/N/e/w/ - OLD NUCLEAR threat- FISSION from NEUTRON BEAMS

[Spectrism]

OK... so we thought this thing might just smolder a while releasing deadly uranium, plutonium, cesium and a few other happy isotopes. Check out this news being downplayed.

http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/03/80539.html

Neutron beam observed 13 times at crippled Fukushima nuke plantTOKYO, March 23, Kyodo

Tokyo Electric Power Co. said Wednesday it has observed a neutron beam, a kind of radioactive ray, 13 times on the premises of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant after it was crippled by the massive March 11 quake-tsunami disaster.

TEPCO, the operator of the nuclear plant, said the neutron beam measured about 1.5 kilometers southwest of the plant's No. 1 and 2 reactors over three days from March 13 and is equivalent to 0.01 to 0.02 microsieverts per hour and that this is not a dangerous level.

The utility firm said it will measure uranium and plutonium, which could emit a neutron beam, as well.

In the 1999 criticality accident at a nuclear fuel processing plant run by JCO Co. in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, uranium broke apart continually in nuclear fission, causing a massive amount of neutron beams.

In the latest case at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, such a criticality accident has yet to happen.

But the measured neutron beam may be evidence that uranium and plutonium leaked from the plant's nuclear reactors and spent nuclear fuels have discharged a small amount of neutron beams through nuclear fission.==Kyodo


No problem, right? Well, let's see what this means. Neutron hits uranium. Uranium then splits- making two smaller atoms (fission) and releases a bunch more neutrons! Repeat, repeat, REPEAT, BOOM!

http://www.classzone.com/books/earth_science/terc/content/visualizations/es0702/es0702page01.cfm?chapter_no=visualization

[Spectrism]

If this all happened last week, what are the neutron emissions now????

[Agrippa]

How does one "observe" a neutron beam?

[Glass]

I get the impression they have these "detectors" which the neutrons hit and leave a tell tale mark on them. Some kind of thin metal sheet. Question is, do neutrons fire off in all directions and if so how many beams are there being produced? I have no lnks to confirm this because all the material is based on lab work where they can trap and direct the neutron beams.

The reactors are not spitting out directed beams that are being trapped. So logically the beams must be going everywhere and if something over a mile away is getting hit then I think we can assume lots of other things around the site are getting hit as well.

Acording to this web site they are harmless: http://www.tnw.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=398dec98-5c05-4d15-a438-3439b7869b1c&lang=en

Perhaps their existence tells us something happened to create them and that something is the problem.

[keehah]

Acording to this web site they are harmless:

Neutron beams have higher mass and/or energy than gamma and x-ray photons. Those break atoms from each other. Neutron beams break atoms apart.

http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/images/200504/Neutrons_chart2a.gif
http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/images/200504/Neutrons_chart2b.gif
http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/cms/?pid=1000102

It is used in cancer treatment to kill cells that other chemotherapy did not kill, 4 times the kill rate.

[JohnQPublic]

I am not sure how accurate the term "beam" is being used, but if it is a beam, then it implies an aperature in a large containment vessel, which implies a hole in the reactor core. Otherwise I think they would have detected "neutrons" as opposed to a "neutron beam".

A beam is a colimated grouping of neutrons. This would likely be caused by the neutrons all bouncing around inside the reactor core, but not leaving. If there is a small hole in the core, then when the neutron hits the hole it can escape. Since the surface area of the hole is very small compared to the surface area of the inside of the core, the neutrons that do escape must hit the hole at a very small angle, thus act colimated. This is the principle used for instance in creating a black body reference source (small aperature, large reflecting area inside).

http://web.mit.edu/16.unified/www/FALL/thermodynamics/notes/fig11Cavity_web.jpg

[Spectrism]

I am not sure how accurate the term "beam" is being used, but if it is a beam, then it implies an aperature in a large containment vessel, which implies a hole in the reactor core. Otherwise I think they would have detected "neutrons" as opposed to a "neutron beam".

A beam is a colimated grouping of neutrons. This would likely be caused by the neutrons all bouncing around inside the reactor core, but not leaving. If there is a small hole in the core, then when the neutron hits the hole it can escape. Since the surface area of the hole is very small compared to the surface area of the inside of the core, the neutrons that do escape must hit the hole at a very small angle, thus act colimated. This is the principle used for instance in creating a black body reference source (small aperature, large reflecting area inside).

http://web.mit.edu/16.unified/www/FALL/thermodynamics/notes/fig11Cavity_web.jpg


Yeah- I puzzled over the term "beam" as well. It does imply a restricted and directed effect.

But these neutrons go through just about everything. They are hindered best by thick concrete. In my army days, we had neutron weapons to keep the soviets at bay. Tactical nukes when airburst would shower (more like blast/spray/flash) down a killzone of neutrons, wiping out all life in the area and there was supposed to be less fallout for longterm radiation hazzards. We were instructed that these would easily go through steel- armored vehicles were no protection. But a deep concrete bunker was best.

Maybe their "beam" is blocked by concrete walls... otherwise it is spraying everywhere. Flying over that wreckage is hazzardous.


I wanted to add.... the experts say that there is no chance this thing can blast like a nuclear weapon. There is a need for the right combination of heat/pressure/radioactive material. That may be right.... but we are in some unknown areas here. The lack of information is amazing. A burning and release of this stuff may be just as bad as a violent blast if they don't get it entombed.

[Spectrism]

I heard one "expert" on the news this morning say that there is "little" chance the reactors could explode. Hmmmm... so we went from no chance to little chance?

[Horn]

The lack of information is amazing. A burning and release of this stuff may be just as bad as a violent blast if they don't get it entombed.


Guess further time testing is required to compute the results.

Lets go back to dropping buckets of water on the reactor from helicopters.

[undgrd]

Would the reason for an explosion be another build-up of Hydrogen?

[Spectrism]

Would the reason for an explosion be another build-up of Hydrogen?


No, there are plenty of vents for the hydrogen to go up now.

My concern is there could be a runaway reaction with neutrons cascading fission reactions. When all the stored rods melt into a mass... and the reactors are all melted down- still getting hotter each hour, we may have just the sufficient mix of ingredients to blast- even if only an inefficient partial release.

Any explosion in and around the TONS of radioactive material will spread that deadly stuff far and wide. My guess is that there is already far more contamination let loose into the air and water than they care to admit. There is enough plutonium there to kill the entire world.

[Horn]

There is enough plutonium there to kill the entire world.

Now you're starting to scare me.