Group Actions
Engagement
  • Author Author: Catwell
  • Date Created: Date Created
  • Views 1133 views
  • Likes 1 like
  • Comments 11 comments
Related
Recommended

If Robots Can’t Survive Radiation Exposure, What Will?

Catwell

image

Tattered flag in Fukushima, Japan. The tsunami that hit japan in 2011 caused serious damage to the country, including the destruction of a nuclear power plant. Radiation leakage continues to be a problem that even robots cannot combat. How, then, can we respond to nuclear emergencies safely?

 

In 2011, one of the worst tsunamis on record hit Japan. Nearly 16,000 people were confirmed dead. Of the survivors, 230,000 were displaced, and many still live in temporary housing. Perhaps the most unfortunate result of the attack was the destruction of the Fukushima Daichi nuclear power plant. The plant, which is run by the Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO), leaked an estimated few hundred tons of nuclear fuel rods.

 

The destruction of the plant has serious ecological consequences. It is believed that at least a small portion of the radioactive waste has come into contact with the ocean by way of contaminated groundwater that connects the plant to the coast coastal region. And while TEPCO built a ‘wall of ice’ along the edge of the seabed to prevent further leakage, the cleanup is projected to take 30 to 40 years.

 

The level of radiation exposure at the site is too high for humans to withstand. In fact, an estimated 8,000 workers bustle around the facility removing debris and pouring water into radiated reactors just to keep the temperature down. The damage done to the reactors allowed the nuclear fuel rods to burn through the specialized containment vessels, meaning that not only has tons of nuclear waste been released, but also, no one is quite sure of the rods’ location.

 

To solve the issue, TEPCO spent two years developing a robot to locate the missing rods. The bot was equipped with a live camera feed, and was programmed to swim underwater to offset any radiation damage. The heat from the reactors was so strong, however, it melted the machine’s wires before any valuable footage was recorded. TEPCO was disappointed and revealed it will take another two years to develop a new robot.

 

While the power company devises a new plan, the challenge poses a real concern to global safety. If such an event was to happen again, how could emergency responders combat radiation that is even too strong for robots? The Nuclear Energy Institute and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission have stated the United States strives to use infrastructure that can withstand natural disasters, so a similar event does not occur in the U.S. One such idea includes back-up containment vessels to withstand the heat emitted by nuclear reactors. Still, this does not solve the issue of what to do in Japan now.

 

The truth is, no one knows what to do. Japan has been heavily criticized for neglecting to safeguard against natural disasters and emergencies. And while it’s helpful for preventative planning, this kind of thinking serves only to point the blame, and offers no solution to decrease the significant ecological damage that resulted from the incident. If robots are the answer, the technology has to be developed much further to withstand heat and radiation of nuclear waste. Until that time comes, we can only wait. (I say that often, we wait too much.)

 

Have a story tip? Message me at:

http://twitter.com/Cabe_Atwell

  • The issue about radiation hardening and how to prevent the destruction of material exposed to radioactive is complicated by the misunderstanding about what makes atoms radioactive.

     

    If my new atomic model is correct, there may be ways to both shield materials from radiation and possibly to decontaminate materials with less effort than people realize.

     

    The current nuclear power generation plants have a horrendous design that greatly complicates the use of nuclear fuel and creates too much waste.

     

    People need to think of using nuclear energy to its full extent.  The current thermodynamic generators are incredibly inefficient.

     

    Luckily, there are many possibilities for safely using radioactive material without the need of radiation hardening.

     

    So please stop fighting the use of fission, just insist that it be used correctly with full efficiency.  Radiation is our friend, not out enemy.

     

    DAB

  • Well, you made a very broad statement, that robots cannot work in high heat environments.  The Russians can be proud to have gotten machines to work at 950 Fahrenheits so far from home, back in time.

     

    I agree with you that we were stupid to build those fission reactors and nowadays, with fracking, solar, wind and the possible advent of fusion reactors they are less needed.  Decommissioning old reactors that aren't damaged by external forces will keep us busy for quite some time.  We do some ugly things for power, burning coal, damming rivers 'til there is only one river left (Frazier) in North America.

     

    Now that we have this awful problem, I think, and I am no expert, that robots made of tubes will hold up better in this situation than ones made of semis.  If someone has an endowment for me, I would love to try.

     

    Rest assured that we are in basic agreement.  I am on the margin of being a nit-picker.

  • in reply to D_Hersey

    A bit of apples and oranges comparison, don't you think?

     

    Inter-planetary exploration has a tad bit set of different goals, requirements and standards than solving a safety-related meltdown problem from a nuclear power plant on dear Mother Earth.

  • Let's get real: there is NO WAY a robot and its sub-assemblies are going to withstand the heat generated by a reactor that's lost its cooling and is melting down.

     

    And why would anyone bother creating a robot that could?

     

    What really melted down this reactor was not a tsunami or earthquake. It was TEPCO (the Fukishima operator). It was corrupt and lax on safety regulations. Even after the accident, TEPCO was dragging its feet.

     

    Much of the work of engineering happens before something gets built. It's called risk management and the associated feasibility studies and the necessary government oversight. Moreover, Japan has had earthquakes in the past. So, what were the conclusions of the risk management studies that I presume were conducted prior to Fukishima ever being built? If there wasn't any or they were doctored, enough said.

     

    Engineering isn't only designing new materials or control systems that can withstand meltdowns. One should engineer the safety risks out of a system before it gets built rather than trying to fix the system when it breaks down. And Fukishima wasn't even a break down; it was a disaster; it was competence; it was stupidity. It should never have been built.

     

    Nothing in the history of humankind has ever been invented or built without limits. Be it humans or robots, there will be a point of no return. Robots are being used successfully for testing and inspections and for decommissioning tasks -- which aren't done when the reactor is melting down.