That cloud of radiation story....

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Goatman, Nov 16, 2017.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. It is just theoretical possibilty. Nothing special.
     
  2. Your "theoreticals" always have two things in common.
    They are massively unlikely.
    They deflect blame from Russia.

    They are lies. You are a liar.
     
  3. Come now, it is theoretically possible that time travel will happen. I think they did an experiment on Concorde flying between London and NY to prove it. So everything is possible, just not probable.

    I see that KGB has accepted defeat and now believes that Russia shot down MH17 and that they had forces in Ukraine. We may have made a breakthrough lads.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. So you can't accept facts even when they come from your own mouth.
     
  5. Back on topic, there are relatively few places where Ru can come from. The main one is Chelyabinsk 65.

    Now I don't pretend to know what Vlad's boys are doing there but I do know that Ru106 occurs as part of fuel reprocessing and that the main, if not the only plant in Russia that's doing that type of processing. I do, however, know that Chel65 is the Russian equivalent of Sellafield (but with more corrosion and a worse accident record) and that they do some very "interesting" [well interesting to me] stuff there.

    Now, whether it was as a result of reprocessing or as a botched attempt to make Ru106 for medical purposes is, to some extent, irrelevant. I do feel that it means that someone, somewhere (postcode Chelyabinsk 65) has dropped a goolie.

    I don't know of any other site in that area which could produce Ru106. The concern is that no-one is admitting responsibility, which means that the release was as a result of an "uncontrolled" event -- accident if you like. Which makes me suspicious that there is more sh!t waiting to happen.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
  6. I believe there is also another location in Russia, which @KGB_resident mentioned, which unlike Mayak is in the area which the French estimated as the origin - south of the Urals and between there and the Volga. Kazakhstan also has historic nuclear facilities in that area, but there haven't been any reports of them doing anything in particular with ruthenium 106.

    Unlike with Mayak, I haven't heard anything reported from the other Russian facility, which raises questions about it rather than answering them.

    As I mentioned previously, I wouldn't be surprised if the source turned out to be a dodgy scrap dealer melting down what he thought was a load of stolen platinum.
     
  7. That would be hard to say. The article spends a lot of time waffling about the issue saying that Westinghouse nuclear fuel is crap, without actually telling us just what is wrong with it. It's difficult to take it seriously with so little actual hard information.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Difficult to see how. Despite the fact that Ru-106 can only be created as a result of fission, and that the only realistic source is used fuel rods, this uncontrolled release is from a refined source.
     
  9. The scientists are pretty sure it's not a leak from a power reactor. As @Joe_Private said, reactor leaks spew out a broad range of isotopes which are pretty distinctive, and a number of which are a lot more worrisome than ru 106. This one is strictly ru 106 and nothing else, which suggests it's either a leak from something that is very focused on that specific medical isotope, or it's from a nuclear powered satellite that re-entered the atmosphere. The latter (nuclear satellites) work on a different principle than commercial power reactors and most use very specialised and distinctive fuel based on rare isotopes.
     
  10. The fuel "rods" * are not reusable anyway, so there's not any need for them to be interchangeable.

    * Fuel is arranged in "bundles" of thin "plates", not "rods".
     
  11. I think in that case he's just talking about being able to buy standard fuel bundles commercially from several sources, rather than having special ones made for a particular reactor. The latter would I imagine be more expensive.

    I'm not in the nuclear fuel business, but I understand that the fuel rod cladding material, formulating the fuel, and packing the fuel into them is a more complex task than it may appear to be at first sight. If the fuel isn't made right it can cause rather expensive problems with your reactor.
     
  12. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    Hallo noob - just joined Arrse yesterday I see?

    And your very first post is on a thread which puts some vague blame on the Russian state for failing to look after their horrible nuclear legacy?

    ( Seconds after the usual rebutter-in-chief for the kleptocracy retires in dignified silence, having demonstrably lost the argument? )


    S-o-o- - where did you serve then Steve? What was your cap-badge ?

    And where did you gain your apparent in-depth knowledge of civilian nukular energy issues?
     
  13. His mate down the pub, he said that several posts ago, so a very indepth knowledge.

    I note that now we are moving onto another Russian disaster and an in depth report form RT. I haven't the time to look at it now but will have a laugh when I get back.
     
  14. Good. The level of bullshit in your cubicle must be nearly up to your nostrils by now anyway.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. In a power reactor, a nuclear moderator is something that slows down the neutrons so they are more likely to react with the rest of the fuel.

    Graphite is a very good moderator. Heavy water is a very good moderator. Normal "light" water is a so-so moderator. This is why graphite and heavy water reactors are able to use natural non-enriched uranium, while light water reactors must have their uranium fuel enriched before they can work. Now some types of graphite or heavy water moderated reactors may use enriched uranium, but that comes down to engineering trade offs, plus the degree of enrichment is normally much less.

    In the case you have described the "light" water would have tamped down the reaction. When the graphite tips of the rods entered the reaction zone and displaced the light water, that would have boosted the reaction level very quickly. If I recall correctly, the reason the tips of the control rods were graphite was to allow them to sit in their guide channels while the reactor was in operating condition. This is a safety design measure to prevent them from hanging up and getting stuck.

    When Chernobyl went off what caused the big mess was the huge mass of graphite burning in reaction with oxygen in a chemical reaction. The heat of this fire carried fuel particles high into the atmosphere where it was distributed over a wide area. These fuel particles contained a very broad spectrum of isotopes which were unmistakable as a power reactor accident.

    The recent incident was that of a single very rare isotope. This is very distinct from what you would expect to see from a power reactor failure. There are only a few plausible sources for this, either something to do with medical isotope production, storage, or recycling, or a nuclear satellite re-entering.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1