In Japan, two thin layers of rubber.

I've worked in a nuclear plant, one that is of similar vintage as Fukushima #1. I've been in and out of the containment building.

To get into containment, you go through what is essentially an airlock. You have two doors, made of steel, that slide open and close. In order to create a containment building seal, both of these doors have what is essentially a shaped rubber bladder that fills and empties as need be, fills in order to seal tight the door when it is closed, empties when the door needs to open.

Furthermore, also coming into the containment building are at least two large bundles of wires for electricity, computer hook ups, etc. These bundles are contained in steel conduit, but the construction of the joint between the conduit and containment building means that there is rubber gaskets that seal the containment building.

Thus, we have a situation where rubber, not steel, is the material used to seal up the containment building.

My guess, this rubber, under stress from pressure, explosions, and increased radioactive activity, has been fatally weakened, and could go at any time. They may have already gone, which would in part explain the increase of radioactivity outside the containment building.

If these rubber pieces fail, it means that a small, but significant amount of radioactive material will escape. How much depends on a lot of factors, interior pressure, heat, etc. But it certainly isn't a good thing.

Perhaps the best way to picture the situation at Fukushima is an old fashioned steam boiler that has completely exceeded its pressure limits. Steam is escaping from weak points of the containment building, leaks that are now small are going to get larger. In short, unless there is a major turn around, a major catastrophe is going to ensue.

Two thin layers of rubber, that's it.

:hi:

Interesting info on the weak points (rubber seals) though. Thanks.

:hi:

Apparently that ran into problems, so no longer venting steam.

I've also heard that the pressure inside the containment building has reached anywhere from 1.5-2.1 times the safe limit. Granted, these buildings are built to withstand this for short periods, gotta love over-engineering, but they can't take it for long, especially forty year old steel that has been weakened due to radiation exposure over the years.

Given that there is apparently some particulate matter within the atmosphere inside containment, you can expect some sort of erosion around those gaps. How much and how soon is based on variable that we simply don't know right now.

And that there has to be some sort of rubber seal of some sort, I'm pretty confident of what the situation is in regards to these rubber seals.

Have you ever been inside a containment building?

Probably better if everyone stop speculating and basing their opinions on unsupported assertions.

Is now speculation. Gotcha.

Sorry if this posting doesn't comply with your wishes for everything to be happy happy, joy joy, but the fact of the matter is that it is based on real life experience and knowledge. If you have any information to contradict that real life experience and knowledge, bring it. Otherwise all you're doing is trying to shut down a valid discussion.

design, construction, or operation makes your opinion speculation.

Your opinion is speculation. Speculation based on experience in nuclear power facilities, but it is certainly speculation. Do you have any information to support your speculation, other than "trust me I have been in a different nuclear power plant in a different country, at a different time"?

Your post doesn't comply with my wishes for accurate information and not speculation.

That doesn't have the sort of airlocks I describe? No, I didn't think so, because such containment building airlocks were standard at that time, especially in GE designed plants, which is what Fukushima is

Get it? Or am I still engaged in "speculation".

Did you have any part in the design, construction, or operation of this building? Have you ever been inside this facility? Have you ever been inside a power plant in Japan?

What you are essentially saying is that if I have seen a 53 Chevy truck, with the standard issue six cylinder engine, unless I see another specific truck, I cannot say that it has the standard six cylinder engine.

Poor logic fail.

Just because you have been inside a handful of nuclear facilities doesn't mean you know a thing about ones in other countries. Facilities that you have never had a single thing to do with, probably didn't even know existed a week ago.

Your logic is akin to sitting in a Ford truck from the 80's, seeing a rubber seal, and declaring that all Ford trucks 1970-1989 have a rubber seal.

Your speculation that somebody can't look at a basic design for a particular generation of nuclear plants, all designed by the same company, and extrapolate that design holds true for all reactors engineered by that same company, of that same generation.

Furthermore, you are spouting nonsense because you simply don't recognize that all nuclear reactors have to seal their containment buildings airtight, and the best way to do that is via rubber gasketing. Your basic ignorance is showing there.

Finally, all Ford trucks 1970-1989 do have at least one rubber seal that is the same across the years and models. It is the rubber door seal. In fact I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that your vehicle, no matter the make, model or year, has the same sort of rubber seal. Why? Because such rubber door seals have been proven to be the most efficient way of keeping the door airtight.

Basic logic, you don't have it.

You are by definition speculating about the construction of those plants. The only ignorance is coming from you, being unable to understand what speculation means? Your absolute failure to understand that being in a nuclear power plant doesn't mean you know anything about power plants that you didn't even know existed a week ago.

I know that cars have a door seal by having personally seen thousands of different models around the world. Not by speculating after seeing one car. You see one nuclear facility and assume that all others around the world use the same design with nothing to support this.

I've seen the designs for lots of nuclear plants from GE, of this generation that is concurrent with Fukushima. There is no speculation on my part. There is only a lack of logic and knowledge on your part.

But hey, keep making yourself look like an ignorant fool.

For one thing, I'm not your damn dog who fetches at the sound of your whistle. Secondly, by giving the information out, it makes it much more easy for people to know my true identity.

Either you believe me or not. But if you don't believe me, do this one thing. Find somebody who has worked at a nuclear reactor and ask them, confirm what I've said.

But I'm not going to sit here and fetch at the whistle of every idiot that comes along.

I'll keep listening to experts who have working knowledge of the facilities in question. You can keep blathering misinformation and speculative non-sense, but anyone with half a brain isn't going to care.

The OP is not coming from an ignorant (uneducated or un-trained) point of view. What he has to say is adding to the conversation of what *could* be happening in the facilities over there.

And my speculation about your speculation regarding his speculation is also opinion.

So let's all hold hands and sing, because nothing you said makes any sense.

Try to explain to that poster just how I came to my conclusion, in simple words and everything, and he/she just keeps rushing blindly on, determined to try and discredit me by any means possible, even though he/she doesn't have a clue about they're talking about.

replying to that--just a waste of time.

Thanks for your added input. ;)

DU is amazing. Thanks Madhound

worked in the field what do you think is the status of the storage tanks? Would the tanks have withstood the hydrogen explosion? Can they withstand partial meltdown of the reactor? Do they need constant attention?

My guess is that at this point, they are probably still standing, though it wouldn't surprise me if they are in gravely weakened condition.

The mutated Andromeda attacks the neoprene door and hatch seals within the Wildfire complex, racing to the upper levels and the surface. The self-destruction atomic bomb is automatically armed when it detects a containment breach, triggering its detonation countdown to incinerate all exo-biological diseases. As the bomb arms, the scientists realize that given Andromeda's ability to generate matter directly from energy, the organism would feed, reproduce, and ultimately benefit from an atomic explosion.

When first seeing the explosion my reaction was "That's not smoke or steam

that's pulverized concrete". Thought at the time the containment failed.

Now having seen pictures of the dome (at least the top) still intact figured

likely to be the walls under the siding.

The main reason blowout walls are used in power plants is if there is an explosion

the people's insides inside aren't compressed into jelly. Maybe with luck the seals held.

Bottom line though something introduced combustibles between the weather walls

and the containment vessel prior to the blast.

Three, four inches thick. The thing is, you have to control the atmosphere and pressure gradient inside containment, which means that you have to have a tight seal. Thus, a rubber, bladder like sealing device is used around both doors of the airlock system.

Sid

Nice try though, nice to see the pro nuke contingent is out in full force, spin, spin, spinning away.

you make it sound like the containment building is the only containment in the reactor.

The roof of the containment building was blown off with the hydrogen explosion. The thickness of the door seals is kind of moot by this point.

Sid

Actually the roof that was blown off came from the secondary containment building, ie, the building that houses the containment building. Primary containment is still holding, for now. But again, there are those pesky rubber seals that need we do need to wonder, and possibly worry about.

The spin has been amazing.

Unlike the person who I was originally conversing with, I do have a better idea of what the reports are saying, though any intelligent person can figure it out if they read carefully enough.

Like a small child caught lying, you go straight to pissy. (hydrogen buildup in the secondary building)

that something like that can be so important but yet not be taken seriously in the design stage.

I have to admit I know little about nuclear power plants. As I understand what has been reported, the inner containment buildings are intact while the outer containment buildings are what blew up.

What I don't understand is if all the fuel rods are inside the inner containment buildings, then why was there a release of radiation when the outer buildings were blown up. Was it a release of cooling water (steam) that was released and not the radiation from the rods inside the inner containment buildings (which I presume is a more deadly form of radiation) or was there some kind of controlled (or uncontrolled) venting of the inner containment building to relieve pressure and keep it from blowing up?

If they did in fact have a controlled release to relieve pressure from the inner containment buildings, then there has to be some mechanical way of doing that, no? And if that mechanism fails, would that not subject the inner containment buildings to so much pressure that there could be a possibility that they too can blow up?

I think very few of us have an accurate understanding of this and wish there were some kind of primer on it that could help us understand what really might be happening.

Though it is a muddled one at best.

From what I understand, there has been at least a partial meltdown, and in order to not have a full meltdown, seawater was pumped directly into the pool containing the overheated fuel rods. When seawater, uranium and massive heat mix, hydrogen is formed. At least some of this hydrogen either escaped, or most likely vented outside of the primary containment building, into the secondary containment building (ie the structure that surrounds containment, it generally contains offices, labs and such). They hydrogen was ignited, and blew this secondary containment building away, leaving, so they say, the primary containment building intact.

However there is a massive amount of pressure built up inside primary containment, and apparently they are getting leaks, possible from around door seals and other gaskets. They have had at least some controlled venting, but apparently that wasn't enough since pressure inside primary containment is still at levels exceeding designed safety specs.

Can primary containment hold? That's the question we're all waiting to find out. These buildings are immensely strong, but they have also been subjected to extraordinary forces, a massive earthquake, huge tsunami, and now a large hydrogen explosion. Nobody is really saying, but the news coming out is getting slowly, but steadily worse, so I would say chances are fifty-fifty at best.

Hope that helps.

I believe I'll take your experience over those who try to discount it.
Thanks for the info.