A Neutron Bomb would NOT Neutralize Fukushima
Proposed: By detonating a 25-km radius neutron bomb at the Fukushima
plant, it would turn off the nuclear reactions taking place, while also
neutralizing the radiation emitting from radioactive particles that have
been emitted within that radius. NASA nuclear physicist says "not".
September 26, 2013; 9:45 am Mountain update
The preliminary indications from the nuclear scientists we talked to
were encouraging. However, a leading nuclear physicist from NASA weighed
in this morning with the following:
*x* says that yes, neutrons do transmute uranium. The problem is that it
will take a lot more than a neutron bomb will deliver. To do anything
with that uranium, you would have to steadily bombard it for years with
a high degree of neutron flux in a very specific part of the neutron
spectrum. And in the process you will be creating radioactive products
in the rest of the environment.
He says the bomb idea is not good because the neutron flux will not be
large enough and last for a long enough time to make much difference,
you'll only get about 10% efficiency of the nuclear material contained
in the bomb because the rest of it will be thrown all over the place,
and you'll create a huge number of new unwanted nuclear products in the
environment.
So the word from these nuclear experts from NASA is: No go on the
nuclear bomb idea.... unless *Y* has information that would convince us
otherwise. Uranium operates for years in a high neutron flux environment
in a reactor. That is an indication of how tough it would be to bombard
it with enough neutron flux to transmute it to a safer material.
CAVEAT: An expert who works at NASA has provided an opinion in response
to an informal request and not as part of any official capacity on this
matter within the space agency
Addendum:
Strategically-speaking, neutron bombs kill people without
destroying structures. They kill all living things within a
certain radius. According to
Gineipaedia.com,
"A neutron bomb is type of nuclear weapon designed to release
massive amounts of neutron radiation instead of explosive force.
Though these weapons do produce large explosions, the radiation they
release is able to permeate armored vehicles, buildings and bunkers,
killing targets who would have otherwise been protected."
More importantly, for this application, they neutralize
radioactivity...
There may be an alternative to a neutron bomb. NASA is developing
space propulsion systems that utilize neutrons. They have ways of
producing a continuous stream of neutrons as well as reflecting and
directing them. Maybe something like this could be used over the
Fukushima plant. It would not be a millisecond approach like the neutron
bomb would be, but would need to be activated over a longer period of
time. [But on second thought, he said: "Not enough flux. It would take
years.
It's just not a good option. Well, let me state it another way. The
amount of nuclear material needed and the length of time required would
need to be understood. This is not something that you try without
extensive knowledge of the consequences. I don't like the idea of trial
and error with Japanese assets and Japanese lives.]
Let's solve this problem.
And really quickly, while I've got your attention on the subject of the
Fukushima fiasco, for those of you who don't usually follow our news,
directory, and networking service, let me inform you that there are a
myriad of very promising clean energy solutions very close to being
ready for market. See our listing at
http://Top5Energy.com And follow our news and directory at
http://PESWiki.com
http://FukushimaSolution.com
|