Monju nuclear reactor sodium leak accident footage

[DarkZero812]

site incorrect

[utubesqueeze]

I'm a strong supporter of nuclear energy but even I think using liquid sodium coolant in a fission reactor is INSANE! I just hope Molten Salt Reactors take off quickly so tha this ridiculous material never sees widespread deployment.

[wog222]

@utubesqueeze Why are they using sodium?

[UnowMe00]

@wog222 water consumes uranium over time requiring refuelling. Sodium does reactors do not require refuelling. Instead it combusts when in contact with air and explodes when in contact with water. So, still a very good question considered our environment and our reactor containment history...

[UnowMe00]

@wog222 water consumes uranium over time requiring refuelling. Sodium does reactors do not require refuelling. Instead it combusts when in contact with air and explodes when in contact with water. So, still a very good question considered our environment and our reactor containment history...

[burn19ballz]

nuclear power the alchemy of our time.it has power that is not to be triffled with and much risk,as like the search for the philospher's stone our search for a undepletable power has lead to harm and death of a untold scale.even one small mistake no matter how minor must not be forgotten or as they say history repeats itself.

[TheEgg185]

sodium is salt. its no big deal.

[fastmower]

@TheEgg185 Any idea how dumb you sound posting that? Sodium is a metal for starters...

[AluminumStudios]

@fastmower You are the one who seems dumb. The Monju plant is a fast-breeder reactor which uses liquid sodium coolant. Do a little research before criticizing people. It says in the video in Japanese that the white stuff is sodium. But you probably don't read Japanese.

[fastmower]

@AluminumStudios No - I don't read Japanese. My comment was in reply to the person who said that sodium was just salt, and therefore nothing to worry about. I don't think that the workers in the video would have taken such precautions if there had been a leak of salt, do you? I know exactly what sodium does in contact with water thank you - and the other alkali metals for that matter. TheEgg obviously knows better though, and shakes sodium on his chips....

[AluminumStudios]

@fastmower My apologies, I didn't look at the order of the comments closely enough.

[AluminumStudios]

@TheEgg185 Sodium chloride is salt and that is fine. Sodium itself is VERY volatile and explodes when exposed to water. Most people learn this in high school science class...

[eatcarpet]

Fast breeder reactor FAILS.

[PUFFTHEMAGICMARMOT]

The blanket statement,"There is no current technology for massive..." is inaccurate. The Amount of wasted wind energy available is immeasurable. We can create excess energy through solarthermal and wind, but are told otherwise by weapons contractors under the guise of energy companies. It's the plutonium they want, not the energy. Your inability to perceive the other angles that make a viable argument imp. You don't want to address the ? economic servitude, discussion of energy will b circular

[1971ojoalparche1971]

I'll take your word that this is what it says on the title, because I didn't understand anything just by looking at this footage.

How do you know this isn't a safety exercise?

[douro20]

The white stuff all over the walls in the area where the pipe burst is sodium hydroxide- evidence that the metal had reacted with the moisture in the air.

[lordkoos]

The problem with nuke plants is that when things go really wrong there isn't much people can do, and the consequences are potentially horrific for the entire planet. Comparing it to coal mining is insane.

[lexichronicle2]

@lordkoos That's only because people are scared of radiation because it can have an immediate impact. If you google into how much oil a rig pulls up per day, and roughly how many rigs there are, and then convert it to CO2 gas, you'll be fk'ing blown away. I promise.

[JoelThedude4u]

@lexichronicle2

Coal plants put out more radiation than a Nuclear plant trough out its history of operation, and far more mercury per hour than 100 lightbulbs CFL

[bitmaster2000]

Half-Life VI beta.

[wollin20]

Man, that's shitty working conditions...Nuclear energy plants have to upgrade their safety records by a factor 5 at least , and invent agile radioactivity resistant robots, and take into consideration the worst possible earthquake (And the last Japanese earthquake was not even the worst possible for the Tsukushima nuclear plant, as the epicenter was quite remote). IMO, no nuclear plant should exist in such areas as nothing could withstand a possible quake of 12 on the Mercalli intensity scale.

[prisoner666JP]

Don't trust this user.

He is a malicious agent and trying to confuse many people with Japanese account as well.

[tjakson1234]

@captinseperoth

The answer should not be what power source takes more lives. The answer should be in Americans, and people around the world, being less greedy in their need for unnecessary energy and preserve not only lives, but the future of the environment as a whole.

[metsapeikkoo]

"10,000 to 50,000 Americans die from respiratory diseases due to the burning of coal, and 300 are killed in mining and transportation accidents"

Eh. And that's just USA alone. No idea about China though.

[wildancrazy159]

Sodium is far to unstable to be used in a environment such as earth for this application. Nuclear power is a real answer to our energy needs, but Sodium is not a viable medium in its use for atomic applications.

[SwordXEvil]

Were these people in video okay afterwards?

[Elantrix]

when will people learn that sodium is a terrible primary coil cooling agent in nuclear reactors.... there is a reason most boycotted the idea and stick with water (under presure), since it's the most STABLE way.

[iminyourbasement]

id like to add that the sodium there talking about is not saltwater but rather liquid sodium crystals that are at over one thousand degrees, it is comparable to lava that is radioactive...

[inesis]

Guy1: Hey, liquid sodium is fun and harmless!

Guy2. Yeah, let's use it to cool down our nuclear power plant!

[HWGuyEG]

Oh the poor fools, only if they used Gallium!

[ryanmail2004]

@HWGuyEG except Gallium doesn't work for reactors. Almost no one watching this video has any fucking clue what they are talking about.

[HWGuyEG]

@ryanmail2004

Burgers find nothing funny. :(

Maybe if I said boric acid...

[phukemonster]

pity on these workers who receive a dangerous level of radioactive sodium

[captinseperoth]

how many Americans will die mining coal this year,let alone the hundreds--to--thousands of Chinese miners who mine coal will die this year? yet how many people died for atomic incidences in the USA?

[rabidowski]

@captinseperoth Why don't you supply the numbers, instead of just asking questions with inferred meanings?

[Dayberry]

@rabidowski because hes trying to get you to look so you will prove to yourself he is right

[Kohdok]

@rabidowski The most people in the United States to ever die from a nuclear meltdown is three. It happened in 1961 at SL-1 in Idaho. They are so far the only ones.

In the same year, there were 293 Coal mining deaths in the United States. So, in one year, Coal mining caused nearly a hundred times the deaths than the entire US nuclear energy program history.

Chernobyl: 4054 (54 direct, 4000 cancer), Chinese mining in 2000(Again, in just one year): 5300

[indegruv]

@Kohdok Your acceptance and interpretation of what are "THE total facts, period" disturbs me

[talonthorn]

@Kohdok Why didn't you include uranium mining deaths? What about the cost of managing nuclear wastes vs coal wastes? But really, the problem isn't so much the material used but the untrustworthy managers of the nuclear plants, who give nuclear power a bad name. But since we can't keep them (nuclear industry and government in bed together) from putting us at risk, nuclear power is not an acceptable energy source.

[22ness0hayden]

@rabidowski No one has the exact numbers. It's impossible to know.

[Rayzkevin]

@captinseperoth

The fuel takes 100,000 years to decay. We havent went though one 100,000 year cycle after getting the technology. It is unclear witch will result in less deaths.

[analyzingfunny]

@captinseperoth how many Americans will start using GEET this year, let alone the hundreds- to thousands of Americans using GEET right now. Yet how many people will wake up and realize we dont need your bullshit here, nor do we need nukes? How many more douche-bag shills like you does it take to sway the public opinion? One, you. How many people does it take to tell you to shove what uranium you have up your ass, and leave the rest in the ground? One. Me.

[captinseperoth]

@analyzingfunny

Why do we send over 2 billion dollars over seas for our energy needs,when we can produce it with thorium reactors?

[captinseperoth]

@captinseperoth google "chinese mining accidents",do I need to say more?

What about the 2010 Copiapó mining accident? There were great chances that they might of not of been saved.

what about fly ash which is far more toxic than the waste from reactors,the weight ratio?

arsenic, beryllium, boron, cadmium, chromium, chromium VI, cobalt, lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, selenium, strontium, thallium, and

vanadium, along with dioxins and PAH compounds

[DeSwiss]

@captinseperoth How many died from solar panels or geothermal power? Or wind power?

Zero.

And it's free.

[captinseperoth]

@DeSwiss geothermal power is highly limited,in the places it could be generated.

Thorium is the key to our future.

[636roadrunner]

@DeSwiss Really? No one from wind power? No one has fallen off of a wind turbine yet? Seriously, I have no idea, just curious.

[ofnarcr]

@DeSwiss people die from falling off of windmills..

[DO6PAT]

@DeSwiss thats surely wrong! Solarpanels sometimes start to burn in cause of electrical missfunctions! So people die because their house burns down ;)

[metsapeikkoo]

@DeSwiss

Last time I checked solar panels and geothermal power had quite poor cost/power ratio.

[Membrane556]

@metsapeikkoo

The number to reach is 5 to 7 cent per KWh wind can meet this but solar is presently 20 cents per KWh.

Stirling solar might be able to allow it to become competitive but still location very important for solar you want one with few cloudy days.

As for nuclear waste a CANDU can run on what is considered a spent fuel rod for a light water reactor they're also are safer then first generation BWRs like the one causing trouble in Japan with is a 40 year old design.

[lexichronicle2]

@Membrane556 Something else to point out about waste is.... how many of the ppl complaining about it also ditch tens of tons of plastics and other crud into the earth? Quite a darn lot. Plastics and artificial materials are not as 'safe' as people think. Burning them can release the most carcinogenic chemicals known to man. And they leach chemicals that mimic hormones into the products stored in them. The younger generations think it's fine because they've grown up with them.

[NOBOX7]

@captinseperoth give it a thousands years and plenty will die cus of failer in nuclear waste storage

[captinseperoth]

@NOBOX7

We can now dig up all the waste,and reuse 90 percent of waste NOW.as more fuel for power plants.

It's just that we don't due to politics.

Look up generation 4 atomic power plants,we(the world) are currently developing plants that produce waste that last for decades not century's.

[JaKEtuRbo2]

@captinseperoth yea but the risk never GOes away ... we just burry it and hope no one digs it up later.. plus the chance it will melt down at any givin moment.. Nukes will end up killing , maybe not our generation but future ones.. and who mines coal anymore the old fashioned way?? Now we have technology and machines do all the dangerous work right?

[TheresNoTimeLikeNow]

@captinseperoth OMG Ignorance & arrogance speaks, just like the Titanic, "Nothing can out do man's brilliance" Yeah except one little earth quake or tsunami, add them together and forget it, a half life of 2.5 billion years, Yeah that's the best way to make steam for electric turbines.  "Not" come on people the earth is moving, shifting growing, radioactivity is not a nice way to die. Take the time to look at some of the Chernobyl results.

Or are your brains gone already? Seriously though

[partyongarth420]

@TheresNoTimeLikeNow wow you are one informative person.. please. tell me everything.. sarcasm

[PUFFTHEMAGICMARMOT]

@captinseperoth How many heads will the children of Japanese parents have for the next 25,000 years? Those with no sense of the subtle are those who are pro Nuke. It's not about how many die, it's about further increasing the cancer rate, mutation rate, introducing elements with 25,000 year half lives into the food chain, and the right that WE DON'T HAVE to poison the future inhabitants of this planet. Mans arrogance is insufferable and has overdeveloped so far that we have no reference.

[1971ojoalparche1971]

@PUFFTHEMAGICMARMOT Right, nuclear energy has its risks. Now tell us what you propose we use today, instead of it, that's 100% safe and has no negative side effects on the economy and on the environment.

While you're at it, tell us how you think current power plants can be replaced with whatever it is you propose.

[PUFFTHEMAGICMARMOT]

@1971ojoalparche1971 The economy only serves to inhibit any advance that could be free. Medicine, or energy- if there is a free solution, our frail economic system is done. The economic system is presented as the only solution by those in power. It limits the human experience to worthless mundane servitude. Solar thermal in CA, AZ, NM, (the hot states) w/ salt to keep turbines going, VAWT in constant high wind areas, like mountain tops, CO, WY, MO, ID, NE, IL, OH, and Thorium type reactors.

[1971ojoalparche1971]

@PUFFTHEMAGICMARMOT I didn't ask about economic servitude or medicine. I asked you to mention which alternatives do you propose to replace nuclear plants.

Solar and Hydrogen are great, but there's no current technology to use them for massive consumption. Eolic is extremely expensive and inefficient. So, assuming you don't want to leave 20% of your country without power, what do you recommend can be used now to replace nuclear plants?

[PUFFTHEMAGICMARMOT]

@captinseperoth The subtle price we pay in the form of increased cancer rates, increased levels of toxin is not easy to measure, and puts money into the medical industry (good for economy, but net-bad for humanity). This is chess, not checkers, but we have a boatload of checkers players who think they have viable opinions.

[analyzingfunny]

@captinseperoth You mena, "How many have died YET"?

[xaenon]

@captinseperoth

The real question is not how many HAVE died - the question is how many WILL die. The worst coal mine accident ever would pale in comparison to the consequences of a nuclear catastrophe. We (the world in general) have actually been LUCKY so far - Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and the current crisis in Japan notwithstanding. Remember, these plants are built by contractors and decisions are often still made based on a bottom line. If that isn't scary , I don't know what is

[allgovsarecriminal]

@captinseperoth you know, we humans have a perception problem. we clearly see and recognize the death of a few people because its a imminent event, but we dont see 10s of millions of people (and their children) having a 5 year shorter live because they get cancer earlier due to a higher radioactive contamination. thats what radiation is about - may it nuclear plant incidents, atom bombs, nuclear waste accidents or DU ammunition.

[AETutorials42]

@allgovsarecriminal

You can't see it that way. First of all, I highly doubt there are any people still living a "5-year shorter life" on Earth nowadays because of an atom bomb. How many nuclear power plant incidents happen a year? How many nuclear waste accidents happen a year? How many deaths are cause by the use of DU per year? You need to provide numbers, instead of statements.

[fireicer]

@captinseperoth These materials don't automatically kill the living, they kill and mutate your unborn so counting bodies is clearly nieve.

[PMnews1]

@captinseperoth When a coal plant or mine has an accident a few die but then they can rebuild and life goes on. When a Nuke plant blows many die and the area is uninhabitable for only 4 billion years! That's how long uranium takes to decay. Actually, I don't like coal either, I am in favor of more wind farms.

[Diamonddavej]

@PMnews1 I think a better comparison is with hydroelectric power stations & dams, where catastrophic dam busts can kill thousands. The 1975 Banqiao Dam disaster in China killed 26,000 the day the dam burst & another 145,000 in the following epidemic & famine.

Vajont Dam collapse, Italy, 1963; 2000 dead

Mir Placalnizza dam failure, Bulgaria, 1966; 488 dead

Malpasset dam collapse, France, 1959; 421 dead

Gleno Dam collapse, Italy, 1923; 356 dead

Val di Stava Dam collapse, Italy, 1985; 268 dead

[PMnews1]

@Diamonddavej There are problems with hydro dams but when a nuke plant blows and (more will) not only will it kill thousands but will continue to kill for millinia. The deaths are not as immediate as a flooding damn but they are slower and far more cruel! People who survive floods will not continue to have deformed babies centuries! The land will recover from a flooded damn, it happens in nature all the time. While it is bad for some plants and animals it is good for others.

[Diamonddavej]

@PMnews1 I anticipated this response.

Please explain why it's worse killing 100,000 people over a pronged period v's killing 100,000 people in 24 hours, since it seems the latter gives people decades of life to live. Indeed many will live a completely healthy for 30 years after radiation exposure, finally succumbing to leukaemia in old age. Why is this worse. Also, the prolonged effects you mention, only occur if no evacuation from the contaminated region is undertaken, if people stayed.

[talonthorn]

@Diamonddavej Oh, like what is happening right now in Japan?

[Diamonddavej]

@talonthorn About 50% of Japanese men smoke, of these 20% will die of cancer caused by their habit. Now one cares. It's facts like this that confuse me about humans. Why we fixate on some risks but ignore others. Try to imagine how would people act, in a world free of smoking, if there was a "tobacco explosion".

[talonthorn]

@Diamonddavej But these people have a choice as to whether to smoke or not.

[Diamonddavej]

@talonthorn Second-hand smoke (public places, work & home), smoking during & after pregnancy, emotional & economic effects on non-smokers when they loose someone to smoking etc.

After smoking in public was banned in Scotland, the nicotine levels in non-smokers decreased by 39%.

Haw, S.J. & Gruer, L. 2007. Changes in exposure of adult non-smokers to secondhand smoke after implementation of smoke-free legislation in Scotland: national cross sectional survey. BMJ 335(7619), 549-549.

[Diamonddavej]

Also, as for evacuation from a contaminated region, this event is comparable to the evacuation when a dam is built and it floods a valley.

1.4 million people were displaced by the Three Gorges Dam, there will be no people there for centuries. And the Three Gorges Dam is just one of 1000s, think of all the other dams and millions who lost their land and homes. There are psychological reasons that make nuclear power more frightening, that's what I'm pointing out.

[Diamonddavej]

Also, another point. Hydroelectric dams displace people, as long as the dam is there, 100s of years? The Three Gorges Dam alone displaced 1.3 million people.

[stdavross666]

what is all the dust? wouldnt sodium explode once it leaked and mixed with the air?? I thought it exploded when mixed with air??

[RTHinesley]

yeah, LMFBR's seem like a crazy idea to me.

[hgryphon]

Um... I know I'm kicking a really really dead horse commenting so long after this was posted... I was just in the mood for watching real disaster videos (because it's always amazing what we learn from our mistakes), and I noticed an old debate here about "radioactive sodium." None of the sodium leaked here was in contact with the fuel, so it wouldn't be irradiated, according to what I've read, just a blown weld, but sodium likes to burn in the air and water, thus a hot fire as well...

[insightllc]

If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.

— Nikola Tesla

Tesla's ingenious clue left to uncover the real dates of experiments in Colorado Springs so not to be the dates of the Yakutat Bay earthquakes which are the literal AND symbolic BIGGEST quakes that rock the VERY planet TO YOUR CORE the biggest quakes in the history of mankind. But Wait, There is more....

[rabidowski]

@insightllc I think you replied to the wrong video.

[insightllc]

@rabidowski Three months ago? If you want to tell me something just say it. Untruth has driven me.

[STFUbot]

I would lick up all the radioactive sodium and eat it like vanilla ice cream bitches.

[mexicanerd]

HARD CORE!

[IrishLincoln]

NUCLEAR CORE!!!

[Ghostbead]

@STFUbot and throw everything up the rest of your life--like getting AIDES.

[Indrius]

Sheer power of manliness is the only thing needed to clean up this nuclear mess. All these guys wearing protective suits are just being pussies.

[jakesmithsoild25]

@STFUbot you would die within a day or too if you did try

[grooveclubhouse]

it be nice if the link to the English subtitled vid was in the description. but well done

[rabidowski]

Send me the link and I will add it.

[anonysquirrel]

It looks like there's white powder everywhere; you can see footprints in the stuff on the floor. I guess it's sodium oxide.

[LostMente]

or hydroxide

[EdgeBotV2]

bring on the pebble bed reactors!

[douro20]

There is one under construction in China.

[oscarlivy]

They are hero!, More security, CAREM, i send my video. Thanks

[sandsphere]

Quite simply, the reason sodium in soft-drinks does not "blow us up" is because it is in ionic form (+). Only elemental non-ionic state sodium will sizzle you. Just like sodium chloride a.k.a. table salt, the enthalpy of reaction with water is low compared to elemental sodium with water.

[zoolkhan]

natrium chloride = salt

is sodium=natrium? (i am no native english)

[karnavinash]

yes it is sir.

[AKhellbindeR]

Gotta love all you wannabe MIT scientists thinking you know whats up.

[zoolkhan]

get rid of teh thought that MIT is the only place with eggheads. ever left american borders at all?

[AKhellbindeR]

Good job replying to a 4 month old post >_>

[Pdark1]

use CANDU reactors and this wouldn't happen.

breeders are flawed.

[melkor6666]

In they ability to offer closed fuel cycle, the breeders will be always superior...

[erikivarowren]

The US Navy built a sodium moderated reactor for a submarine back in the 50's for the first nuclear submarine named Sea Wolf. It was built right after the Nautilus. They changed their mind after a few months and switched it over to a water moderated type. I guess the US Navy was pretty smart to figure that out way back in the beginning of the atomic age. After all they do have the safest record when it comes to using nuclear power.

[tstravist]

As far as we know what happens in secret military nuclear installations/plants...

[zebra4593]

One million Japanese signatures demanding this reactor (plutonium fast breeder) be shut down because it is so dangerous. If the Japanese are so stupid that they start it up again they can enjoy another chernobyl.

Also - this reactor is built on top of an active earthquake zone! How stupid can humans get?

[hiraku0n]

Are all nuclear reactors of RBMK1000? Why is that all people know about when it comes to nuclear power is Chernobyl-4? Monju was far from INES 7, in fact it would be level 0 as there was no radiation leak. Perhaps you should suggest an practical alternative to their future energy source. As far as I understand, Nuclear power plants in Japan have one of the strictest regulations; somewhere around 500 Gal. Plants near suduction zones are being reinforced to withstand +1000 Gal.

[grand1337]

The INES scale isnt that simple.

E.g. INES 3 can apply even without radiation leakage. Its a matter of how the remaining security layers are affected.

From what I gather the incident was a leakage in the secondary cooling system combined with a very intense fire causing steel structures to melt.

That does not sound like INES 0 (in short "no safety significance) to me.

Rather 1-3, depending on how the security layers were affected - cooling facilities are vital for safety.

[grand1337]

infact, after further research I would consider it as INES 1.

[swiftdragoness88]

RBMK's are russian and they have been in complete closure what's a candu anyway

sorry i know quite alot about chernobyl from history project but i know it sound retarded of me of not knowing what one is but stumbled across it and never truly understood so could you tell what it is please?

[Darkwizzrobe]

Your position appears to be that, regardless of the low probability of an event, the statement of the hazard is enough to justify stopping the process. This has been a historic argument against nuclear power by the anti-nuclear groups.

[Ghostbead]

@Darkwizzrobe and industry groups--sane ones anyway.

[Estragon17]

@Darkwizzrobe

Yes... an argument backed up time and time again by the lack of safety and oversight found at many nuclear facilities. Yes, in a perfect world where humans were always responsible, nuclear power would be completely safe... except, of course, for its waste products... but we don't live in that world.

[rabidowski]

Taking that into consideration, they could design future reactors taking into consideration the fallbility of humans.

[dumbvid4]

@Estragon17 Actually fast breed sodium reactors don't produce large amounts of waste Unlike today's conventional light water reactors, with advances in nuclear technology it is gradually becoming less and less.I would like to think we have come a long way since Chernobyl

[tstravist]

@Darkwizzrobe - Your using a strawman argument saying that anti-nuclear positions is that '...regardless of the low probability of an event, the statement of the hazard is enough to justify stopping the process'. The argument is that EVEN IF there is a low probability of a very serious accident that accident would cause very wide spread radioactive contamination which would be effectively permanent and unrepairable. Low probability with very high damage is still considered bad risk.

[icedragonw1]

The use of metal as a coolant was a smart idea; however lead would have been a much more ideal choice. Lead, if it leaks out, would solidify and make a seal of the leak. Compared to sodium, lead is also non reactive.

[r8wing]

Also lead is much denser and can absorb more heat from the reactor core than sodium, making the reactor more efficient. As a bonus, lead is an effective gamma ray shield and doesn't get radioactive if bombarded with neutrons. After the nuclear fuel is spent all that remains is a harmless solid lead cocoon with some radioactive waste inside, completely sealed off from the exterior. I don't understand why this very promising technology doesn't get more attention.

[imickey503]

cuz you cant turn it off.

[albionsseed]

Yehaa!! Lots of OT for the deconners and HP's. Milk this more than an old school outage.

[barcodezombie]

its like an very eerie video.. could be used in a horror movie :P rofl.

[stefanoboxing]

totally agreed here man

I took me sometime to forget the whole thing and enter shower

[crozz131]

The United States tried a Sodium Reactor back in the 50's. The problem was the coolant used to cool the Sodium pump seeped into the Sodium cooling system witch then blocked the flow of coolant around 13 of the rods. The rods melted and the experiment was halted. Sodium Reactors would mean no refueling since Sodium doesnt absorb neutrons like Water or Graphite. No refueling means no outage shutdowns and cheaper power since no new rods are needed.

[HiReeZin]

I think you don't have your "facts" quite straight :-)

[sbu6]

Sodium was used because of it's very low moderating ratio and low neutron capture

celative to graphite. And that is very important in fast breeder reactor.

[diaflux]

Sodium has advantages, like a very high boiling point 1156 K relative to water 373 K. If completely contained it's an excellent and very safe coolant. Water is more likely to boil and cause explosions. It's unfortunate that sodium does nasty things on contact with water. I'm sure large amounts of it aren't fun to be around if heated up and exposed to air as well...

[seneca67]

Sodium is a poor choice for a coolant. I mean why not just use nitroglycerine? Lol ahhh no, Nitro is bad too. I think the dude was saying ," Hey screw this damnt, I am outta here!, lol"

[TEFLONTHADON]

Sodium is much better to use until something goes wrong, than it turns into a nightmare. Like many other things in life.

[seneca67]

Better than what? Btw, my comments are not meant to be critical of any particular nation. I just think it is insane to use such a dangerous coolant. I remember one of the big selling point of the sodium cooled reactor was passive convective cooling, as a back up for MHD flow pumps (no need for bearings and seals; yet we find traditional pumps w bearings that break down and form gunk in the fuel rods, which of course blocks the flow of the coolant.

[seneca67]

I think it was Einstein, and his Colleague Szilard that developed the first MHD pump sodium refrigerator. A fellow in in the mid 1990's found one of the antiques, and decided to saw into the coolant reservoir, just to see what it contained. Immediately a fire ignited, which the fellow attempted to dowse with a pitcher of water.. well. Happily he survived, but his work shop was incinerated.

[qv76]

Sodium isn't radioactive so why the big deal?

[seneca67]

Sodium is a highly reactive metal. It is unstable in open air, and reacts explosively with water, moisture or organics . Since it is used as the thermal medium in the primary heat exchangers and passes into the core, it does become radioactive. So when gaskets and other materials react with this stuff and gaseous reaction products are produced, pressure builds causing pipe welds to burst. Other reaction products accumulate in the core and impede coolant flow.

[Pdark1]

seneca67, not trying to be a smart ass or anything, but if sodium reacts explosively to water, then why is sodium im some drinks? why don't we explode?

you seem to be an expert on that.

[seneca67]

The food and beverage industry refers to NaCl, Sodium chloride simply as sodium or table salt. However, sodium, itself, is a highly reactive metal element. Good question, i am glad to help provide clarity, as i am certain many are wondering that.

[Sunburntpenguino]

@seneca67 In this accident the pipe that broke was in the secondary loop so the sodium was not radioactive. It did still cause extensive damage to the plant and information cover ups by the plant owners prevented it from being restarted until this year.

[420anonymous]

@seneca67 Thank you for the explanation.

[Yamakiri]

The quality's so low it's like pouring sand in my eyes!

[pupplesan]

This is a molten sodium metal-cooled fast breeder reactor. This was a rupture of a secondary (NON-radioactive) inconel sodium cooling pipe that spilled several hundred kilos of sodium metal onto the floor of the cooling raceway. You can see the mass of sodium at about 6:00-6:45. Sodium metal is highly chemically reactive and began ejecting a mist of sodium oxide and sodium hydroxide as it reacted with atmospheric oxygen and water. This is why workers wore bunny suits to approach the mass.

[JgHaverty]

Those arent bunny suits, those are "steam suits" (resistant to heat).

A bunny suit you are thinking of are called "anti-c's" and prevent contamination from getting on your body. This is just because the shit is so damn hot lol

[HiTekVagabond]

How much did the sodium leak cost in the 13 years that it's been offline?

[istoleyourpie]

uh... can you post that link here somewhere for the english subtitled one?

[rabidowski]

Sorry, no such video exists. Perhaps a kind Japanese Youtube'r could provide translation?

[tstravist]

There is an english subtitled version on the dotsub site under the title 'Video tape of Monju sodium spill'