ScribbleLive

lol I saw that too elaine.. @quaker good morning.... I have some treats for the coffee..

@ elainekirk, had to travel back in time to warn @Dean not to get on that bus today

@Dean, Bath's Law 1.1 to 1.2 of original quake

@Dean, I didn't say HOW you would get on the bus :-)

@Dean, my wager is that the quake is stronger than the 9.0 reported.

That does not surprise me at all Bobby.. good find

@lilly.. the article said the radiation level was 100milli SV/hr outside the containment vessel, if we know the thickness of the containment vessel and then look up the shielding factors we could estimate it inside the containment vessel.

Good morning! Now here is an intersting bit of news:" Gregory Jaczko "strategically" withheld information from his colleagues in an effort to stop work on the controversial Yucca Mountain waste repository, according to a report by the agency's internal watchdog." Unfortunately need to pay for the read: online.wsj.com

good morning Peter

@lillymunster , I found it thanks. It is important to see that the discussion on what to do with the burned fuel rods gets going. The sad thing is it always seems to take a major disaster to capture people's attention. As to that power plant in Omaha you inquired about last night, the only info I found was that the containment design includes an SFP at the bottom.

LM.. it was only us discussing the corium interaction with the concrete..

@Dean We had another noticeable EQ this morning just before I got my coffee so I was already a little rattled!

I found another interesting piece. In case something goes wrong in this country, the industry will blame it on the NRC: pbadupws.nrc.gov . I just cite the paragraph on hardened vents: "In the 1980s, the NRC staff began reviewing the potential for accidents more severe than those
the plants were licensed for and designed to mitigate. According to the NRC, while BWR Mark I
containments had provisions for venting, it "typically consist[ed] of a ductwork system which has a low design pressure of only a few pounds per square inch" and "[v]enting under high pressure
severe accident conditions would fail the ductwork" and "release the containment atmosphere into the reactor building."25 In order to enhance the ability of Mark I containments to prevent and mitigate the consequences of accidents beyond the design basis accidents, the NRC requested in Generic Letter 89-16 that all BWR Mark I plants install a "hardened vent," also known as a DTVS, and stated that for those Mark I plants that did not do so voluntarily, it would conduct a backfit analysis to determine whether to impose it as a requirement. 26 In response to Generic Letter 89-16 and the subsequent results of their Individual Plant Examinations ("IPEs"), all of the Mark I nuclear power plants demonstrated compliance to the NRC's satisfaction.27 However, because installation of DTVS was not ordered for all Mark I plants but was subject to a site-specific backfit analysis, each decision to install such a system was based on plant-specific analyses, subject to the NRC's review. Therefore, the NRC has already reviewed the issue of installation and operation of DTVS on a plant-specific basis, and Petitioner's assertions that such a review is now necessary ignores the historical record of the actions alreadytaken by the NRC." Do you realize that some reactors may not be equipped with hardened vents at all because the design-specificity renders the retrofit unnecessary or impossible?

@Dean I'm assuming that if there are cracks in the slab from the earthquake and aftershocks that the process would be accelerated?