help please! thanks:)
-
Worst case scenario, assuming that it wasn't possible to move the fuel rods in time.
1) The core would become extremely hot, melting the fuel rods and most of the internal structure.
2) The buildings would catch fire and a huge amount of radioactive waste would be released into the atmosphere.
3) The molten fuel would gather in the bottom of the reactor chamber until it reached critical mass, and it would then explode causing catastrophic damage and pollution.
Chernobyl got to stage 2, but they were able to cool the building sufficiently by pumping in huge quantities of water so that the fuel solidified and never reached critical mass.
In the 1950s, an American reactor was allowed to reach stage 3 to see what would happen. The site remains a glowing hole in the ground.
1) The core would become extremely hot, melting the fuel rods and most of the internal structure.
2) The buildings would catch fire and a huge amount of radioactive waste would be released into the atmosphere.
3) The molten fuel would gather in the bottom of the reactor chamber until it reached critical mass, and it would then explode causing catastrophic damage and pollution.
Chernobyl got to stage 2, but they were able to cool the building sufficiently by pumping in huge quantities of water so that the fuel solidified and never reached critical mass.
In the 1950s, an American reactor was allowed to reach stage 3 to see what would happen. The site remains a glowing hole in the ground.
-
Depends highly on the type of reactor.
Most reactors nowadays are boiling water reactors. Unlike in Chernobyl type reactors, the control material and coolant material in these reactors is the same stuff: water.
The moment the water is removed, the neutrons are no longer slowed down and they stop reacting (fast neutrons do not react). This causes an immediate shutdown of the reactor.
After the shutdown the reactor is still extremely radio-active and hot. It will keep heating up, since the radioactive material keeps decaying. This will likely melt the reactor, but not restart it. This meltdown will destroy the reactor and possibly the container vessel and building, but it cannot cause a nuclear chain reaction.
Note that in Fukushima the reactor was shut down normally after the earth quake. All that went wrong there, went wrong after the shut down.
Most reactors nowadays are boiling water reactors. Unlike in Chernobyl type reactors, the control material and coolant material in these reactors is the same stuff: water.
The moment the water is removed, the neutrons are no longer slowed down and they stop reacting (fast neutrons do not react). This causes an immediate shutdown of the reactor.
After the shutdown the reactor is still extremely radio-active and hot. It will keep heating up, since the radioactive material keeps decaying. This will likely melt the reactor, but not restart it. This meltdown will destroy the reactor and possibly the container vessel and building, but it cannot cause a nuclear chain reaction.
Note that in Fukushima the reactor was shut down normally after the earth quake. All that went wrong there, went wrong after the shut down.
-
KABOOM!
Followed by severe irradiation of the surrounding area, human deaths, birth defects, long term health issues, evacuation, the land being unusable due to radiation levels for decades if not centuries.
Basically, as the above said: Chernobyl
Followed by severe irradiation of the surrounding area, human deaths, birth defects, long term health issues, evacuation, the land being unusable due to radiation levels for decades if not centuries.
Basically, as the above said: Chernobyl
-
Depends on the design of the reactor, there is one type (the Canadian CANDU reactor) which is supposed to be more rugged, but I couldn't say much more.....
-
It would be another chernoybl or like the recent fukashima nuclear plant with it's never ending nucleur waste
-
Chernobyl