experiments of energy

harnessing techniques that are and have been suppressed and shelved by

the mega corps and the military complex. Physics is constantly being

challenged by this fact and the vested interests are well aware of the

threat that such technologies pose to their societal structure. You can

choose to believe that everything is fine in the world and you were

taught everything there is to know about how the universe works. That

won't stop people from figuring out otherwise.
--

Patrick Shirkey

Boost Hardware Ltd.
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user