[Archive! - page 15
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Unlikely, but I could be wrong. Of course there is a nuclear reaction, but the fuel in a nuclear power plant is not weapons-grade plutonium... You need a much higher concentration of the fuel itself to make a chain reaction.
Chernobyl was a conventional explosion that blew out a lot of radioactive material. Something like a dirty bomb was created.
If it can't be cooled down, it (the fuel there is a lot of tonnes) won't be self-cleaned (all the excess will melt away) to a cannon state?
What a wonderful way to concentrate fuel Tantrik suggested... It's quick and doesn't require a lot of effort.
Do you have any idea how much f@cking it takes to make a kilogram of uranium-235 of about 70% purity? It takes several hundreds, if not thousands, of cycles on centrifuges alone (just to separate it from U-238)...
Plutonium is a different problem, but it's also a pain in the ass.
What a wonderful way to concentrate fuel Tantrik suggested... It's quick and doesn't require a lot of effort.
Do you have any idea how much f@cking it takes to make a kilogram of uranium-235 of about 70% purity? It takes several hundred cycles on centrifuges alone (just to separate it from U-238)...
Plutonium is a different problem, but it's also a pain in the ass.
What a wonderful way to concentrate fuel Tantrik suggested... It's quick and you don't have to strain yourself...
At Chernobyl it just blew up. It blew out all the dirty stuff that was lying around - it just blew up.
There was no "hood" - it was a dome over the reactor. Oh, man... it didn't help them.
you are not an expert. what is the temperature?
I'm not an expert. What temperature are you talking about? In the reactor at meltdown? I don't know, you could look it up on the internet, I guess. About a thousand and a half or two, probably.
I was just talking about how difficult it is to make more or less clean fuel. It's not likely to get cleaner with meltdown...
granit77: God forbid Ahmadinejad reads it, it will be the end of everything.
But it's too late: they've already got a few hundred centrifuges there, I think.
I'm not an expert. What temperature are you talking about? In the reactor at meltdown? I don't know, you could look it up on the internet, I guess. About a thousand and a half or two, probably.
I was just talking about how hard it is to make more or less clean fuel.
It's too late for that: they've already got a few hundred centrifuges there, I think.
in my humble opinion - making metal (we don't need it at all), and here I was talking about heating to plasma and starting an uncontrolled chain reaction - just wanted to know if that's possible? ()
An uncontrolled chain reaction requires, first of all, a decent concentration of the fuel itself (uranium or plutonium) so that the radiation flux density is high enough. Temperature is unlikely to have much effect on the radiation flux.
The concentration of clean fuel in peaceful energy is much lower than that for weapons purposes. I don't know the numbers, but somewhere in the neighborhood of a few percent. This is what the reactors were designed to do: the radiation flux should only be sufficient to maintain the nuclear reaction in a near-coma state. And the rods are needed to regulate this flux. The worst thing for nuclear power plants is to overheat the reactor to a meltdown. Then it's impossible to regulate anything, because the control rods themselves fuse with the active nuclear material.
The reaction keeps going, but is still in a coma. Temperatures do not exceed normal thermal temperatures, i.e. thousands of degrees. The radiation is large enough to heat the reactor up badly, but not at all enough to take the reaction to an uncontrollable stage. The whole thing may explode, but it won't be a nuclear explosion. It would be an ordinary explosion - simply because, for example, the heat sink is bad or missing.
granit, correct me if I have misinterpreted somewhere.
https://www.mql5.com/go?link=http://www.osudim.cc/opel/403/193743/ - that's the expert's answer.
Something's not right here:
And this is where it really went wrong: the external power generators could not be connected to the NPP (The plugs didn't fit)