[ RadSafe ] Arnie Gundersen - Another One Who Interviews on Russia Today and Floods the Net
sjd at swcp.com
Thu Apr 28 19:42:59 CDT 2011
I scrolled through the Fukushima Updates at the Fairewinds
website (link below). I can't comment on the technical claims of
Fairewinds or of Gunderson. I did notice four revealing things.
First Gunderson discussed "the consequences of the Fukushima
radioactive fallout on Japan, the USA, and the world." with Steve
Wing. Enough said on that point.
Second, when talking about levels of exposure, he used
disintegrations per second, thus making it possible to use very large
numbers --- once 900,000 dps, and once 2,000,000 dps.
Third, he repeated the standard cliches about a coverup by
the Japanese government,
Fourth, he discusses "how Governments are once again
limiting public access to accurate radiation dose information."
Does any of this sound like the standard no-nuke hokum?
According to the e-mail below, Gunderson claimed that the
hydrogen explosion forced enough fuel rods together to cause a prompt
criticality and another explosion. Based on what I have read about
atomic bomb design I find this hard to believe. Isn't one of the
biggest problems in bomb design a problem of getting the two
sub-critical masses to stay together long enough to cause an
explosion? Even if a hydrogen explosion could force some fuel rods
close together what is going to keep them together long enough to
allow an explosion to occur? Wouldn't they merely bounce apart as
soon as they made contact? Or even if an explosion could began,
wouldn't it blow the rods apart and make the make the criticality
event into a fizzle?
I'm not a bomb designer or a nuclear engineer, nevertheless
to me this prompt criticality" claim sounds rather unlikely. I could
stand to be corrected on any or all of my speculations.
At 06:42 AM 4/28/2011, you wrote:
>Arnie Gundersen has been all over the web and the news sharing his
>opinions on just what is going on.
>I am not a nuclear engineer, but most of what he says seems
>plausible enough to me. The actual claim was that a hydrogen gas
>explosion in Unit 3's fuel storage pond banged enough fuel rods into
>each other to initiate a prompt criticality, which resulted in
>another near-simultaneous blast, which made for a much larger event
>than it otherwise would have been.
>The question I have of Mr. Gundersens and his assertion is, assuming
>we did have a prompt criticality in part of the fuel stored there,
>how does that result in such a violent explosion? That would get us
>a lot of heat and radiation, for sure, but how does that translate
>into an explosion unless there is some other vector present like
>water to flash into steam (and it does not look much like a steam
>explosion to me)?
>On 04/28/2011 03:41 AM, Roger Helbig wrote:
>>Does anyone know anything about this claimed nuclear engineer who postulates
>>a criticality incident as causing Reactor #3 explosion at this video link -
>>several other videos from Faire Wind Associates - another new voice in the
>>game - http://vimeo.com/22865967
More information about the RadSafe