Nuclear Reactors become brittle over time and can fail

[Lou Newton Bond Servant of Jesus Find all posts View Profile Close Lou Newton]

Many of the Nuclear reactors in the US are very old. Many are well beyond the lifespan that they were designed for.

Older reactors get brittle from the nuclear radiation the steel is exposed to for that time. The nuclear reactor in Palisades Michigan is the most brittle reactor in the world. A brittle reactor can fail in a very terrible way.

Here is a video from Fairwinds that shows what can happen when a reactor is brittle.

Gunderson used to be a proponent of nuclear energy. But when 3 miles Island had it's disaster and he seen the lies that were told to the public he became a nuclear energy watchdog instead.




http://www.fairewinds.org/nuclear-cr....IJ3I7PxX.dpbs

[Baruch Administrator Find all posts View Profile Close Baruch]

This immediately made me think of all the old nuclear power plants scattered across the US, Lou, and the increase in global seismic activity. I was only a couple hundred miles away from Three Mile Island when it melted. These things can break under the best conditions. What will happen after a few good shakes?

I made a small study around where I live now, estimating the locations and radius of immediate radioactive contamination if the reactors all went down. There are very few safe areas. And as we see with Fukushima, the contamination gradually spreads far and wide.

I can't help but wonder. Is this a calculated setup for some future agenda? The risk seems too great. Only the very desperate go all in, unless they have an ace up their sleeve.

[Lou Newton Bond Servant of Jesus Find all posts View Profile Close Lou Newton]

This immediately made me think of all the old nuclear power plants scattered across the US, Lou, and the increase in global seismic activity. I was only a couple hundred miles away from Three Mile Island when it melted. These things can break under the best conditions. What will happen after a few good shakes?

I made a small study around where I live now, estimating the locations and radius of immediate radioactive contamination if the reactors all went down. There are very few safe areas. And as we see with Fukushima, the contamination gradually spreads far and wide.

I can't help but wonder. Is this a calculated setup for some future agenda? The risk seems too great. Only the very desperate go all in, unless they have an ace up their sleeve.

The really dangerous ones are the Boiling Water Reactors. If they get too hot the reaction speeds up and of course we know that happens if you can not cool it down quickly. There are 34 or 35 of these in the US. These were the kind in Japan that melted down. I think it takes an idiot to build a Boiling Water Reactor in an Earthquake Zone.

Some types will slow down if they lose cooling.

I would shut down all Boiling Water Reactors if it was in my power. Some of these were built in the 60's.

I live 35 miles from the closest one. But I feel the most dangerous one to me, is a Boiling Water Reactor that is 65 miles away.

Illinois has 11 Nuclear plants. There are 100 in the US.

[baobab New Member Find all posts View Profile Close baobab]

Atoms! Where are you?

I learned something from this thread. I knew about Wigner energy and how it caused the U.K.’s worst nuclear disaster which was the Windscale incident in the late 50s. When graphite is subject to neutron bombardment atoms in the crystal system get knocked out of place. This causes pressure. When the pressure reaches the breaking point the crystal resumes its original structure and a great amount of heat is released. This caused the pure uranium metal to ignite. Modern reactors use uranium oxide which is exponentially harder to ignite. Windscale was similar to the reactor at the Hanford Washington site. It was designed to make plutonium 239 from Uranium 238. Annealing (heating) the graphite on purpose causes the crystals to resume their original structure without the heat getting out of control. I thought that reactor metal would be subject to the same principal. The reactor metal gets very hot so Wigner energy is not a big concern. It is like a constant annealing. I did not know that neutron bombardment creates helium in the metal. I guess the regulators are hoping to die of old age before the reactors crack. This is a very big concern and I consider it criminal negligence to wait twenty more years before the samples in the core a tested.

“Superalloys gain their spectacular high-temperature behavior due to the presence of "gamma-prime" and "gamma-double-prime" precipitates in their structure. These are tiny particles in the nickel-based matrix that pin "dislocations" (the basis of ductile deformation) up to very high temperatures. The main problems with using nickel in a reactor environment are twofold: (1) superalloys contain large numbers of alloying elements. Not quite half the periodic table, but it seems that way. These solutes move around under the gradients of defects produced during irradiation which destroys the gamma-prime and gamma-double-prime, produces new precipitates (with names like "eta" or "laves") which can embrittle the grain boundaries, and radiation induced segregation which can induce both brittle failure and corrosion at the grain boundaries. (2) Nickel is highly susceptible to (n, alpha) reactions, in which a neutron is absorbed by a nickel nucleus, causing it to kick off an alpha particle. This transmutes the nickel into a different element, and results in the alpha becoming a helium atom in the metal. Since helium has (effectively) zero solubility in metals, helium bubbles begin to form almost immediately.”
http://nucleararcher.blogspot.com/20...for-geniv.html

On a lighter note, it is not possible for any amount of reactor fuel to blow up. No fuel in a nuclear reactor has ever blown up. What has blown up is steam and then hydrogen which damaged the core but the core can only melt. (Core melt is very bad in itself) reactor fuel can only melt.

There are some “safe” reactor designs that cannot blow up on their own. Scientists and engineers are researching liquid fluoride thorium reactors (LFTR) which are a type of molten salt reactor (MSR). LFTR’s operate at atmospheric pressure or only slightly above it. The steam created can blow up but it wouldn’t create the same effect as the Chernobyl disaster. Once the reactor goes critical, spent nuclear fuel from other type reactors can fuel the LFTR. I mentioned that these reactors cannot blow up on their own. The problem is that no reactor is immune from the possibility of being blown up from outsiders. Nuclear power plants can be blown up using conventional weapons such as the hellfire and the MOAB. So there is no such thing as a safe nuclear power plant.

Politicians, the U.S. government in general and big corporation are heavily invested in in nuclear power and crude oil. There is very little motive to invest in alternative power. Windmills and solar panels make the general public think big brother is trying to help out. Tesla knew how to make free energy available to the masses. This is anathema to Big Brother. If you design a method of free energy you better run for the hills and hide. The problem with a free energy system is like fire. Fire is essential but can be used quite destructively. A free energy source could end up being a terrible nightmare on scales unimaginable. The energy beam that turned the twin towers to mere dust comes to mind.

I think we will witness things we have never though of before Jesus returns.

[Lou Newton Bond Servant of Jesus Find all posts View Profile Close Lou Newton]

I learned something from this thread. I knew about Wigner energy and how it caused the U.K.’s worst nuclear disaster which was the Windscale incident in the late 50s. When graphite is subject to neutron bombardment atoms in the crystal system get knocked out of place. This causes pressure. When the pressure reaches the breaking point the crystal resumes its original structure and a great amount of heat is released. This caused the pure uranium metal to ignite. Modern reactors use uranium oxide which is exponentially harder to ignite. Windscale was similar to the reactor at the Hanford Washington site. It was designed to make plutonium 239 from Uranium 238. Annealing (heating) the graphite on purpose causes the crystals to resume their original structure without the heat getting out of control. I thought that reactor metal would be subject to the same principal. The reactor metal gets very hot so Wigner energy is not a big concern. It is like a constant annealing. I did not know that neutron bombardment creates helium in the metal. I guess the regulators are hoping to die of old age before the reactors crack. This is a very big concern and I consider it criminal negligence to wait twenty more years before the samples in the core a tested.

“Superalloys gain their spectacular high-temperature behavior due to the presence of "gamma-prime" and "gamma-double-prime" precipitates in their structure. These are tiny particles in the nickel-based matrix that pin "dislocations" (the basis of ductile deformation) up to very high temperatures. The main problems with using nickel in a reactor environment are twofold: (1) superalloys contain large numbers of alloying elements. Not quite half the periodic table, but it seems that way. These solutes move around under the gradients of defects produced during irradiation which destroys the gamma-prime and gamma-double-prime, produces new precipitates (with names like "eta" or "laves") which can embrittle the grain boundaries, and radiation induced segregation which can induce both brittle failure and corrosion at the grain boundaries. (2) Nickel is highly susceptible to (n, alpha) reactions, in which a neutron is absorbed by a nickel nucleus, causing it to kick off an alpha particle. This transmutes the nickel into a different element, and results in the alpha becoming a helium atom in the metal. Since helium has (effectively) zero solubility in metals, helium bubbles begin to form almost immediately.”
http://nucleararcher.blogspot.com/20...for-geniv.html

On a lighter note, it is not possible for any amount of reactor fuel to blow up. No fuel in a nuclear reactor has ever blown up. What has blown up is steam and then hydrogen which damaged the core but the core can only melt. (Core melt is very bad in itself) reactor fuel can only melt.

There are some “safe” reactor designs that cannot blow up on their own. Scientists and engineers are researching liquid fluoride thorium reactors (LFTR) which are a type of molten salt reactor (MSR). LFTR’s operate at atmospheric pressure or only slightly above it. The steam created can blow up but it wouldn’t create the same effect as the Chernobyl disaster. Once the reactor goes critical, spent nuclear fuel from other type reactors can fuel the LFTR. I mentioned that these reactors cannot blow up on their own. The problem is that no reactor is immune from the possibility of being blown up from outsiders. Nuclear power plants can be blown up using conventional weapons such as the hellfire and the MOAB. So there is no such thing as a safe nuclear power plant.

Politicians, the U.S. government in general and big corporation are heavily invested in in nuclear power and crude oil. There is very little motive to invest in alternative power. Windmills and solar panels make the general public think big brother is trying to help out. Tesla knew how to make free energy available to the masses. This is anathema to Big Brother. If you design a method of free energy you better run for the hills and hide. The problem with a free energy system is like fire. Fire is essential but can be used quite destructively. A free energy source could end up being a terrible nightmare on scales unimaginable. The energy beam that turned the twin towers to mere dust comes to mind.

I think we will witness things we have never though of before Jesus returns.

Hi Baobab,

Thanks for your reply.

While it nay be true that nuclear reactors will not have a nuclear explosion, they certainly can explode.

Not only nuclear reactors can explode, but also nuclear spent fuel pools can explode. They did in Japan.

Anyone who witnessed the explosion that was hundreds of feet high knew that spent fuel pool exploded.

That is what a dirty bomb is. They take nuclear material that is not in a nuclear bomb form and put explosives with the material. They then blow up the dirty bomb with the normal explosives and that explosion spreads radioactive nuclear material over a large area. That nuclear material is almost impossible to clean up and it will be radioactive for thousands of years.

If a dirty bomb, a nuclear reactor, or a spent fuel pool was to blow up near a large city that city would be a ghost town for a very long time.

[Travis New Member Find all posts View Profile Close Travis]

Politicians, the U.S. government in general and big corporation are heavily invested in in nuclear power and crude oil. There is very little motive to invest in alternative power. Windmills and solar panels make the general public think big brother is trying to help out. Tesla knew how to make free energy available to the masses. This is anathema to Big Brother. If you design a method of free energy you better run for the hills and hide. The problem with a free energy system is like fire. Fire is essential but can be used quite destructively. A free energy source could end up being a terrible nightmare on scales unimaginable. The energy beam that turned the twin towers to mere dust comes to mind.

I think we will witness things we have never though of before Jesus returns.

This is a topic that I think is valid and important, and I don't think it is discussed often enough.

I know structural/civil engineers who truly believe that the twin towers collapsed because of Jet fuel burning too hot for too long. I am dumbfounded by this, and do not know how to even begin addressing this issue in a logical manner with them.

Nuclear power plants scare me, I feel like they are going to cause nothing but trouble someday (and in a sense they already have).

Travis

[Steve Hollander Member Find all posts View Profile Close Steve Hollander]

This is a topic that I think is valid and important, and I don't think it is discussed often enough.

I know structural/civil engineers who truly believe that the twin towers collapsed because of Jet fuel burning too hot for too long. I am dumbfounded by this, and do not know how to even begin addressing this issue in a logical manner with them.

Nuclear power plants scare me, I feel like they are going to cause nothing but trouble someday (and in a sense they already have).

Travis

Hi Travis,
I believe that you are saying the twin towers were blown up and did not collapse from the heat? ..... Steve

[Lou Newton Bond Servant of Jesus Find all posts View Profile Close Lou Newton]

This is a topic that I think is valid and important, and I don't think it is discussed often enough.

I know structural/civil engineers who truly believe that the twin towers collapsed because of Jet fuel burning too hot for too long. I am dumbfounded by this, and do not know how to even begin addressing this issue in a logical manner with them.

Nuclear power plants scare me, I feel like they are going to cause nothing but trouble someday (and in a sense they already have).

Travis

Thanks for your reply Travis.

I do not want this thread to get into a debate about the towers. But since you have brought it up, I will answer this once.

I am a structural and mechanical engineer. I designed hot metal steel mill cranes that picked up over 500 tons of molten metal. One of our problems was shielding the structural steel from the heat so it would not lose enough strength to fail.

Steel loses one half of it's strength at only 932 degrees F. That is not very hot. That fire was a lot hotter than that.

A friend called me when the towers were hit and told me to turn the TV on. I did and seen the second plane hit. He said they were discussing if the towers would fall of not.

As I looked at where they were hit and pondered this question, The Holy Spirit spoke to me and said, The towers are coming down. I told my friend that they would fall and the one that was hit last would fall first.

He asked me how I knew this. I told him that the second tower was hit much lower and had much more weight on the damaged floors.

A little while latter the second one hit, fell, and then later the other one fell.

Now I do not know for sure if these towers were brought down by the Muslims flying the planes. But I do know they fell and it was expected by me knowing what I knew about steel that got hot.

Further the main columns did not have to fail first. If the floor joist that supported the columns from buckling failed, the columns would surely fail.

I have watched many videos about this and I have not seen one bit of credible evidence that the towers were not brought down by two planes being flown by Muslim terrorist.

Secrets are hard to keep from getting out. It is hard enough if only a few people know about it. But to think that a whole crew went into these towers to plant explosives and then not one came forth to tell about it is impossible for me to believe.

People tell about the B 25 hitting the Empire state building and it did not fall. Comparing a B25 to a Boeing 767 is like comparing a insect to a goose. That B 25 weighed about 27,000 pounds and was going about 200 MPH. The Boeing 767 weighed about 400,000 pounds and was going over 500 MPH.

KE = 1/2 x mass x velocity squared

That would calculate to 540,000,000 for the B25 and 50,000,000,000 for the 767

That means the 767 had 93 times more energy than the B25.

I sure do not trust our government. But I trust the Muslims even less.

Lou

[Travis New Member Find all posts View Profile Close Travis]

Hi Travis,
I believe that you are saying the twin towers were blown up and did not collapse from the heat? ..... Steve

Nay,

What I believe happened is much less conventional than some theory that c4 was used to blow up the buildings. If I was forced to choose between the two theories that are normally proposed, that fire weakened the structure to the point of failure or that it was a controlled demolition with explosives, rationally I would have to go with the latter of the two. But I don't think it was either. More in my next post though.

Travis

[Lou Newton Bond Servant of Jesus Find all posts View Profile Close Lou Newton]

Hi Travis

Here are some questions that come to mind while reading this material:

1 - why would anyone who is a truth seeker give Jesse Ventura and Alex Jones as someone to give testimony to support their claim ?

2 - She is foreign born, but where does she comes from ?

3 - what is her religion ? - what are her core beliefs ?

4 - Free energy ! She claims that man has the ability to spit the earth in half with this free energy. I find that more than hard to believe. The Lord Jesus is in control and he has not given this power to any man ever.

This is the same claim that those who believe that CERN will cause a giant black hole to swallow the earth. Before that there was those who said that a nuclear bomb would cause a chain reaction that destroyed the earth.

5 -Here is the poem she wrote:

Magic of the Heart

"Look from your heart and you will see the truth.
Feel with your heart and you will know which way to go.

Speak from your heart and you will speak the truth.
Listen with your heart and you will understand.

Live from your heart and you will live in peace.
Love with your heart and you will love forever."

by Dr. Judy Wood

There is no magic in the hearts of man. The Lord tells us this instead:

Jeremiah 17:9
New International Version
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

New Living Translation
"The human heart is the most deceitful of all things, and desperately wicked. Who really knows how bad it is?

This poem that she wrote is nothing but eastern religion. It is a very evil thing that she puts forth.

Man can not find truth because his heart is wicked. The very core of his being is self serving. There is one and only one way to find truth. That is to seek The Lord Jesus and ask Him to reveal it to you.

Lou Newton

[Travis New Member Find all posts View Profile Close Travis]

Here are some questions that come to mind while reading this material:

1 - why would anyone who is a truth seeker give Jesse Ventura and Alex Jones as someone to give testimony to support their claim ?

2 - She is foreign born, but where does she comes from ?

3 - what is her religion ? - what are her core beliefs ?

4 - Free energy ! She claims that man has the ability to spit the earth in half with this free energy. I find that more than hard to believe. The Lord Jesus is in control and he has not given this power to any man ever.

This is the same claim that those who believe that CERN will cause a giant black hole to swallow the earth. Before that there was those who said that a nuclear bomb would cause a chain reaction that destroyed the earth.

5 -Here is the poem she wrote:



There is no magic in the hearts of man. The Lord tells us this instead:



This poem that she wrote is nothing but eastern religion. It is a very evil thing that she puts forth.

Man can not find truth because his heart is wicked. The very core of his being is self serving. There is one and only one way to find truth. That is to seek The Lord Jesus and ask Him to reveal it to you.

Lou Newton

Um. Well,

The thing I like about this specific work is that it isn't made up of speculation like so many others. The author approaches the subject like a forensic science case, looking at evidence itself to let it tell us what happened. This is quite admirable.

The author is not a believer in Jesus Christ. This does not stop her from being able to analyze the facts that surround the twin towers coming down. What she presents is quite astounding, because she lets her audience determine for themselves what is going on, with a little bit of help along the way.

If I could only get any of my information, on any subject, from born again believers I would have to throw out almost everything I have ever heard about anything my entire life. One does not have to be a believer to give a credible testimony about something as objective as observable phenomena. I am not looking to this author for answers about who God is. I don't think she knows Him.

I am sorry that you do not appreciate her work though, she has put a lot of hard work and time into it and has laid a lot on the line to make it public as well. In the future I think I will go into more detail on this subject, I think it is an important one.

I would encourage anyone and everyone to take a sincere look at the objective things this author points out about the collapse of the towers though. She refrains from speculating when it comes to looking at the raw data, and only gives her opinion on what may have happened at the end of her lectures/presentations. She would admit she does not know exactly who did it, or precisely how they did it, only that the evidence we have shows something other than the official narrative went on that day.

Grace and peace to you,

Travis

[baobab New Member Find all posts View Profile Close baobab]

Kaboom

Lou wrote:
"While it nay be true that nuclear reactors will not have a nuclear explosion, they certainly can explode."

True

Nuclear reactors can explode and have exploded.

I was highlighting the point that reactor explosions are steam and hydrogen only. Some people (you are not one of them) believe the idea that nuclear reactors can blow up like a nuclear bomb. The fuel can only melt and/or be displaced by the non nuclear explosion and create a "dirty bomb" from hades.

[Lou Newton Bond Servant of Jesus Find all posts View Profile Close Lou Newton]

Lou wrote:
"While it nay be true that nuclear reactors will not have a nuclear explosion, they certainly can explode."

True

Nuclear reactors can explode and have exploded.

I was highlighting the point that reactor explosions are steam and hydrogen only. Some people (you are not one of them) believe the idea that nuclear reactors can blow up like a nuclear bomb. The fuel can only melt and/or be displaced by the non nuclear explosion and create a "dirty bomb" from hades.

Hi Baobab,

I went back a reread my reply to you. I apologize for not making it clear that my reply was for anyone who may not know that they can blow up, for I felt sure you did know this. This was only for those who may not have known this.

Lou

[Lou Newton Bond Servant of Jesus Find all posts View Profile Close Lou Newton]

Travis, please do not try to sell this woman's book on my article.

I have to stand against that.

While it is true that those other than Christians can find truth IF they humble themselves and truly seek it, it is also true that no one can find truth without the help of God. They have to follow godly principles to find truth. She has NOT followed God or true principles in any way.

Ivan Panin humbled himself and his beliefs and put truth above everything. That is simply putting Jesus first, for He is truth. Panin was not a Christian, but followed Christian principles. He later became a Christian and gave all the glory to God.

If one goes back and examines the great discoveries of science, they will see that most came for men that believed The Bible. Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Bacon and all of the foundation stones of modern science believed The Bible was true. In fact they stood against false religion and were persecuted for it.

This woman does has something to gain: notoriety and how about selling a book for $40.

She bases this whole thing on FREE ENERGY. She claims that the ones who know of this can spit the earth in half with it. That was enough for me to stop right there. That is a ridiculous claim. The Lord Jesus is the One in control, not mere men.

She claims that people can find truth as long as they feel they can in their heart. This is not science, or truth seeking, but false eastern religion.

The only people I seen that testified for her, was Jesse Ventura and Alex Jones. Neither has ever met a conspiracy theory that they did not like.

She has a doctorate and yet was only an assistant professor at a minor university.

Her whole theory is based on free energy. Yes, the universe is filled with energy. But God has not allowed man to control this energy, but stays in control of it Himself. He has allowed man to control very small amounts of energy, but never vary large amounts.

I know where this all comes from. He is the father of lies. He tells anyone who will listen that we can be like God. This woman is saying that same thing. We can find truth with our hearts. Man can destroy the world. Men are not God and can do neither.

All truth comes from The Lord Jesus Christ. This woman preaches lies that are against His Truth.

While I do consider the opinion of many who are not Christians. I also do not consider the opinion of those who stand in direct opposition to The Lord Jesus.

Those lies all come from one source and he never once told the truth.

Travis I appeal to you to reconsider these things.

I do want to thank you for your thread about the Roman Catholic Church. It is very good.

This is a web site called Fortress of Truth. We should not promote anything that is not true. We should use our efforts and time to promote The Lord Jesus Christ and not other things that stand against the things that Jesus taught.

Lou Newton

[Travis New Member Find all posts View Profile Close Travis]

This is a web site called Fortress of Truth. We should not promote anything that is not true. We should use our efforts and time to promote The Lord Jesus Christ and not other things that stand against the things that Jesus taught.

I can give a hearty amen to this statement, if nothing else.

I picked the name for this forum for a reason. It grieves me to see lies of any sort promoted here. I also rejoice to see truth promoted. That is why I think this topic is so important. So many lies have been perpetrated based off of false premises surrounding 9/11.

It's not about a specific person, or their book, but about the facts surrounding what happened that day, I just like giving credit where credit is due. If someone has put a ton of work into their material, they deserve to be recognized for it. If you don't want to buy a book I don't mind. All the material in this book is also located online if one takes the time to find and access it. The author is not just trying to make a buck, all the information is free if one doesn't feel like supporting the hard work they put into it.

I never meant for there to be this much discussion on this topic on this thread, I was only responding to you and steve commenting on my initial short response. Baobab knows how passionate about this topic I am. I am glad he brought it up.

I will move on from this thread, regarding this topic. It is definitely an important one though.

Travis