ScribbleLive

Good morning all

@Veenie Do you get a bump if I go buy something else? I bought all the shares in you I could.

@smoss Back to finishing that 2001 Greenpeace report on MOX. Every page has some shocking new revelation. The info of "this bad thing happens with MOX" corresponds to something that happened at 3....

@elainekirk good work on the fissure near #1 (that word is so appropriate)

@lillymunster anything happening /hapened at 3 will be nothing compared to munju if they restart it tick tick tick
@bo good evening I will go put the kettle on

@lilly.. two values at a nuclear plant that deal with safety... POSITIVE or NEGATIVE TEMPERATURE FEEDBACK... and POSITIVE or NEGATIVE REACTIVITY COEFFICIENT.

@smoss The points of how it makes so many other things more difficult or worse in a melt down type accident were beyond anyone's control at 3 at some point.

@dean From what I understand controlling a reactor with MOX in it sounds much more difficult. Also, if it starts to go downhill it can do so quickly.

When Tepco Shares Are the Family Jewels blogs.wsj.com

Japanese Inventory of Separated Plutonium (2009)

Japan's inventory of separated plutonium at the end of 2009 was published on September 7, 2010 by the Japan Atomic Energy Commission. The end of year inventory has been published for each year since 1993. A shipment from France of 1,508 kgHM of plutonium oxide arrived in Japan in January 1993. The shipment caused an international uproar. Japan responded by publishing its plutonium inventory in an attempt to increase transparency. The figures published were for "total plutonium", but since 2006 the figures for Japanese plutonium held in France and the UK have only been published for "fissile plutonium", making precise calculation of Japan's total plutonium holdings difficult.

Japan's pluthermal program (using MOX fuel) began in 2009, ten years later than planned. Plutonium shipped and loaded into reactors is reflected in the figures in these tables. The 1,458 tons of plutonium held as "Unirradiated new fuel at reactor sites etc." includes 210 kg at Fukushima I-3 (TEPCO), 205 kg at Kashiwazaki-Kariwa-3 (TEPCO), 213 kg at Hamaoka-4 (Chubu) and 831 kg at Ikata-3 (Shikoku). (The figures don't add up due to rounding.) The plutonium held at Tokyo Electric Power Company's (TEPCO) reactors was shipped there in MOX fuel over ten years ago. The plutonium held at Chubu Electric's and Shikoku Electric's reactors arrived in MOX fuel from France in May 2009. MOX fuel for Kyushu Electric's Genkai-3 plant (677 kg) also arrived in May 2009, but it was loaded in the same year, so it is included in "Plutonium loaded in nuclear reactors" under "Separated Plutonium in Use". The remaining 669 kg of the total 1,345 kg plutonium loaded in nuclear reactors was loaded in Monju last year. (Monju started up in May this year.)

Hideyuki Ban (CNIC Co-Director)

The plan to burn MOX fuel in light water reactors is called the pluthermal program in Japan. In the core of a pluthermal reactor, there are ten times more actinides such as plutonium, americium, and curium than the core of a uranium reactor. Actinides cause serious internal exposure in human bodies and thus pose a very serious threat to human health.

In short, exposure doses resulting from an accident at a pluthermal reactor would be twice those produced by an accident at a uranium reactor. A given exposure dose would be received by residents over twice the distance. The overall affected area would be four times larger

MOX also creates a higher flux level which can have increased stress corrosion on core components.

all true lilly, why I was against mox from day one and was involved on some of the testing.. it's like I was saying long ago.. I don't like taking an original reactor design with it's inherent safety features with the fuels used and make drastic changes like introducing a new fuel system

I think those are the digital globe shots.

@dean The Greenpeace report I was reading talked about installing improved control rods before running MOX in a BWR

@lilly I think the control rods had to have more worth reactively so they probably used a different composite material

I think that main thing in MOX is it maked the control rods less affective and, if there is a problem with inserting control rods accompanied with accidents the control rods would be less affective during the reactivity transients