DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - chernobyl: steam explosion or self contained nuclear explosion?

**Wachearex** · 03-13-2010, 03:17 AM

depends on the country in, but alot of the west state it was a steam explosion , whereas the east say it was a self contained nuclear explosion with nuclear fueled fire.... thoughts?

Everything you need to know is here:

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/Chernobyl/#

It wasn't a nuclear explosion: civil reactor cores are designed to prevent this. Essentially the fuel rods are separated in such a way that a fission chain reaction is possible but not so much that it could go 'thermonuclear' on you. In the case of Chernobyl, the explosion was simply a gas pressure one - due to various reasons (some due to the architectural design of the RMBK but most were due to human error), the reactor core temperature to rise beyond the design limits. This caused a sequence of problems resulting in large portions of the coolant boiling away and ultimately rupturing the pressure vessel in the so-called 'steam explosion'. Further explosions were caused by the incoming air igniting the hot graphite moderator and a release of hydrogen due to the fuel rod walls reacting with the steam; the sheer temperature of the core and moderator ignited various other parts of the reactor infrastructure.

What source are using for the opinion of the "east"?

also heavy water reactors use `unrefined` uranium , literally dug out of the ground and shoveled in (well not quite but you get the idea) The uranium is heavily refined - it's just not enriched, as with the UK Magnox reactors.

03-13-2010, 03:17 AM	#9
Wachearex Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 426 Senior Member	depends on the country in, but alot of the west state it was a steam explosion , whereas the east say it was a self contained nuclear explosion with nuclear fueled fire.... thoughts? Everything you need to know is here: http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Focus/Chernobyl/# It wasn't a nuclear explosion: civil reactor cores are designed to prevent this. Essentially the fuel rods are separated in such a way that a fission chain reaction is possible but not so much that it could go 'thermonuclear' on you. In the case of Chernobyl, the explosion was simply a gas pressure one - due to various reasons (some due to the architectural design of the RMBK but most were due to human error), the reactor core temperature to rise beyond the design limits. This caused a sequence of problems resulting in large portions of the coolant boiling away and ultimately rupturing the pressure vessel in the so-called 'steam explosion'. Further explosions were caused by the incoming air igniting the hot graphite moderator and a release of hydrogen due to the fuel rod walls reacting with the steam; the sheer temperature of the core and moderator ignited various other parts of the reactor infrastructure. What source are using for the opinion of the "east"? also heavy water reactors use `unrefined` uranium , literally dug out of the ground and shoveled in (well not quite but you get the idea) The uranium is heavily refined - it's just not enriched, as with the UK Magnox reactors.
	Quote