# Meltdown....



## KarVer (Oct 30, 2014)

Couldn't find the information I was looking for. 
So! We in this world have nuclear power plants. 
In America some 300 roughly miles above I think Nebraska, for instance a nuclear type weapon goes off an all of the USofA is "dark" from the EMP... 
How Long Do WE Have Before a NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Could Meltdown? I am thinking a week without power chaos starts an those reactors aren't cared for proper like. My guess is 1-?5 months... thats why I ask. An how far out could a meltdown affect? What would be signs? Where do we need to avoid? What states have nuclear power plants?
ALSO if a little "ISsHolE" terrorist has a lil suitcase dirty type grungy bomb in say a skyscraper in idnk ...NY not far from ... the ... oh the ...stock exchange... could a lil thing like that send a emp charge enough to take down that markeT? An spread out how far you estimate?
Thanks for your helpful insight, thoughts, opinions, guesstimate, an Views ahead of time


----------



## paraquack (Mar 1, 2013)

As I understand from reading about this because of nuke plant close to me, it could be a lot shorter, maybe a day or two or a week. I hope but don't know if the computer systems needed to operate a nuke plank are hardened against and nuke cause EMP. The plant could just go into a run away mode or shut down completely or anything in between. Even if the plant continues to operate properly, it would go "off line". When a nuke plants goes off line, they need electrical power from outside the plant to operate the cooling pumps and there might not be any if switching stations are damaged. So they have diesel generators. If a Geomagnetic storm type "EMP" were to take out the grid, the nuke plant would need to rely on it's diesel generators for the power to run the pumps. When they run out of fuel and the battery back up for the pumps goes out, you get Fukishima again. So depends on fuel availability.

Here's a map of plants. Energy Justice Map

A dirty bomb is more a scare tactic. They take a radioactive material and use regular explosives to scatter the nuclear material, no EMP.


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

There is a show called "Life After People" that aired a few years ago that explains what would happen pretty well. The scenario is a little different, its basically what would happen if people just one day disappeared from the earth. One of the episodes shows what would happen to the fuel rods and the structure itself. You might be able to find it on YouTube.


----------



## Prepadoodle (May 28, 2013)

Aren't nuke plants designed to fail safe? I'm pretty sure they press like one button and the control rods all slam into position and stop the reaction. Same would happen if they somehow lost power from an EMP or whatever.

Only in James Bond movies does the whole thing have a button, lever, or valve you close to make the whole island blow up.


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

Yes, the reactor would go into an automatic "scram" mode shutting the reactor down.
The reactor chamber that holds the rods is covered in cooling water and pumped through a heat exchanger to keep things cool. Without power those pumps will run off a diesel generator until they run out of fuel.
Once the pumps stop the reactor core will melt down and drop into the containment building where it will either cool because it gets spread out or it will burn through the bottom of the containment and bury itself in the ground. It is isolated and of little danger unless the water table is affected. That would be bad for those down stream for around 10 to 15 miles.

The worst danger, by far, is the used rod storage facility. All reactor sites have them to some degree. They are large water basins cooled by big pumps filled to some degree with spent fuel rods. When the pumps stop the water will heat up, boil off and the rods will burn. There is no containment facility for the spent fuel rods so as they burn the will release a continuous stream of fallout. Down-winders will have to move out of the path to be safe. The area is huge depending on the direction and speed of the winds. The fallout could stretch for a long way (100s of miles) before dissipating enough to reduce the danger. With only the one plant in the "danger" zone I am 100 miles away (as the crow flies) and well south of the prevailing winds path. I should be OK but if the winds are abnormal and in the wrong direction the homestead might get hit with some minor fallout. If the wind stays in that direction for more than a few days I will have to move south or north. We have a BOL way north so It would put us in a safe zone. If the winds are normal then we are well out of its way.


----------



## NotTooProudToHide (Nov 3, 2013)

Silly people! According to our president coal fire power plants are far more dangerous than nuclear plants!


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

How Long Do WE Have Before a NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Could Meltdown? 3 days if there is traffic and no rail access, indefinate if there isn't.

Off road vehicles / tanks, and possibly air drops will be supplying the plants with oil and other resources to insure they are able to power down if that needs to be done.

Generally the issue isn't the nuclear plants so much as it is the oil refineries and oil stockpiles - US has tons of light sweet crude right now but it doesn't have a lot of light sweet crude refineries. More or less there will be oil to power generators to insure most systems stay online.

The big question is, what is going on outside that.

I just watched a youtube video from southern prepper one, and there was a quote in there that as many as 90% of Americans will die in the event of a major EMP event. 

With those numbers there will be a lot of secondary issues.

Assuming that There are only 10,000 people to handle each nuclear power plant you can assume it will take perhaps 1000 of those people to operate the supply chain, such as food for workers, keeping equipment at the plant operational, doing nuclear power plants stuff, providing security etc.. and many of those will not be people who necisarily regularly do those jobs.

The gov has nuclear safety pretty high up in its priorities.


An EMP alone may not be enough the issue is that the systems could go offline in a grid down scenario. 


There are other stock exchanges in America, NYSE is more of a media icon for Americans, it really isn't that important. Most trading is done electronically. Even in the event of the floor being closed trading can still happen.


It will be sorted out even if it means collecting car batteries and car alternators.


----------



## PatriotFlamethrower (Jan 10, 2015)

I love reading all of these scenarios. Some of you are partially correct. Some of you are almost completely wrong.

I wore various hats in nuclear power plants for over 15 years. Paul is probably the closet to being correct about what would happen. Just for the record, Paul, the "used rod storage facility" that you refer to are called the "Spent Fuel Pools", and they are located in the reactor building. Also, the "reactor chamber" is called the "reactor vessel". The reactor vessel is located in the reactor building, or containment building.......I've seen both designations used for the same thing.
.
The affected nuclear power plants in this scenario would immediate initiate a SCRAM, where the control rods are either immediately inserted into the reactor core by gravity or by hydraulics (depending on whether the nuke plant is a PWR or a BWR).

Fully inserting the control rods stops the nuclear fission process, or "chain reaction".

The Emergency Diesel Generators, usually 2-4 generators that are larger than a Greyhound bus, would then automatically start to supply on-site power. These generators would supply cooling water to the condensers, feedwater to the nuclear reactor to cool it down, and the all-important water to the spent fuel pool heat exchangers, as well as provide other electrical needs.

As Fukushima proved, priority one is to keep the spent fuel pool full of water and to keep the reactor core covered in water.

U.S. nuclear power plants have redundant systems for redundant systems. If there are not computers available, then the operators will have to do things the old-fashioned way...........go out in the plant, manually open and close valves, and locally inspect and monitor various components of the plant that would normally be done in the comfort of a nice comfortable chair in the main control room.

How much fuel do the emergency diesel generators have available? Probably a weeks worth of fuel.

As for a meltdown situation, the evacuation zone for such an event is within a 10-mile radius of the affected nuclear power plant. Remember that we are dealing with fuel rods that are "only " 10% enriched U-235, not an atomic bomb that is 99% enriched Plutonium.

The fallout is tracked based on temperature, humidity, wind speed, dispersion, and many other factors. The "experts" in that part of the nuke arena use a bunch of calculations to determine the danger to the local population.

One thing that has not been mentioned is the fact that the majority of U.S. nuclear power plant engineers and operators are former U.S. Navy nuclear folks. The people know their stuff. They served on submarines, where they were dealing with miniature versions of civilian nuclear power plants, and they were dealing with highly enriched Uranium or Plutonium. They also served on nuclear aircraft carriers, where the power plants are much larger. All of the other personnel, such as operators, health physics people, nuclear chemists, other engineers, and other professionals, have advanced college degrees.

The Fukushima incident was a Japanese fustercluck that would NEVER happen in this country, but that is a whole other topic.


----------



## Tennessee (Feb 1, 2014)

As being a retired Nuclear Plant Operator I can talk from some experience and Paul and Patriot flamethrower are basically correct in what they say. The decay heat produced from nuclear fission is the problem. And the only thing they left out is that you can flood the reactor core and spent fuel pits with river, ocean or lake water. This act is used as a last resort for obvious reason but it can be done to prevent a meltdown. But no action left unattended will keep the reactor core or spent fuel pit from boiling dry over time unless it’s maned.


----------



## paraquack (Mar 1, 2013)

Thanks for the knowledgeable input Tennessee, I appreciate it. But in the scenario that started this thread, If there is an EMP and it causes a breakdown in the grid, if there is no power, and the diesel controls are fried by the EMP, how do you flood the storage pit and reactor core for a long enough period of time to keep everything cool enough. Or will the reactor cool down in a day or so. If so, what happened to Fukishima after they lost the generators & battery back up. I thought I saw "fire trucks" spraying ocean water into the containment buildings for many, many days. Of course we can guess where all that water goes. Wouldn't the contaminated water be a problem here, but forget that for the time being. I suppose the videos of the fire trucks could be old video shown over and over. On another note, are nuke plants hardened against nuclear EMP? Or will it destroy all the control systems? I really wonder if the operators of nuke plants really have worst case scenario contingencies in place? Or are they like Fukishima and think it'll never happen? I've go a nuke plant about a hundred miles due west of me and I am concerned. So any info is appreciated.


----------



## Mad Trapper (Feb 12, 2014)

PaulS said:


> Yes, the reactor would go into an automatic "scram" mode shutting the reactor down.
> The reactor chamber that holds the rods is covered in cooling water and pumped through a heat exchanger to keep things cool. Without power those pumps will run off a diesel generator until they run out of fuel.
> Once the pumps stop the reactor core will melt down and drop into the containment building where it will either cool because it gets spread out or it will burn through the bottom of the containment and bury itself in the ground. It is isolated and of little danger unless the water table is affected. That would be bad for those down stream for around 10 to 15 miles.
> 
> The worst danger, by far, is the used rod storage facility. All reactor sites have them to some degree. They are large water basins cooled by big pumps filled to some degree with spent fuel rods. When the pumps stop the water will heat up, boil off and the rods will burn. There is no containment facility for the spent fuel rods so as they burn the will release a continuous stream of fallout. Down-winders will have to move out of the path to be safe. The area is huge depending on the direction and speed of the winds. The fallout could stretch for a long way (100s of miles) before dissipating enough to reduce the danger. With only the one plant in the "danger" zone I am 100 miles away (as the crow flies) and well south of the prevailing winds path. I should be OK but if the winds are abnormal and in the wrong direction the homestead might get hit with some minor fallout. If the wind stays in that direction for more than a few days I will have to move south or north. We have a BOL way north so It would put us in a safe zone. If the winds are normal then we are well out of its way.


Or it continues to spew untold amounts of radiation into the area.

Do you think FUKUshima is not still spewing? Don't be dumb. Nor try to dumb us down.

Paul, do you eat pelagic fish? How is their level?

Regardless of your BOL, YOU will be effected.


----------



## Tennessee (Feb 1, 2014)

paraquack said:


> Thanks for the knowledgeable input Tennessee, I appreciate it. But in the scenario that started this thread, If there is an EMP and it causes a breakdown in the grid, if there is no power, and the diesel controls are fried by the EMP, how do you flood the storage pit and reactor core for a long enough period of time to keep everything cool enough. Or will the reactor cool down in a day or so. If so, what happened to Fukishima after they lost the generators & battery back up. I thought I saw "fire trucks" spraying ocean water into the containment buildings for many, many days. Of course we can guess where all that water goes. Wouldn't the contaminated water be a problem here, but forget that for the time being. I suppose the videos of the fire trucks could be old video shown over and over. On another note, are nuke plants hardened against nuclear EMP? Or will it destroy all the control systems? I really wonder if the operators of nuke plants really have worst case scenario contingencies in place? Or are they like Fukishima and think it'll never happen? I've go a nuke plant about a hundred miles due west of me and I am concerned. So any info is appreciated.


Who's to say what modifications NRC has inputted since I've retired. All I can say is what I know at the time I worked and the plants I worked in. And I'm not aware of any modification to prevent disruption caused by an EMP. You have to understand most plant components were built between 60s and 70s. But I don't see an EMP preventing a shutdown. The key is keeping it maned and the decay heat under control. The equipment needed to shut down the plant can be started locally.


----------



## sideKahr (Oct 15, 2014)

KarVer, this subject comes up every couple of months. There is much useful information on the board. Do a search on "EMP reactor" for a start, then any other combination you choose using CME, meltdown, and related terms. Many of our members have experience in the nuclear power industry, and they have generously shared their knowledge with us.


----------



## PatriotFlamethrower (Jan 10, 2015)

I'll just bow out of this discussion.

Apparently my explanations about the inner workings of U.S. nuke power plants, based on MY knowledge and experience, must have been posted in Chinese or something.

Tennessee, it's all yours. You are the man! :77:

By the way, Tennessee, very happy to meet a fellow nuke. I don't meet very many in these forums.


----------



## arrowblazer71 (Jul 27, 2015)

I provide security at a nuclear power plant, I don't claim to know every internal working of the plant or even a lot to that matter. what I do know is patriotic and Tennessee have provided some very knowledgeable information based off of experience. not something they saw on tv from biased reporters working for their own personal agenda. I dont know how long it will take for the fuel pool to boil over if no power is supplied to the pumps(actually I do its on our turnover reports) One thing I do know is these operators drill and drill several times a month/year. I live inside the zone of fallout no matter what the wind or temperature. I feel as safe as you can get. I am not oblivious to the danger I do have a plan to get my family out of danger if SHTF. 
So many people try to scare you into thinking the way they want you to think. I didnt think I would see it on here. LOL OH wait yes i did. we are all here because we believe one thing or another conspiracy or disaster all the same.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

Tennessee said:


> Who's to say what modifications NRC has inputted since I've retired. All I can say is what I know at the time I worked and the plants I worked in. And I'm not aware of any modification to prevent disruption caused by an EMP. You have to understand most plant components were built between 60s and 70s. But I don't see an EMP preventing a shutdown. The key is keeping it maned and the decay heat under control. The equipment needed to shut down the plant can be started locally.


The good news is these older plants are past their lifespan, so will be brought offline eventually since they are overdue for shutdown. Normally things due for retirement don't get expensive updates.

The Life Span of U.S. Reactors - BusinessWeek

Plants are given 40 year operation permits. However there is an option to apply for 20 year extensions.

The next 10 years are critical for the nuclear industry

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise...tend-lifespan-of-nuclear-reactors-to-80-years

http://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/power-reactor/

Plants may have been designed for 30 years based on 1960's nuclear physics. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/N...ar-Wastes/Decommissioning-Nuclear-Facilities/

So after the california plants shut down I think Utah or arizona is the only state west of texas with operating nuclear plants, correct me if that isn't correct.
By a quick look most new plants are due in the southern us.

Not likely. But possible.
Plausible deniability.
It ain't one.

DO you have any idea what will happen to the US in event of a E1 HEMP?
Possible is not likely but it is possible.

Yes, they can fail, is it likely, no. Is an E1 HEMP likely, no. So with this reasoning.

It could not go as planned for failsafe shutdown for various reasons.

Thankfully it doesn't matter much if things don't work. Now we can all sleep. easy

The point, go west and hope the wind doesn't blow that way unless you have a boat and head east and hope the wind doesn't blow that way, but I have to say jetstream flows west to east. In event of total US grid failure do not stay in the eastern US.


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

Washington has at least one operating nuclear power plant. It is operating on the older Hanford reservation but producing electricity for the populace. Funny it is considered a renewable energy source but the hydro plants are not... retarded government policies.


----------



## Will2 (Mar 20, 2013)

PaulS said:


> Washington has at least one operating nuclear power plant. It is operating on the older Hanford reservation but producing electricity for the populace. Funny it is considered a renewable energy source but the hydro plants are not... retarded government policies.


Is that Columbia GS?

It was scheduled to decomission in 2023 but it was given a 20 year extension. There is only a 1 in 150,000 chance of disaster there by earthquake.


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

CGP - formerly WNP-2. The only one left operating of the 5 either constructed or partially constructed in WA.

The public affairs department did a telephone survey asking my opinions on nuclear power production. They had canned questions with multiple choice answers but I deviated a lot from the multiple choice answers. I have nothing against producing power with atomic energy but I don't like the waste of burying plutonium. They should recycle it to reuse as fuel until it is used up. Taking care of the rest of the waste products is a matter of dividing it up among the researchers and medical industry. we should not be burying raw waste from spent fuel rods when it has the ability to make so much more power. Wasteful!


----------



## alterego (Jan 27, 2013)

toolmanky said:


> Silly people! According to our president coal fire power plants are far more dangerous than nuclear plants!


Fukushima?


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

The Japanese are still alive and doing well. Fukashima didn't seem to hurt them much. Granted a lot of people were relocated but they aren't all glowing in the dark yet? How bad can it be?

Besides, how can something so small that you can't see it hurt you? :single_eye::laughhard:


----------



## 2efgee (Aug 4, 2015)

PaulS said:


> The Japanese are still alive and doing well. Fukashima didn't seem to hurt them much. Granted a lot of people were relocated but they aren't all glowing in the dark yet? How bad can it be?
> 
> Besides, how can something so small that you can't see it hurt you? :single_eye::laughhard:


I was in Japan during Fukushima, it was all over the news but besides the people in that direct area it didn't seem to have drastic effects for the rest of us. I remember fish prices went up a bit as radiated fish were not a hot item for most people. All of the people evac'ing citizens from the area were mostly using choppers and simply had to take decontamination showers.
A cool thing that the media didn't report in America as far as I know was the Yakuza (Japanese nationalist mafia) response. They used their privately owned helicopters and vehicles to rescue civilians from the affected areas where the government response wasn't quick enough. 
Hated how all the people in Cali thought they were gonna get cancer though. We were just told to minimize our time outside, maybe a couple hundred miles from Fukushima. They didn't even cancel school.


----------

