Politics.be Registreren kan je hier.
Problemen met registreren of reageren op de berichten?
Een verloren wachtwoord?
Gelieve een mail te zenden naar [email protected] met vermelding van je gebruikersnaam.

Ga terug   Politics.be > Themafora > Maatschappij en samenleving
Registreer FAQForumreglement Ledenlijst

Maatschappij en samenleving Dit subforum handelt over zaken die leven binnen de maatschappij en in die zin politiek relevant (geworden) zijn.

Antwoord
 
Discussietools
Oud 30 mei 2006, 11:51   #61
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

Maddox & Sfax: in de berichten/links die ik gaf staat duidelijk DAT er momenteel door klassieke kerncentrales tritium op water èn atmosfeer wordt geloosd en dat de hoeveelheden omhoog gaan/moeten.

NIET gevonden, terzake van de beoogde "nieuwe techniek": het omzettings-rendement van tritium en/of deuterium naar helium.

Zoals algemeen bekend, is in veel fabrieks-processen een omzetting niet 100%, tamelijk vaak zelfs maar omtrent 50 en dan zit je met, hetzij puur of in enige onbedoelde verbinding, oorspronkelijke of nieuwe stoffen als afval cq fataal bijproduct, met weinig of geen mogelijkheden tot (her-)benutting.

Zulke getallen zie ik nergens vermeld. Dit is mij allemaal te geheimzinnig en ja, houdt mij wantrouwig.

ZOU het mogelijk zijn om het fataal aanvallend helium deugdelijk op te slaan dan komt hieruit wellicht een nuttig her-gebruik zoals bijvoorbeeld gewichts-ondervanging voor voer- en vaartuigen binnen onze atmosfeer en eventueel vulling van zwem/zweef-vesten maar dat zal er wel niet inzitten anders hadden de ijveraars zulke aansprekende reclame-argumenten zeker wel gepubliceerd.

Ik wil geen noemenswaardige hoeveelheden tritium drinken en ook geen gek helium-stemmetje krijgen.

Laatst gewijzigd door willem1940NLD : 30 mei 2006 om 11:52. Reden: typo
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 12:01   #62
oliepiek
Banneling
 
 
oliepiek's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 3 mei 2005
Berichten: 1.275
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Sfax Bekijk bericht
Kernramp na kernramp?
List of civilian nuclear disasters and accidents:

1950s
  • December 12, 1952 – The first serious nuclear accident occurred at AECL's NRX reactor in Chalk River, Canada. A reactor shutoff rod failure, combined with several operator errors, led to a major power excursion of more than double the reactor's rated output. The heavy water moderator was purged, killing the reaction in under 30 seconds. A cover gas system failure led to hydrogen explosions, which severely damaged the reactor's interior. The fission products of approximately 30 kg of uranium were released through the reactor stack. Irradiated light-water coolant leaked from the damaged coolant circuit into the reactor building; some 4,000 cubic metres were pumped via pipeline to a disposal area to avoid contamination of the Ottawa River. Subsequent monitoring of surrounding water sources revealed no contamination. No immediate fatalities or injuries resulted from the incident; a 1982 followup study of exposed workers showed no long-term health effects. Jimmy Carter, then a nuclear engineer in the US Navy, was among the cleanup crew.[1][2]
  • May 24, 1958 At the NRU reactor in Chalk River, Canada, a damaged uranium fuel rod caught fire and was torn in two as it was being removed from the core, due to inadequate cooling. The fire was extinguished, but not before releasing a sizeable quantity of radioactive combustion products that contaminated the interior of the reactor building and, to a lesser degree, an area surrounding the laboratory site. Over 600 people were employed in the clean-up.[3][4]
  • 1959 – A sodium-cooled reactor suffered a partial core meltdown at Santa Susana Field Laboratory near Simi Valley, California.[5]
[edit]

1960s
  • April 21, 1964 – A US Transit 5BN nuclear-powered navigational satellite failed to reach orbital velocity and reentered the atmosphere 150,000 feet (46 km) above the Indian Ocean. The satellite's SNAP generator contained 16 kCi (590 TBq) of plutonium-238, which at least partially burned upon reentry. Increased levels of Pu238 were first documented in the stratosphere four months later. The EPA estimated the abortive launch resulted in little Pu238 contamination to human lungs (0.06 mrem or 0.6 µSv) compared to fallout from weapons tests in the 1950s (0.35 mrem or 3.5 µSv) or the EPA's Clean Air Act airborne exposure limit of 10 mrem (100 µSv). [6][7]
  • July 24, 1964 – Wood River Junction facility in Charlestown Rhode Island. A criticality accident occurred at the plant, designed to recover uranium from scrap material left over from fuel element production. An operator accidentally added a concentrated uranium solution to an agitated tank containing sodium carbonate, resulting in a critical nuclear reaction. The criticality exposed the operator to a fatal radiation dose of 10,000 rad (100 Gy). Ninety minutes later a second excursion happened, exposing two cleanup crew to doses of up to 100 rad (1 Gy) without ill effect. [8] pg27[9]
  • October 5, 1966 – A sodium cooling system malfunction at the Enrico Fermi demonstration nuclear breeder reactor on the shore of Lake Erie near Monroe, Michigan, caused a partial core meltdown. The accident was attributed to a piece of zirconium that obstructed a flow-guide in the sodium cooling system. Two of the 105 fuel assemblies melted during the incident, but no contamination was recorded outside the containment vessel. [10]
  • May 1967 – Unit 2 at the Chapelcross Magnox nuclear power station in Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland, suffered a partial meltdown when a fuel rod failed and caught fire after the unit was refuelled. Following the incident, the reactor was shut down for two years for repairs [11] [12].
  • January 21, 1969 – A coolant malfunction in an experimental underground nuclear reactor at Lucens, Canton of Vaud, Switzerland. No injuries or fatalities resulted. The cavern was heavily contaminated and was sealed. [13][14]
[edit]

1970s
  • February 22, 1977 – The Czechoslovakian nuclear power plant A1 in Jaslovske Bohunice experienced a serious accident during fuel loading. This INES level 4 nuclear accident resulted in damaged fuel integrity, extensive corrosion damage of fuel cladding and release of radioactivity into the plant area. As result the A1 power plant was shut down and is being decommissioned. [15][16]
  • March 28, 1979 – Equipment failures and worker mistakes contribute to a loss of coolant and a partial core meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor in Middletown, Pennsylvania. This is the worst commercial nuclear accident in the United States to date. Site boundary radiation exposure was under 100 millirems (1 mSv) (less than annual exposure due to natural sources), with exposure of 1 millirem (10 µSv) to approximately 2 million people. There were no immediate fatalities, although followup radiological studies predict at most one long-term cancer fatality. [17][18][19]
[edit]

1980s
  • March 1981 – More than 100 workers were exposed to doses of up to 155 millirem per day radiation during repairs of a nuclear power plant in Tsuruga, Japan, violating the company's limit of 100 millirems (1 mSv) per day. [20]
  • January 25, 1982 – At Rochester Gas & Electric Company's Ginna plant in Rochester, New York, a steam generator pipe broke, spilling radioactive coolant on the plant floor. Small amounts (about 80 Ci or 3 TBq) of radioactive steam escaped into the air.[21][22][23]
  • September 23, 1983Buenos Aires, Argentina An operator error during a fuel plate reconfiguration led to a criticality accident at the RA-2 facility in an experimental test reactor. An excursion of 3x1017 fissions followed; the operator absorbed 2000 rad (20 Gy) of gamma and 1700 rad (17 Gy) of neutron radiation which killed him two days later. Another 17 people outside of the reactor room absorbed doses ranging from 35 rad (0.35 Gy) to less than 1 rad (0.01 Gy).[24] pg103[25]
  • April 26, 1986 – The worst accident in the history of nuclear power occurred at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant located near Kiev, USSR (now part of Ukraine). Fire and explosions resulting from an unauthorized experiment left 31 dead in the immediate aftermath. Radioactive nuclear material was spread over much of Europe. Over 135,000 are evacuated from the areas immediately around Chernobyl (or, in Ukrainian, Chornobyl) and over 800,000 from the areas of fallout in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. About 4,000 mi² (10,000 km²) were taken out of human use for an indefinite time. In 2005, a comprehensive study on the long-term health consequences of the accident was completed by the IAEA, World Health Organization and six other UN agencies, as well as the governments of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. The findings include 60 radiation-caused fatalities to date, with an estimated 4000 additional fatalities to come within the lifetimes of those exposed; however, this is not nearly as many deaths as were predicted in the more-immediate aftermath of the accident. [26]. See Chernobyl accident.
  • May 4, 1986, – An experimental 300-megawatt THTR-300 HTGR located in Hamm-Uentrop, Germany released radiation after one of its spherical fuel pebbles became lodged in the pipe used to deliver fuel elements to the reactor. Operator actions to dislodge the obstruction during the event damaged the fuel pebble cladding, releasing radiation detectable up to two kilometers from the reactor. [27]
  • November 24, 1989 – Near-meltdown at Greifswald, East Germany [28]
  • October 19, 1989, – the Vandellos nuclear power plant near Tarragona, Spain did not result in an external release of radioactivity, nor was there damage to the reactor core or contamination on site. However, the damage to the plant's safety systems due to fire degraded the defence-in-depth significantly. The event is classified as Level 3, based on the defence-in-depth criterion. The plant was closed due to this accident, and now is in dismantling process.
[edit]

1990s
  • April 6, 1993Tomsk, Russia At the Tomsk-7 Siberian Chemical Enterprise plutonium reprocessing facility, a pressure buildup led to an explosive mechanical failure in a 34 cubic meter stainless steel reaction vessel buried in a concrete bunker under building 201 of the radiochemical works. The vessel contained a mixture of concentrated nitric acid, uranium (8757 kg), plutonium (449 g) along with a mixture of radioactive and organic waste from a prior extraction cycle. The explosion dislodged the concrete lid of the bunker and blew a large hole in the roof of the building, releasing approximately 6 GBq of Pu 239 and 30 TBq of various other radionuclides into the environment. The accident exposed 160 on-site workers and almost two thousand cleanup workers to total doses of up to 50 mSv (the threshold limit for radiation workers is 100 mSv per 5 years)[29]. The contamination plume extended 28 km NE of building 201, 20 km beyond the facility property. The small village of Georgievka (pop. 200) was at the end of the fallout plume, but no fatalities, illnesses or injuries were reported. [30]
  • September 30, 1999Japan's worst nuclear accident to date takes place at a uranium reprocessing facility in Tokai-mura, Ibaraki prefecture, northeast of Tokyo, Japan. The direct cause of the criticality accident was workers putting uranyl nitrate solution containing about 16.6 kg of uranium, which exceeded the critical mass, into a precipitation tank. The tank was not designed to dissolve this type of solution and was not configured to prevent eventual criticality. Three workers were exposed to (neutron)radiation doses in excess of allowable limits (two of these workers died); a further 116 received lesser doses of 1 msV or greater. [31] [32] [33] For more details, see Tokai, Ibaraki and 5 yen coin.
[edit]

2000s
  • February 15, 2000 – The Indian Point nuclear power plant's reactor 2 in Buchanan, New York, vented a small amount of radioactive steam when a steam generator tube failed. No detectable radioactivity was observed offsite. Con Edison was censured by the NRC for not following the procedures for timely notification of government agencies. Subsequently, Con Edison is required by the NRC to replace all four steam generators. [34] NRC Information Notice 2000-09
  • February 9, 2002 – Two workers were exposed to a small amount of radiation and suffered minor burns when a fire broke out at the Onagawa Nuclear Power Station Miyagi Prefecture, Japan. The fire occurred in the basement of reactor #3 during a routine inspection when a spray can was punctured accidentally, igniting a sheet of plastic. [35]
  • April 19, 2005Sellafield, UK. Twenty metric tons of uranium and 160 kilograms of plutonium dissolved in 83,000 liters of nitric acid leaked undetected over several months from a cracked pipe into a stainless steel sump chamber at the Thorp nuclear fuel reprocessing plant. The partially processed spent fuel was drained into holding tanks outside the plant. [36].
  • 2005Dounreay, UK. In September, the site's cementation plant was closed when 266 litres of radioactive reprocessing residues were spilled inside containment. [37][38]. In October, another of the site's reprocessing laboratories was closed down after nose-blow tests of eight workers tested positive for trace radioactivity. [39]
  • November 3, 2005Haddam, Connecticut, USA. The Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company reports that water containing quantities (below safe drinking water limits) of Cs-137, Co-60, Sr-90, and tritium leaked from a spent fuel pond. Independent measurements and review of the incident by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission are due to begin November 7, 2005. [40][41][42]
  • February, 2006, UK. Safety cap left off radioactive waste casket as it travelled 130 miles across Britain. "Only by “pure chance” was no one directly exposed to the high concentration of cobalt-60 gamma rays that streamed from the container because of the failure to install a lead safety plug."[43]
  • March 16, 2006 the State of Illinois sued Exelon Corporation for repeated leaks of tritium into water discharged around its Braidwood Nuclear Generating Station. Exelon states that despite the leaks it has operated within legal limits, but is agreeing to compensate landowners. [44] [45] Safety reviews have found that several nuclear plants have been leaking radioactive water. [46] The attorney general of Illinois has demanded that Exelon provide substitute water supplies to residents. Nils J. Diaz, the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said, "They're going to have to fix it."
List of military nuclear disasters and accidents:

1940s
  • June 24, 1942Leipzig, Germany: Werner Heisenberg and Robert Dopel had an explosion in the Leipzig L-IV atomic pile, which resulted in a major fire. This occurred shortly after L-IV demonstrated Germany's first signs of neutron propagation. The device was in the process of being checked for a possible heavy water leak to the core; during the inspection air was accidentally introduced into the reactor core, leading to ignition of the uranium powder inside. The fire caused the heavy water jacket to boil, eventually generating enough steam pressure to blow the reactor apart. A spray of burning uranium particles were scattered throughout the lab, igniting a major facility fire. [1]

A sketch of Louis Slotin's criticality accident used to determine exposure of those in the room at the time.

[edit]

1950s
  • February 13, 1950 – After having serious engine trouble caused by ice buildup on the carburetors, the crew of a B-36 bomber from the 7th Bomb Wing jettisoned a MKIV Fat Man bomb off the coast of British Columbia, Canada, and detonated it with conventional explosives before the plane itself crashed north of Smithers, British Columbia. When it was released, the bomb did not contain the plutonium core needed for an atomic explosion. This was the first time in history a nuclear weapon was lost. See B-36B 44-92075.
  • April 11, 1950, – A B-29 bomber carrying a nuclear weapon, four spare detonators, and a crew of thirteen crashed into a mountain near Manzano Base in Albuquerque, New Mexico, three minutes after departure from the Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque. The crash resulted in a major fire which was reported by the New York Times as being visible from "fifteen miles." The bomb's casing was completely demolished and its high explosives ignited upon contact with the plane's burning fuel. However, according to the Department of Defense, the four spare detonators and all nuclear components were recovered. A nuclear detonation was not possible because the weapon's core, while being carried on-board, was not placed in the weapon for safety reasons. All thirteen crew members were killed. [4]
  • November 10, 1950 – A B-50 returning one of several US Mark IV bombs secretly deployed in Canada had engine trouble and jettisoned the weapon at 10,500 feet (3,200 m). The bomb, carrying the depleted uranium tamper but not its plutonium core ("pit"), was set to self-destruct at 2500' (750 m) and dropped over the St. Lawrence River off Rivière du Loup, Quebec. The explosion shook area residents and scattered nearly 100 pounds (45 kg) of depleted uranium.[5]

The Castle Bravo fallout pattern.

  • March 1, 1954 – During the Castle Bravo nuclear test of the first deployable hydrogen bomb, a miscalcuation results in the explosion being over twice as large as predicted, with a total explosive force of 15 megatons. Of the total 15 megaton yield, 10 megatons were from fission of the natural uranium tamper, but those fission reactions were quite dirty, producing a large amount of fallout. That, combined with the much-larger-than-expected yield, and an unanticipated wind shift, produced a number of very serious consequences. Radioactive fallout was spread eastward onto the inhabited Rongelap and Rongerik atolls, which were soon evacuated. Many of the Marshall Islands natives have since suffered from birth defects and have received some compensation from the Federal government. A Japanese fishing boat, the Fifth Lucky Dragon, also came into contact with the fallout, which caused many of the crew to grow ill; one eventually died. This resulted in an international uproar, and reignited Japanese concerns about radiation, especially in regards to the possibility of contaminated fish.
  • November 29, 1955 – An operator's error led to a partial core meltdown in the experimental breeder reactor EBR-I, resulting in temporarily elevated radioactivity levels in the reactor building and necessitating a significant repair. [6][7] [8]
  • July 27, 1956– On a routine training mission, a B-47 bomber from the 307th Bombardment Wing crashed into a storage igloo containing three MK-6 nuclear weapons at the Lakenheath Royal Air Force Station, 20 miles northeast of Cambridge, England, killing the crew of four. Although the bombs involved in the accident did not have their fissile cores installed, each carried about 8,000 pounds of high explosives as part of their trigger mechanism. The crash and fire did not ignite the explosives and no detonation occurred. A retired Air Force general said later that if the explosives had detonated, releasing radioactive material, "it is possible that a part of Eastern England would have become a desert." Another Air Force officer said that it was only through "a combination of tremendous heroism, good fortune and the will of God" that a horrific nuclear weapons accident was avoided. The damaged weapons and components were later returned to the Atomic Energy Commission. [9]
  • May 22, 1957 – A B-36 flying to Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, New Mexico, accidentally released a MK17 thermonuclear bomb through the closed bomb bay doors while on approach. The bomb did not contain the core needed for a nuclear explosion, but upon impact the conventional explosives detonated, making a crater 25 feet (7.6 m) wide and 12 feet (3.7 m) deep and dispersed fragments and debris, though no radioactive material.[10]
  • September 11, 1957 – A major fire at Rocky Flats weapon mill 27 km from Denver began in a glove box and spread through the ventilation system into the stack filters. Plutonium and other contaminants were released, but the exact amount of which is unknown; estimates range from 25 mg to 250 kg. [11] [12] [13] [14]
  • September 29, 1957 – A cooling system failure resulted in a nuclear waste storage tank steam explosion at Mayak, a spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility near Chelyabinsk, Russia. The explosion, estimated to have the same energy as 75 tons of TNT (310 GJ), released some 20 MCi (700 PBq) and subjecting (by various estimates) 124,000 to 270,000 people to dangerously high levels of radiation. [15]
  • October 812, 1957 – See Windscale fire. Windscale Pile No. 1 at Sellafield, Cumbria, began an annealing process to release Wigner energy from graphite portions of the reactor. The reactor that burned was one of two air-cooled graphite-moderated natural uranium reactors at the site used for production of plutonium. Technicians mistakenly overheated the reactor pile because poorly placed temperature sensors indicated the reactor was cooling rather than heating, leading to failure of a nuclear cartridge, which allowed uranium and irradiated graphite to react with air. The nuclear fire burned four days, damaging a significant portion of the reactor core. About 150 burning fuel cells could not be lifted from the reactor core, but operators succeeded in creating a fire break by removing nearby fuel cells. A risky effort to cool the graphite core with water eventually quenched the fire. The air-cooled reactor had released radioactive gases into the surrounding countryside, primarily in the form of iodine-131. Milk distribution was banned in a 200 mile² (520 km²) area around the reactor for several weeks. A 1987 report by the National Radiological Protection Board predicted the accident would cause as many as 33 long-term cancer deaths, although the Medical Research Council Committee concluded that "it is in the highest degree unlikely that any harm has been done to the health of anybody, whether a worker in the Windscale plant or a member of the general public." [16] [17] [18] [19]
  • January 31, 1958Morocco – During a simulated takeoff a U.S. Air Force B-47 carrying an armed nuclear weapon caught fire when a wheel failure lead to its tail hitting the runway and a fuel tank rupture. Some contamination was detected immediately following the accident. [20][21]
  • February 28, 1958 – At the US-leased RAF airbase at Greenham Common, England, a B-47E of the 310th Bomb Wing developed problems shortly after takeoff and jettisoned its two 1,700 gallon external fuel tanks. The tanks missed the designated safe impact area and one hit a hangar whilst the other struck the ground behind a parked B-47E. The parked B-47E, which was fuelled with a pilot onboard and carrying a 1.1 megaton (4.6 PJ) B28 thermonuclear free fall bomb, was engulfed by flames. Whether any contamination resulted is disputed. See Greenham Common. [22]
  • June 16, 1958 – A prompt neutron criticality accident occurred in the C-1 wing of building 9212 at the Oak Ridge Tennessee Y-12 complex. A supercritical portion of highly enriched uranyl nitrate was allowed to collect in the drum. It is estimated that the criticality produced 1.3 * 1018 fissions. Eight employees were in close proximity to the drum during the accident, receiving neutron doses ranging from 30 to 477 rems. No fatalities reported. [23]
  • December 30, 1958 – A critical mass of plutonium solution was accidentally assembled during chemical purification at Los Alamos. The crane operator died of acute radiation sickness. The March, 1961 Journal of Occupational Medicine printed a special supplement medically analyzing this accident. Hand-manipulations of critical assemblies were abandoned as a matter of policy in U.S. federal facilities after this accident.[24]
  • November 20, 1959: A chemical explosion occurred in the radio-chemical processing plant at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee during decontamination of processing machinery. (Report ORNL-2989, Oak Ridge National Laboratory). The accident resulted in the release of about 15 grams of plutonium 239.
[edit]

1960s
  • June 7, 1960 – At McGuire Air Force Base in New Egypt, New Jersey, a helium tank exploded and ruptured the tanks of a BOMARC-A cruise missile. The fire destroys the missile, with contamination to the area directly below and adjacent to the missile.[25]
  • October 13, 1960 – A USSR Northern Fleet November class submarine, the ill-fated K-8, was on exercise in the Barents Sea when a leak developed in the steam generators and in a pipe leading to the compensator reception. While the crew rigged an improvised cooling system, radioactive gases leaked into the vessel. Three of the crew suffered visible radiation injuries, and according to radiological experts in Moscow; some crew members had been exposed to doses of up to 1.8 - 2 Sv (180 - 200 rem). [26][27]

SL-1 reactor being removed from the National Reactor Testing Station.

  • January 3, 1961SL-1, a U.S. experimental military nuclear power reactor at the National Reactor Testing Station in Idaho, went prompt critical during maintenance procedures and caused the water surrounding the core to explosively vaporize, causing a pressure wave to strike the top of the reactor vessel, propelling the control rod and entire reactor vessel upwards, killing the operator who had been standing on top of the vessel and pinning him to the ceiling. Two other military personnel supervising the maintenance operations were also killed.
  • January 24, 1961 – A B-52 bomber suffered a fire caused by a major leak in a wing fuel cell and exploded in mid-air 12 miles (20 km) north of Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, Goldsboro, North Carolina. The incident released the bomber's two Mark 39 hydrogen bombs. Five crewmen parachuted to safety, but three died—two in the aircraft and one on landing. Three of the four arming devices on one of the bombs activated, causing it to carry out many of the steps needed to arm itself, such as the charging of the firing capacitors and critically the deployment of a 100-foot (30 m) diameter retardation parachute. The parachute allowed the bomb to hit the ground with little damage. The fourth arming device — the pilot's safe/arm switch — was not activated and so the weapon did not detonate. The other bomb plunged into a muddy field at around 700 miles per hour (300 m/s) and disintegrated. Its tail was discovered about 20 feet (7 m) down and much of the bomb recovered, including the tritium bottle and the plutonium. However, excavation was abandoned because of uncontrollable flooding by ground water, and most of the thermonuclear stage, containing uranium, was left in situ. It was estimated to lie at around 180 feet (55 m). The Air Force purchased the land and fenced it off to prevent its disturbance, and it is tested regularly for contamination, although none has so far been found. See: [Broken Arrow: Goldsboro, NC http://www.ibiblio.org/bomb/].
  • July 4, 1961 – The Soviet Hotel-class K-19 submarine experiences a major accident after a reactor cooling system fails off the coast of Norway. The incident contaminates the crew, parts of the ship, and some of the ballistic missiles carried onboard, and several fatalities result. Reactor core temperatures reach 800 °C, nearly enough to melt the fuel rods, although the crew is able to regain temperature control by using emergency procedures. The movie K-19: The Widowmaker, starring Harrison Ford and Liam Neeson, tells a controversially fictionalized story of these events.
  • December 5, 1964 – A Minuteman 1B missile was on strategic alert at Launch Facility (LF) L-02, Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota. Two airmen were dispatched to the LF to repair inner zone (IZ) security system. In the midst of their checkout of the IZ system, one retrorocket in the spacer below the Reentry Vehicle (RV) fired, causing the RV/nuclear warhead to fall about 75 feet (23 m) to the floor of the silo. When the RV/nuclear warhead struck the bottom of the silo, the arming and fusing/altitude control subsystem containing the batteries was torn loose, thus removing all sources of power from the RV/nuclear warhead. The RV structure received considerable damage. All safety devices operated properly in that they did not sense the proper sequence of events to allow arming the warhead. There was no detonation or radioactive contamination.
  • January 1965 – An accident at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory releases 300 kCi (11 PBq) of radioactive material.
  • October 1965 – A fire at Rocky Flats exposes a crew of 25 to up to 17 times the legal limit for radiation.
  • December 5, 1965 – An A-4E Skyhawk airplane with one B43 nuclear bomb onboard falls off the USS Ticonderoga into 16,200 feet (4.9 km) of water off the coast of Japan. The ship was traveling from Vietnam to Yokosuka, Japan. The plane, pilot, and weapon are never recovered. There is dispute over exactly where the incident took place—the US Defense Department originally stated it took place 500 miles (800 km) off the coast of Japan, but US Navy documents later show it happened about 80 miles (130 km) from the Ryukyu Islands and 200 miles (320 km) from Okinawa. [28]
  • January 17, 1966 – Near Palomares, Spain, during over-ocean in-flight refueling, a B-52 collides with a United States Air Force KC-135 jet tanker. Eight of the eleven crew members are killed. The KC-135's 40,000 US gallons (150,000 L) of jet fuel burn. Two hydrogen bombs rupture, dispersing radioactive particles over nearby farms. An intact bomb lands near Palomares. The fourth bomb was lost at sea, 12 miles (20 km) off the coast. A search involving three months and 12,000 men recovers it. The US Navy employed the use of the deep-diving research submarine DSV Alvin to aide in the recovery efforts. During the ensuing cleanup, 1,500 metric tons of radioactive soil and tomato plants are shipped to a nuclear dump in Aiken, South Carolina. The U.S. settled claims by 522 Palomares residents for $600,000. The town also received a $200,000 desalinization plant. The motion picture Men of Honor (2000), starring Cuba Gooding, Jr. as USN Diver Carl Brashear, and Robert De Niro as USN Diver Billy Sunday, contained an account of the fourth bomb's recovery.
  • Winter 1966-1967 (date unknown) – The icebreaker Lenin, the USSR's first nuclear-powered ship, suffers a major accident (possibly a meltdown) in one of its three reactors. It was rumoured that around 30 of the crew were killed. The ship was abandoned for a year to allow radiation levels to drop before the three reactors were removed, to be dumped into the Tsivolko Fjord on the Kara Sea, along with 60% of the fuel elements packed in a separate container. The reactors were replaced with two new ones, and she re-entered service in 1970.
  • January 22, 1968 – 7 miles (11 km) south of Thule Air Force Base, Greenland, a fire breaks out in the navigator's compartment of a B-52 which crashes, scattering three hydrogen bombs on land and dropping one into the sea. During a cleanup complicated by Greenland's harsh weather, contaminated ice and airplane debris are buried in the U.S. Bomb fragments were recycled by Pantex, in Amarillo, Texas. Danes were outraged by the event because Greenland is a Danish possession, and Denmark forbids nuclear weapons on its territory. Denmark had massive demonstrations against the U.S. One warhead was recovered by Navy Seals and Seabees (U.S. naval engineers) in 1979. An August 2000 report suggests that the other bomb remains at the bottom of Baffin Bay.
  • May 24, 1968 – The nuclear submarine K-27 (Project 645) was out at sea. During sea trials, the nuclear reactor had operated at reduced power, and on May 24, power inexplicably suddenly dropped. Attempts by the crew to restore power levels failed. Simultaneously, gamma radiation in the reactor compartment increased to 150 rad/h. Radioactive gases were released to the reactor compartment from the safety buffer tank, and radiation on board the submarine increased. The reactor was shut down, and approximately 20% of the fuel assemblies were damaged. The incident was caused by problems in the cooling of the reactor core The entire submarine was scuttled in the Kara Sea in 1981. [29]
  • August 27, 1968 – The Project 667 A Yankee class nuclear submarine K-140 was in the naval yard at Severodvinsk for repairs. On August 27, an uncontrolled increase of the reactor's power occurred following work to upgrade the vessel. One of the reactors started up automatically when the control rods were raised to a higher position. Power increased to 18 times its normal amount, while pressure and temperature levels in the reactor increased to four times the normal amount. The automatic start-up of the reactor was caused by the incorrect installation of the control rod electrical cables and by operator error. Radiation levels aboard the vessel deteriorated. [30]
  • May 11, 1969 – 5 kg of plutonium burns at Rocky Flats. Hundreds of railway cars are used to transport the contamination to Idaho Falls, where it is left in unlined trenches over one of the US's most significant aquifers. The Colorado Committee for Environmental Information deployed scientists with sophisticated measuring equipment, putting officials on notice that the public now had the capacity to discover and report releases of radioactive substances. The committee's work in response to the fire discovered radioactive residue in areas near Rocky Flats that provided evidence of gradual build-up of radioactive compounds during the years of Rocky Flats operation.
  • July 24, 1969 – A serious fire at the AEC's Nuclear Trigger Assembly Facility at Rocky Flats in Colorado suspends US missile production. Areas downwind are contaminated by plutonium. Several factory buildings become uninhabitable and are later dismantled and buried.
Two US Navy nuclear submarines were lost in this decade, USS Thresher (SSN-593)in 1963 and USS Scorpion (SSN-589) in 1968. Although both were lost with all hands in deep water, according to the articles in Wikipedia there appears to have been no "signifcant" contamination of the surrounding area with radioactive material. Given the damage, it seems unlikely that the primary cooling loops did not fail, so there probably was some release of radioactive cooling water in both accidents.
[edit]

1970s
  • April 12, 1970 – A Soviet November-class attack submarine apparently experiences problems with its nuclear propulsion system while in the Atlantic Ocean. The crew attempts to hook a tow line to a Soviet bloc merchant marine vessel, but fails. The ship sinks, killing 52. [31]
  • December 12, 1971 – In the Thames River near New London, Connecticut, radioactive coolant water is being transferred from the submarine USS Dace (SSN-607) to the submarine tender USS Fulton when 500 US gallons (1,900 L) are spilled into the river.
  • December 1972 – A major fire and two explosions at a plutonium fabrication plant in Pawling, New York, cause plutonium to contaminate the plant and grounds, resulting in its permanent shutdown.
  • 1975 – The USS Guardfish attempts to dump the depleted resin from its purification system (used to remove dissolved radioactive minerals and particles from the primary coolant loops of submarines). The ship is contaminated when the wind blows resin back onto the ship. This type of accident was fairly common (see 1961), however U.S. Navy nuclear vessels no longer discharge resin at sea.
  • OctoberNovember 1975 – While disabled, the submarine tender USS Proteus discharges radioactive coolant water into Apra Harbor, Guam. A Geiger counter at two of the harbor's public beaches showed 100 millirems/hour, fifty times the allowable dose.
  • August 1976 – An explosion at a Hanford, Washington, Plutonium Finishing Plant contaminated several workers. The plant converted plutonium nitrate solutions into metallic form for nuclear weapons production facilities. The explosion blew out a quarter-inch-thick lead glass window that shielded workers from radioactive materials. One 64-year-old worker was showered with nitric acid and radioactive pieces of glass. The worker inhaled the largest dose of americium-241 ever recorded. He inhaled about 500 times the U.S. government occupational standards for the element. The worker was placed in isolation for five months and given an experimental drug to flush the isotope from his body. By 1977, his body's radiation count had fallen by about 80 percent. When the worker returned home, friends and church members avoided him. His minister finally had to tell people it was safe to be around him. He died of natural causes in 1987 at age 75. [32]
  • 1977 – The Soviet K-171 accidentally releases a nuclear warhead while off the coast of Kamchatka. After a frantic search involving dozens of ships and aircraft, the warhead is recovered. [33]
  • May 22, 1978 – Aboard the USS Puffer near Puget Sound, Washington, a valve was mistakenly opened, releasing up to 500 US gallons (1,900 L) of radioactive water.
  • July 16, 1979 (34th anniversary of the Trinity test) – In Church Rock, New Mexico, the earth/clay dike of a uranium mill's "temporary" settling/evaporating pond fails. The pond was past its planned and licensed life and had been filled two feet (60 cm) deeper than design, despite evident cracking. The incident drains about 100 million US gallons (380,000 m³) of radioactive liquids and 1100 short tons (1000 metric tons) of solid wastes, which settle out up to 70 miles (100 km) down the Rio Puerco[34]
[edit]

1980s
  • September 19, 1980 – An United States Air Force repairman doing routine maintenance in a Titan II ICBM silo in Arkansas drops a wrench socket which rolls off a work platform and falls to the bottom of the silo. The socket strikes the missile, causing a leak from a pressurized fuel tank. The missile complex and surrounding area is evacuated and eight and a half hours later, vapors within the silo ignite and explode with enough force to blow off the two 740-short ton (670 t) silo doors and hurl the two megaton W53 warhead 600 feet (180 m). The explosion kills an Air Force specialist and injures twenty-one other USAF personnel. [35]
  • August 8, 1982– While on duty in the Barents Sea, there was a release of liquid metal coolant from the reactor of the a Soviet Project 705 Alfa class submarine K-123. The accident was caused by a leak in the steam generator. Approximately two tons of metal alloy leaked into the reactor compartment, irreparably damaging the reactor such that it had to be replaced. It took nine years to repair the submarine. [36]
  • January 3, 1983 – The Soviet Cosmos-1402 nuclear-powered spy satellite burns up over the South Atlantic.
  • August 10, 1985 – About 35 miles (55 km) from Vladivostok in Chazhma Bay, an a Soviet Echo class submarine has a reactor explosion, producing fatally high levels of radiation. Ten officers are killed, but the deadly cloud of radioactivity does not reach Vladivostok. [37]
  • 1986 – The US Government declassifies 19,000 pages of documents indicating that between 1946 and 1986, the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington, released thousands of US gallons (several m³) of radioactive liquids. Of 270,000 people living in the affected area, most received low doses of radiation from iodine.
  • October 3, 1986 – 480 miles (770 km) east of Bermuda, K-219 a Soviet Yankee I class submarine experienced an explosion in one of its nuclear missile tubes and at least three crew members were killed. Sixteen nuclear missiles and two reactors were on board. Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev privately communicated news of the disaster to U.S. President Ronald Reagan before publicly acknowledging the incident on October 4. Two days later, on October 6, the ship sank in the Atlantic Ocean while under tow in 18,000 feet (5.5 km) of water. [38]
  • October 1988 – At the nuclear trigger assembly facility at Rocky Flats in Colorado, two employees and a Department of Energy inspector inhale radioactive particles, causing closure of the plant. Several safety violations were cited, including un-calibrated monitors, inadequate fire equipment, and groundwater contaminated with radioactivity.
[edit]

1990s
  • November 17, 1996 – The Russian probe Mars 96 fails during launch and crashes back to Earth with an radioisotope thermoelectric generator on board. The location of the crash is disputed - either in the Pacific Ocean or in the mountains of Chile.
  • 1997Georgian soldiers suffer radiation poisoning and burns. They are eventually traced back to training sources abandoned, forgotten, and unlabelled after the collapse of the Soviet Union. One was a cesium-137 pellet in a pocket of a shared jacket which put out about 130,000 times the level of background radiation at 1 meter distance.[39]
[edit]

2000s
  • February, 2003Oak Ridge Tennessee Y-12 facility. During the final testing phase of a new salt-less uranium processing method the test experienced a small explosion followed by a fire. The explosion occurred in an unvented vessel containing unreacted calcium, water and depleted uranium, an exothermic reaction amongst these articles generated enough steam to burst the container. This small explosion breached the glovebox where it was stored. Air filtered into the damaged glovebox igniting some loose uranium powder (uranium is pyrophoric) starting a fire that slightly contaminated three employees. A year later BWTX, a partnership of BXW Technologies and Bechtel National was fined $82,500 for the accident.[40] [41]

List of civilian radiation disasters and accidents:

1950s
  • March, 1957– Employees of a Houston company licensed by the Atomic Energy Commission to encapsulate sources for radiographic cameras were exposed to Iridium192 powder (resulting in radiation burns to the two workers directly exposed). The powder was then spread to several homes and cars in the community. The incident was reported in Look Magazine in 1961; investigations published by the Mayo Clinic that same year found few of the radiological injuries claimed in widespread press reports, but failed to assuage public fears that followed publicity of the accident.
[edit]

1960s

1969In Lucens, Switzerland, a testing reactor similar to the NRX-Reactor explodes, most of radiation is contained inside a cave. INES Level 4 Accident.
[edit]

1970s
  • July 16, 1979 (34th anniversary of the Trinity test) – In Church Rock, New Mexico, the earth/clay dike of a uranium mill's settling/evaporating pond fails. The pond was past its planned and licensed life and had been filled two feet (60 cm) deeper than design, despite evident cracking. The incident drains about 100 million US gallons (380,000 m³) of radioactive liquids and 1100 short tons (1000 metric tons) of solid wastes, which settle out up to 70 miles (100 km) down the Rio Puerco[1]
  • September 29, 1979 - Tritium leak at American Atomics in Tucson, Arizona; at the public school across the street from the plant $300,000 of food is found contaminated; chocolate cake had 56 nCi/L; by contrast, the EPA safety limit for drinking water is 20 nCi/L (740 Bq/L) based on consumption of 2 liters per day.[2][3][4][5]
[edit]

1980s
  • February 11, 1981 – A new worker inadvertently opened a valve and more than 100,000 US gallons (380 m³) of slightly radioactive water leaked into the containment building of the Tennessee Valley Authority Sequoyah 1 nuclear power plant in rural Tennessee. Fourteen workers came into contact with the water.[6]
  • March 1981 – More than 100 workers were exposed to doses of up to 155 millirem per day radiation during repairs of a nuclear power plant in Tsuruga, Japan, violating the company's limit of 100 millirems (1 mSv) per day. [7]
  • July 1981 – Lycoming, Nine Mile Point, New York. An overloaded waste water tank was deliberately flushed into the waste building sub-basement, filling it to a depth of four feet. This overturned and spilled some of the approximately one hundred fifty 55 U.S. gallon drums that were stored there. Fifty thousand U.S. gallons (190 m³) of lesser-contaminated water was discharged into Lake Ontario. [8][ NRC Region 1 augmented inspection team (AIT) inspection report# (50-220/89-90) of the use of the Radwaste building sub-basement as a long term liquid retention facility at Nine Mile Point unit 1.] October 2, 1989
  • 1982International Nutronics of Dover, New Jersey spilled an unknown quantity of radioactive cobalt solution used to treat gems for color, modify chemicals, and sterilize food and medical supplies. The soluton spilled into the Dover sewer system and forced the closure of the plant. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission was only informed of the accident ten months later by a whistleblower. In 1986 International Nutronics was fined $35,000 and one of its top executives was sentenced to probation for their failure to report the spill. [9][10][11]
  • December 6, 1983Juarez Mexico, A local resident salvaged materials from a discarded radiation therapy machine carrying 6000 pellets of cobalt-60. The dismantling and transport of the material led to severe contamination of his truck; when the truck was scrapped, it in turn contaminated another 5000 metric tons of steel with an estimated 300 curies (11 terabecquerels) of activity. This material was sold for kitchen table legs and building materials some of which was sent to the U.S. and Canada; the incident was discovered when a truck delivering contaminated building materials months later to the Los Alamos National Laboratory accidentally drove through a radiation monitoring station. Contamination was later measured on the roads that were used to transport the original damaged radiation source. In some cases pellets were actually found embedded in the roadway. In the state of Sinaloa, 109 houses were condemned due to contaminated building material. This incident prompted the NRC and US Customs Service to install radiation detection equipment at all major border crossings. [12] [http://www.nuclearfiles.org/hitimeline/nwa/80/1984.html
Below is a chemical accident which occurred within the nuclear fuel cycle
  • January 6, 1986 – At the Kerr-McGee nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in Gore, Oklahoma, a cylinder of uranium hexafluoride burst after being improperly heated. One worker died of caustic chemical exposure, 30 were injured.[13][14]
  • 1986 – The NRC revoked the license of a Radiation Technology, Inc. (RTI) plant in New Jersey for worker safety violations. A safety device to prevent people from entering the irradiation chamber during operation had been bypassed. A worker had received a near-lethal dose of radiation. RTI was cited 32 times. Violations also included throwing radioactive garbage out with the regular trash.[15]
  • September 13, 1987 – In the Goiânia accident, scavengers broke open a radiation-therapy machine in an abandoned clinic of Goiânia, Brazil. They sold the kilocurie (40 TBq) caesium-137 source as a glowing curiosity. Four hundred were contaminated, four die.[16]
  • June 6, 1988Radiation Sterilizers in Decatur, Georgia, reported a leak of caesium-137 at their facility. Seventy thousand medical supply containers and milk cartons were recalled. Ten employees were exposed, and three "had enough on them that they contaminated other surfaces," including their homes and cars.[17]
  • 5 February 1989 Three workers were exposed to gamma rays from the 60Co source in a medical products irradation plant. The most exposed person died while the other two lost limbs. This was a human error accident where a person made the wrong choice to enter the irradation room.[18]
[edit]

1990s
  • June 24, 1990Soreq, Israel An operator at a commercial irradiation facility bypassed the safety systems on the JS6500 sterilizer to clear a jam in the product conveyer area. The one to two minute exposure resulted in a whole body dose estimated at 10 Gy or more. He died 36 days later despite extensive medical care. See fool irradation [19] for a discussion of thise type of event. [20]
  • October 26, 1991Nesvizh, Belarus An operator at an atomic sterilization facility bypassed the safety systems to clear a jammed conveyer. Upon entering the irradiation chamber he was exposed to an estimated whole body dose of 11 Gy, with some portions of the body receiving upwards of 20 Gy. Prompt intensive medical care managed to keep him alive for 113 days after the accident.[21]
  • April 6, 1993Tomsk, Russia At the Tomsk-7 Siberian Chemical Enterprise plutonium reprocessing facility, a pressure buildup led to an explosive mechanical failure in a 34 cubic meter stainless steel reaction vessel buried in a concrete bunker under building 201 of the radiochemical works. The vessel contained a mixture of concentrated nitric acid, uranium (8757 kg), plutonium (449 g) along with a mixture of radioactive and organic waste from a prior extraction cycle. The explosion dislodged the concrete lid of the bunker and blew a large hole in the roof of the building, releasing approximately 6 GBq of Pu 239 and 30 TBq of various other radionuclides into the environment. The accident exposed 160 on-site workers and almost two thousand cleanup workers to total doses of up to 50 mSv (the threshold limit for radiation workers is 100 mSv per 5 years)[22]. The contamination plume extended 28 km NE of building 201, 20 km beyond the facility property. The small village of Georgievka (pop. 200) was at the end of the fallout plume, but no fatalities, illnesses or injuries were reported. [23]
  • August 31, 1994Commerce Township, Michigan David Hahn's experimental reactor was discovered in his mother's back yard. The unshielded reactor exposed his neighborhood to 1000 times the normal levels of background radiation.
  • 1998Recycler Acerinox in Cádiz, Spain, unwittingly melts scrap metal containing radioactive sources; the radioactive cloud drifts all the way to Switzerland before being detected.[24]
[edit]

2000s
  • February 9, 2002 – Two workers were exposed to a small amount of radiation and suffered minor burns when a fire broke out at the Onagawa Nuclear Power Station Miyagi Prefecture. The fire occurred in the basement of reactor #3 during a routine inspection when a spray can was punctured accidentally, igniting a sheet of plastic. [25]
  • February, 2002 – A large gamma source was transported from a Leeds hospital (Cookridge hospital) to Sellafield with defective shielding. The radiation was escaping from the package downwards into the ground, it is not thought that this event has caused any injury or disease in either a human or an animal. This event was treated in a serious manner because the defense in depth type of protection for the source had been eroded. If the container had been tipped over in a road crash then a strong beam of gamma rays would have been directed in a dirrection where it would be likely to irradate humans. Given the typical activitry and isotopic nature of a radiotherphy source then it is reasonable to assume that deterministic (short term) effects such as the so called radiation sickness or "acute radiation syndrome" might have been observed among those involved in the accident (and in rescue workers). The company responsible for the transport of the source, AEA Technology was fined £250000 by a British court.
  • 2003Cape of Navarin, Chukotka, Russia. A radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) located on the Arctic shore was discovered in a highly degraded state. The level of the exposition dose at the generator surface was as high as 15 R/h; in July 2004 a second inspection of the same RTG showed that gamma radiation emission had risen to 87 R/h and that strontium-90 had begun to leak into the environment. [26] In November 2003, a completely dismantled RTG located on the Island of Yuzhny Goryachinsky in the Kola Bay was found. The generator's radioactive heat source was found on the ground near the shoreline in the northern part of the island. [27]
  • September 10, 2004Yakutia, Russia. Two Radioisotope thermoelectric generators — were dropped 50 meters onto the tundra at Zemlya Bunge island during an airlift when the helicopter flew into heavy weather. According to the nuclear regulators, the impact compromised the RTGs' external radiation shielding. At a height of 10 meters above the impact site, the intensity of gamma radiation was measured at 4 millisieverts per hour. [28]
  • 2005Dounreay, UK. In September, the site's cementation plant was closed when 266 litres of radioactive reprocessing residues were spilled inside containment. [29][30]. In October, another of the site's reprocessing laboratories was closed down after nose-blow tests of eight workers tested positive for trace radioactivity. [31]
  • November 3, 2005Haddam, Connecticut, USA. The Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company reports that water containing quantities (below safe drinking water limits) of Cs-137, Co-60, Sr-90, and tritium leaked from a spent fuel pond. Independent measurements and review of the incident by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission are due to begin November 7, 2005. [32][33][34]
  • March 11, 2006 – at Fleurus, Belgium, an operator working for the company Sterigenics[35], at medical equipment sterilization site, entered the irradation room and remianed there for 20 seconds. The room contained a source of Co-60 which was not in the pool of water.[36] Three weeks later the worker suffered of symptoms typical of an irradiation (vomit, lost of hairs, fatigue). One estimate that he was exposed to a dose between 4.4 and 4.8 Gy due to a malfunction of the control-command hydraulic system maintaining the radioactive source in the pool. The operator spent over one month in a specialized hospital before going back home. Today he still shows after-effects (fatigue) that should attenuate in several months. To protect workers, the federal nuclear control agency AFCN and private auditors from AVN recommanded Sterigenics to install a redundant system of security. It is an accident of level 4 on INES scale.[37][38][39]
  • March 16, 2006 – The State of Illinois sued Exelon Corporation for repeated leaks of tritium into water discharged around its Braidwood Nuclear Generating Station. Exelon states that despite the leaks it has operated within legal limits, but agreed to compensate landowners. [40] [41] The tritium was produced during normal operation and, as fuel reactivity declines, is legally discharged with the borated water into the nearby river. However, some of this water leaked onto land. On March 20, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced it had formed a task force to examine tritium leaks. [42]
  • May 5, 2006 – An accidental release of radioactive iodine gas at a nuclear power plant in Minnesota exposed approximately one hundred plant workers to low-level radiation. Most workers received 10 to 20 millirems (0.1-0.2 mSv), about the same as a dental x-ray. The workers were wearing protective gear at the time, and no radiation leaked outside the plant to the surrounding area. [43]
Alstublieft.
oliepiek is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 19:59   #63
Sfax
Banneling
 
 
Geregistreerd: 23 januari 2003
Berichten: 12.310
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door oliepiek Bekijk bericht
List of civilian nuclear disasters and accidents:

...

Alstublieft.

Uw gespartel is amusant maar best wel zielig

In heel uw lijstje staat welgeteld 1 evenement dat je als kernramp kan bestempelen en dat is, wonder o wonder, Chernobyl (een notoir onveilig design van reactor in combinatie met negeren van veiligheidsvoorschriften leidt logischerwijs tot problemen).
TMI kan je mogelijk nog gebruiken als tweede in lijn, en daar is er van straling of bedreiging voor de omgeving al geen sprake meer...

Informeer jezelf eens mijn beste...
Sfax is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 20:11   #64
Sfax
Banneling
 
 
Geregistreerd: 23 januari 2003
Berichten: 12.310
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door willem1940NLD Bekijk bericht
Maddox & Sfax: in de berichten/links die ik gaf staat duidelijk DAT er momenteel door klassieke kerncentrales tritium op water èn atmosfeer wordt geloosd en dat de hoeveelheden omhoog gaan/moeten.
Dat staat daar absoluut niet in. Dat lees jij er in, maar dat staat er niet in.
Dat de concentraties lager zijn dan toegestaan en dat hogere concetraties mogen, wil niet zeggen dat ze omhoog moeten of omhoog gaan.
En Borsele loost geen tritium; dat staat nergens in jouw bericht. Lozen betekent dat ze hun zwaar water botweg het kanaallin sturen, en dat doen ze niet.

Citaat:
NIET gevonden, terzake van de beoogde "nieuwe techniek": het omzettings-rendement van tritium en/of deuterium naar helium.

Zoals algemeen bekend, is in veel fabrieks-processen een omzetting niet 100%, tamelijk vaak zelfs maar omtrent 50 en dan zit je met, hetzij puur of in enige onbedoelde verbinding, oorspronkelijke of nieuwe stoffen als afval cq fataal bijproduct, met weinig of geen mogelijkheden tot (her-)benutting.
Kwestie van het even simpel voor te stellen:
Een H-atoom, 2 neutronen en een geslaagde reactie is één tritium-atoom; zonder die geslaagde reactie (de bron van inefficientie), heb je gewoonweg nog steeds dat H-atoom, en die twee neutronen. Geen afval; gewoon nog een kans om het nog eens te proberen.

Citaat:
Zulke getallen zie ik nergens vermeld. Dit is mij allemaal te geheimzinnig en ja, houdt mij wantrouwig.

ZOU het mogelijk zijn om het fataal aanvallend helium deugdelijk op te slaan dan komt hieruit wellicht een nuttig her-gebruik zoals bijvoorbeeld gewichts-ondervanging voor voer- en vaartuigen binnen onze atmosfeer en eventueel vulling van zwem/zweef-vesten maar dat zal er wel niet inzitten anders hadden de ijveraars zulke aansprekende reclame-argumenten zeker wel gepubliceerd.

Ik wil geen noemenswaardige hoeveelheden tritium drinken en ook geen gek helium-stemmetje krijgen.
Dat blijft zo'n beetje sterkste tegenargument, en zelfs dat is op quatch gebaseerd.

Eens resumeren: fissie ben je tegen, fusie klaarblijkelijk ook, organische brandstoffen vanzelfsprekend ook, en zelfs zonnecellen en windenergie vind je niet goed. Enkel waterenergie kan je ietwat gerust stellen, en dat kan je hier in België niet gebruiken.
Welke energiebron stel jij voor?
Sfax is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 21:17   #65
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

Ik ben niet "tegen" techniek of energiebronnen, wel tegen niet-informatie en desinformatie en uiteraard ook tegen GEVAAR.

Waterkracht stelt mij voornamelijk FINANCIËEL tamelijk "gerust": meestal wel opbrengst uit tamelijk duurzame installatie, maar uiteraard alleen in gebieden met toereikend debiet aan water. Uiteraard niet genoeg winbaar voor dekking van wereld-energiebehoefte.

Borsele loost/veroorzaakt wel degelijk tritium, zie Pag 125/126, Diagram 4 van:
http://www.vrom.nl/get.asp?file=docs...ortNLfinal.pdf

Graag stoppen met schelden / op de man spelen en haspel de argumenten niet door elkaar.

Tritium (in hoeveelheden van enige betekenis) is niet zinvol op te slaan (en zeker niet in een blikken trommel ofzo); rood kwik of een metaalhydride nodig, zeer dure grap. Misschien ook wel "invriezen" nabij Kelvin-punt mogelijk; nog niet tegengekomen maar zoiets lukt ook aardig met (evenmin normaal bewaarbaar wegens te kleine moleculen die overal doorheenkruipen) waterstof, beetje familie.
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 21:53   #66
Sfax
Banneling
 
 
Geregistreerd: 23 januari 2003
Berichten: 12.310
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door willem1940NLD Bekijk bericht
Ik ben niet "tegen" techniek of energiebronnen, wel tegen niet-informatie en desinformatie en uiteraard ook tegen GEVAAR.
Gevaar kan je nooit voor 100% uitsluiten; learn to live with it.

Citaat:
Waterkracht stelt mij voornamelijk FINANCIËEL tamelijk "gerust": meestal wel opbrengst uit tamelijk duurzame installatie, maar uiteraard alleen in gebieden met toereikend debiet aan water. Uiteraard niet genoeg winbaar voor dekking van wereld-energiebehoefte.
Theoretisch wel; praktisch niet.
Let trouwens op met die financiële gerustheid. Waterkracht is absoluut niet zo goedkoop (zeker niet als je met getijdencentrales werkt).

Citaat:
Borsele loost/veroorzaakt wel degelijk tritium, zie Pag 125/126, Diagram 4 van:
www.vrom.nl/get.asp?file=docs/kamerstukken/ Thu13Oct20050906460200/JC2ndreportNLfinal.pdf
Werkt hier niet; geeft een fout.
Tussen Borsele die Tritium veroorzaakt en Tritium loost is trouwens een serieus schaalverschil.

Citaat:
Graag stoppen met schelden / op de man spelen en haspel de argumenten niet door elkaar.
Ik haspel de argumenten niet door elkaar, maar als ze inconsistent zijn dan kan ik dat gerust aanhalen, niet?
Op de man spelen was er evenmin bij; gewoon een samenvatting van je uitlatingen samen met een vraag...

Citaat:
Tritium (in hoeveelheden van enige betekenis) is niet zinvol op te slaan (en zeker niet in een blikken trommel ofzo); rood kwik of een metaalhydride nodig, zeer dure grap. Misschien ook wel "invriezen" nabij Kelvin-punt mogelijk; nog niet tegengekomen maar zoiets lukt ook aardig met (evenmin normaal bewaarbaar wegens te kleine moleculen die overal doorheenkruipen) waterstof, beetje familie.
En wat zijn daarvoor je bronnen? Wil je plots gaan beweren dat beta-straling gevaarlijker is dan aangenomen (en aangetoond)?

Laatst gewijzigd door Sfax : 30 mei 2006 om 21:56.
Sfax is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 22:13   #67
maddox
Secretaris-Generaal VN
 
maddox's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 25 september 2002
Locatie: vilvoorde
Berichten: 69.989
Stuur een bericht via MSN naar maddox
Standaard

Tritium in betekeniswaardige hoeveelheden worden niet in zuivere vorm opgeslagen. En om een hydride te maken..... "verbrand" het gewoon, en je hebt superzwaar water, perfect op te slaan in een tupperware doos. Doe er een zilverpapiertje rond als je de beta straling 100% wil tegenhouden.
maddox is nu online   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 22:45   #68
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Sfax Bekijk bericht
Gevaar kan je nooit voor 100% uitsluiten; learn to live with it.
Ontkennen en/of de kop in het zand steken is een ander uiterste.
Citaat:
Theoretisch wel; praktisch niet.
Let trouwens op met die financiële gerustheid. Waterkracht is absoluut niet zo goedkoop (zeker niet als je met getijdencentrales werkt).
Hoe dan ook, ontoereikend winbaar; overigens wel al zeer lang zich lonend.
Citaat:
Werkt hier niet; geeft een fout.
Tussen Borsele die Tritium veroorzaakt en Tritium loost is trouwens een serieus schaalverschil.
De grafiek geeft lozingen weer.
Citaat:
Ik haspel de argumenten niet door elkaar, maar als ze inconsistent zijn dan kan ik dat gerust aanhalen, niet?
Op de man spelen was er evenmin bij; gewoon een samenvatting van je uitlatingen samen met een vraag...
Uiteraard heb je recht op een eigen mening; op mijn beurt vind ik bijvoorbeeld dat je alleen maar probeert dingen te ontkennen of weg te wuiven, zonder werkelijke onderbouwing. Raar dat je, als je er zo veel van lijkt/beweert vanaf te weten, kennelijk toch alles hebt overgeslagen wat ik in diverse links heb opgediept.
Citaat:
En wat zijn daarvoor je bronnen? Wil je plots gaan beweren dat beta-straling gevaarlijker is dan aangenomen (en aangetoond)?
Bronnen plenty, o.a Internet en encyclopedieën.
Ik las dat het drinken van Tritium wordt afgeraden.
__________________
Als het regent in Limburg, kan het op Aarde best mooi weer zijn.

Laatst gewijzigd door willem1940NLD : 30 mei 2006 om 22:47. Reden: typo
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 22:53   #69
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door maddox Bekijk bericht
Tritium in betekeniswaardige hoeveelheden worden niet in zuivere vorm opgeslagen. En om een hydride te maken..... "verbrand" het gewoon, en je hebt superzwaar water, perfect op te slaan in een tupperware doos. Doe er een zilverpapiertje rond als je de beta straling 100% wil tegenhouden.
Herhaling: er zijn geen (werkbare en/of betaalbare) oplossingen voor de opslag van tritium.
Probeer je "simpel" technisch advies eens te slijten aan de Dames/Heren (democratische) Beslissers.

Ik vermoed dat je tamelijk jong bent en dus menselijkerwijs gesproken meer tijd tegemoet kunt zien om veel tritium te nuttigen; proost.
__________________
Als het regent in Limburg, kan het op Aarde best mooi weer zijn.
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 23:42   #70
Tavek
Banneling
 
 
Geregistreerd: 11 januari 2004
Berichten: 66.569
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door willem1940NLD Bekijk bericht
Herhaling: er zijn geen (werkbare en/of betaalbare) oplossingen voor de opslag van tritium.
Probeer je "simpel" technisch advies eens te slijten aan de Dames/Heren (democratische) Beslissers.

Ik vermoed dat je tamelijk jong bent en dus menselijkerwijs gesproken meer tijd tegemoet kunt zien om veel tritium te nuttigen; proost.
Een natuurlijk waterstofisotoop vrees ik niet.
Tavek is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 30 mei 2006, 23:43   #71
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Tavek Bekijk bericht
Een natuurlijk waterstofisotoop vrees ik niet.
Het gaat om minder natuurlijke, ofwel bovenmatig grote hoeveelheden.
__________________
Als het regent in Limburg, kan het op Aarde best mooi weer zijn.
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 00:07   #72
maddox
Secretaris-Generaal VN
 
maddox's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 25 september 2002
Locatie: vilvoorde
Berichten: 69.989
Stuur een bericht via MSN naar maddox
Standaard

Willem1940NLD, ik ben 33 jaar en al jarenlang technieker. Mijn eindwerk ging over kernenergie en de bijhorende problemathiek.

Jouw argument van heliumopslag , waar het helium gemaakt is door kernfusie. Dat is geen probleem. dat helium is net hetzelfde als het heluim nu gewonnen uit aardgas. en dat gebruiken we zelfs in de ballonnetjes voor de klein mannen.

De omzetting van tritium en deuterium in een fusiereactie is van elke 1000 ton Deuterium/tritiummengsel 997 ton helium en 3 ton omgezet in pure energie. (sorry als ik hier een komma verkeerd zou zetten, ik heb effe geen naslagwerk ter beschikking.) Geen afvalproduct an sich.
Zolang er plasma in de reactor zit kan die niet afgezet worden. Dus eerst de brandstoftoevoer afzetten, het beschikbare plasma opwerken en dan pas afzetten.

Er is trouwens ook geen tritiumopslag nodig bij een fusiecentrale, alleen deuterium en lithium6. Hebben we in een keer nut voor de overtollige neutronenstraling.
maddox is nu online   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 00:12   #73
carlgustaaf
Banneling
 
 
carlgustaaf's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 26 juli 2005
Berichten: 10.858
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Tavek Bekijk bericht
Tijd om wat centen en energie in research rond dit thema te steken mij dunkt !
Ja, die regeringen kunnen dat wel doen eigenlijk hé! Vermits het toch het volk is die de rekeningen zal betalen.Ze moeten zich niet generen vooral...
carlgustaaf is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 00:15   #74
carlgustaaf
Banneling
 
 
carlgustaaf's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 26 juli 2005
Berichten: 10.858
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Tavek Bekijk bericht
Kernfusie zou wel eens de ontdekking van de eeuw kunnen worden indien ze op grote schaal zou kunnen toegepast worden. Bijna ongelimiteerde energie zonder drawbacks.

Als we dan nog die kutautos en camions van de baan kunnen halen is onze planeet misschien gered.
Oftewel ontploft ze in duizend stukken
Onze toekomst gespeeld op een dobbelsteenworp: alles of niets!In één slag!
carlgustaaf is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 00:16   #75
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

@maddox: dat klinkt inderdaad erg bemoedigend, bijna te mooi om waar te zijn: 100% "opgebruikend" proces.

Het is te hopen dat er geen andere dingen (zelfs voor jou) verzwegen zijn gebleven tot dusver.
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 00:43   #76
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

Het gedoe lijkt mij zoiets als een mini-zon; spannend onderdeel van een verhaal dat iemand op Wiki heeft neergezet lijkt dan (als vervolg) zelf koolstof knutselen uit (overtollig) helium ...

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zon
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 00:51   #77
Jazeker
Secretaris-Generaal VN
 
Jazeker's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 20 februari 2004
Locatie: Vlaanderen
Berichten: 66.000
Stuur een bericht via MSN naar Jazeker
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door carlgustaaf Bekijk bericht
Oftewel ontploft ze in duizend stukken
Onze toekomst gespeeld op een dobbelsteenworp: alles of niets!In één slag!
Mag ik uw artikels betreffende de gevolgen van het ontploffen van een kernfusiereactor ?
__________________
The oncoming storm







Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Flanelcondoom Bekijk bericht
*KNIP* Deze opmerking lijkt mij persoonlijk en onnodig grievend.
Nelle Pastorale Nelle Jazeker Nelle

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Duupje Bekijk bericht
Jep, heil Jazeker.
Jazeker is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 00:55   #78
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Jazeker Bekijk bericht
Mag ik uw artikels betreffende de gevolgen van het ontploffen van een kernfusiereactor ?
Even geduld, te pril stadium. Die reactors moeten minstens eerst gebouwd worden voordat er een zinvol artikel over zoiets kan worden geschreven.
__________________
Als het regent in Limburg, kan het op Aarde best mooi weer zijn.
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 02:34   #79
maddox
Secretaris-Generaal VN
 
maddox's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 25 september 2002
Locatie: vilvoorde
Berichten: 69.989
Stuur een bericht via MSN naar maddox
Standaard

Willem1940NLD , een fusiereactor kan wel ontploffen, maar de gevolgen zullen lokaal blijven. In het ergste geval slaan de magnetische velden door, en komt het 20 miljoen graden hete plasma in kontakt met de metalen en betonnen beschermingsmantel. Wat dus onmiddelijk zal verdampen.
Maar zonder die magnetische velden kan de temperatuur en de druk niet gehandhaafd worden en valt de fusiereactie onmiddelijk stil.

En de hoeveelheid plasma is gering dus de hoeveelheid radioactief materiaal dat effectief vrij kan komen is miniem in vergelijking met een moderne grote splijtingsreactor.

En voor de rest, tja, da's een grote electriciteitscentrale die BOEM zegt. Er zijn er al een pak meer klassieke de lucht in gegaan, of stuwdammen gebroken.
maddox is nu online   Met citaat antwoorden
Oud 31 mei 2006, 02:44   #80
willem1940NLD
Perm. Vertegenwoordiger VN
 
Geregistreerd: 4 november 2004
Berichten: 14.274
Standaard

Bijna een sprookje; "en zij leefden nog lang & gelukkig".
willem1940NLD is offline   Met citaat antwoorden
Antwoord



Regels voor berichten
Je mag niet nieuwe discussies starten
Je mag niet reageren op berichten
Je mag niet bijlagen versturen
Je mag niet jouw berichten bewerken

vB-code is Aan
Smileys zijn Aan
[IMG]-code is Aan
HTML-code is Uit
Forumnavigatie


Alle tijden zijn GMT +1. Het is nu 15:41.


Forumsoftware: vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright ©2002 - 2020, Politics.be