• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • We present & discuss radiation health, science & news
  • To keep you informed about vital nuke information.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
WEBCAM March 2018
#21
03-21  The tepcam 1 view changed yesterday; more zoomed in and aimed at a slightly lower height.  The view was crisp like the lens was clean.  Kinda makes me wonder if we have a new camera.  Only a little less sky but a spark count finds very few sparks.  I hadn't noticed many while watching, it was only seeing the cam4 spark that made me go looking into the recordings and count cam1 sparks.  I did notice a lot of missing time; the clock jerking past several seconds at a time.  

03-21 030757 d.bmp
03-21 031251 spark.bmp
03-21 032103 spark.bmp
03-21 033218 spark double.bmp
03-21 033328 spark.bmp
03-21 033917 spark.bmp
03-21 034353 spark.bmp
03-21 034627 c4 spark.bmp
One hour scanned; only 6 cam1 sparks and 1 distortion; one spark on cam4.

   
   
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#22
Majia: It appears that TEPCO may have replaced the cam on units 1 and 2 because the cam view is sharper and the perspective has changed (greater focus in on buildings) http://www.majiasblog.blogspot.com.uy/20...s-1-2.html
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#23
The time difference between the two tepcams is still 42 seconds on my equipment and connection; watching them side by side.  Events I catch happening on both cameras at the same time, have that 42 second difference; cam4 displaying later than cam1.  I looked because I thought a new camera might have a different time set.  If it is the same old camera it got some maintenance and a new focus.  The emissions Majia notices sometimes on cam1 will be off screen and not as visible now.  We'll only see it on cam4 when it gets really bad.  I've been seeing 10 seconds or more between sparks on cam1 which is down from the every 3 to 5 second range when activity was high.  There is less dark background for them to shine with the new focus and that might reduce counts.  During the day, I'm seeing better views of the tools and loads the large remote crane is using at r1.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#24
How to Spot a Nuclear Bomb Program? Look for Ghostly Particles
By KENNETH CHANG MARCH 27, 2018
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/scien...rinos.html
Quote:The vast majority of antineutrinos from the Hartlepool reactor would pass unimpeded through the new detector, but calculations by the scientists indicate that two to four a day would collide with a hydrogen nucleus — a proton — in a water molecule.

When this collision occurs, the proton transforms into a neutron and ejects a positron, the antimatter version of an electron. Because the positron moves so quickly through the water, it emits the optical equivalent of a sonic boom, called Cherenkov radiation. (Watchman is a shortening of Water Cherenkov Monitor of Antineutrinos.)

The sparks I see on the tepcams are Cherenkov radiation.  The tepcams are useful as radiation detectors with the Cherenkov sparks blinking in the night.  I think that Tepco purposely zoomed the camera tighter so we won't see as much in the way of emissions on cam1.  They haven't be able to stop the radiation still leaking out.  Opening r1 was the beginning of the increase of sparks I notice on cam1.  Remote crane work continues over r1, vacuuming, spraying, containers moving in and out.  Haven't seen much happening over r2 since they cleaned the roof.  When work to remove debris from r3's sfp occurred the sparking increased.  Covering r3 with the fuel removal roof hasn't stopped the sparks.  Suspected emissions from the CSFP always caused a spark increase.  Now that the spent fuel has had years to cool we don't see as much fogging or long lasting webs.  The sparks don't blink as much as they did in the early days but spark flurries still erupt regularly.  
 
03-26 Spark report

03-26 182803 spark.bmp
03-26 183437 spark.bmp
03-26 183701 spark.bmp
03-26 184030 spark.bmp
03-26 184116 spark.bmp
03-26 184150 spark.bmp

03-26 190000 spark.bmp
03-26 190009 spark.bmp
03-26 190515 spark.bmp
03-26 190823 spark.bmp
03-26 190932 spark 3f.bmp
03-26 191201 spark.bmp
03-26 191422 spark.bmp
03-26 191816 spark.bmp
03-26 192434 spark.bmp
03-26 192730 spark.bmp
03-26 192927 spark.bmp
03-26 193024 spark.bmp
03-26 193233 spark 1f.bmp
03-26 194103 spark.bmp
03-26 194632 spark.bmp
03-26 195932 spark.bmp
03-26 195947 spark.bmp

03-26 200528 spark 3f.bmp

17 sparks an hour.  Didn't notice any distortions from dusk to 8pm. The spark flurries still occurring; radiation still drifting in the air over Daiichi. Here's a daytime view of r1 with one of the remote crane loads and a couple sparks.  You might notice a light in r1 that was blinking.  It's off in the second spark pic and on in the other two.  The r1 light has a reddish hue.    

   
   
   
   
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#25
Quote:Horse:

Covering r3 with the fuel removal roof hasn't stopped the sparks.  Suspected emissions from the CSFP always caused a spark increase. 

Thinking back on all the events we've witnessed and am considering the ground to be a likely source of rad emissions besides the SFP. Recall the steaming fissures in the first months or year after? With all the earthquakes since and torrential rains, there's probably been substantial changes in the layers of earth under and around the reactors. If that's the case, yeah, a roof over the reactor isn't going to reduce much.

Work on the ground might make a difference. Make it impermeable. If possible.
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#26
Most of the ground at the plant was covered with concrete just to cut the rads.  Tepco has ground monitors they say indicates safe levels that never vary.  The tepcams are a couple stories above the ground so I think they give a better air reading.  Several likely sources to choose from, and my guess is they all add together.  Sometimes one source might get worse but unless I can see something on the cams or read about some problem it's hard to pinpoint which one.  When they closed up r4 and finished the r4 sfp removal work, the CSFP emissions went down and sparks on cam4 really diminished, cam4 sparks are rare now.  Cleaning the roof of r2 may have helped some.  Tepco says the north end is still much more dangerous than the south end and the camera sparking rates agrees with that assessment.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#27
Wonder if the concrete was modified for greater lasting power - over time, esp. with earthquakes, it will degrade and crack again. Are those monitors the ones they put lead bases under? I think you are are correct - it's a series of different sources that perpetuate the emissions and sparks. It is curious that the data from the monitors rarely changes. Wonder if that holds true when there are earthquakes nearby.
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#28
Im inclined to think some of the sparks are caused by pixel activation in the camera by a radioactive particle. Neutron? Proton?

This photo illustrates that a great deal of activity occurred at the plant.  I noticed a beam that was barely visible. By boosting the contrast the magnitude of the beam became evident.  Perhaps the metal containment acted as an aperture for the radiation, which then interacted with air creating secondary photons, some in the visible wavelengths. There are also emissions in the UV and IR band we wouldnt see.  

Alexander Yuvchenko, recounts that he looked up towards the Chernobyl reactor hall he saw a "very beautiful" laser like  beam of light  caused by the ionization of air, that appeared to flood up into infinity. 

Mankind is 97% the same as chimpanzees. We have collectively activated powerful and deadly forces beyond our control and understanding.  Certainly there is an impressive understanding of scientific detail, yet the sum of the impacts on our biosphere are impossible to comprehend

   
 
Reply
#29
Fantastic picture Code.  It shows much more ionized air rising above the plant compared to what Tepco may be measuring at ground level.  Let's say r1 was a stove top with a pan on it.  Placing a thermometer over the top of the pan would be much hotter than a thermometer sitting by the pan.  Daiichi would be three pans and only number two has a lid on it.  Of course, Tepco would be more concerned with the radiation at ground level affecting work than any radiation plume rising above, contaminating the air that blows out to sea.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#30
While nuclear industry and science are quick to say the measured radiation is so low its harmless, observation and dedicated research shows that low levels of fallout deform sicken and kill.  Radiation testing may be doing more harm than good because low levels are demonstrated, levels thought to be safe and often below background levels.  Nature shows the effects that science cant or refuse to understand
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep00570

Its a sad truth that the public must do the reporting of biological effects that science and media are silent about and usually deny
Costa Rica Horrors
http://radioactivechat.blogspot.com/2014...cific.html

Mutations
https://thefukushimaradiationtreereports...-and-vids/

   
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  WEBCAM April 2018 Horse 13 837 Yesterday, 12:04 PM
Last Post: Horse
  WEBCAM February 2018 Horse 28 2,758 02-25-2018, 12:56 PM
Last Post: Horse
  WEBCAM January 2018 Horse 16 2,232 01-31-2018, 06:26 PM
Last Post: Horse
  WEBCAM March 2017 Horse 33 14,793 04-04-2017, 02:31 PM
Last Post: Horse
  WEBCAM March 2016 Horse 24 15,896 03-24-2016, 08:56 PM
Last Post: RodgerRoentgen

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)