Trinity vs the Fukushima Reactor 3 explosion. Can you tell the difference?

Trinity :

“Trinity was a test of an implosion-design plutonium device. The weapon’s informal nickname was “The Gadget”.[11] Using the same conceptual design, the Fat Man device was detonated over Nagasaki, Japan, on August 9, 1945. The Trinity detonation produced the explosive power of about 20 kilotons of TNT…” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_(nuclear_test)) “The bomb design to be used at Trinity Site actually involved two explosions. First a conventional explosion involving 5,300 pounds of TNT would compress the 15 pound plutonium core into a critical mass, then, a tiny fraction of a second later, a nuclear explosion would occur from a chain reaction in the plutonium.” (http://olive-drab.com/od_nuclear_trinity.php)

15 pounds = 6.8 Kgm

Fukushima Diiachi Reactor 3:

How many kilograms of plutonium in reactor 3?

The significant about the explosion of Reactor is the containment and contents release and transport the events resulted in.

The explosion itself was comparatively very very small. Though atmospheric dispersion of the debris and radionuclides has been hemispheric, the vast bulk of the Fukushima Diiachi fallout has, and continues to be, deposited locally.

Those closest in are always worst off, whether in the case of bombs or reactors. It is important not to underestimate the power of nuclear weapons, especially if one mistakenly thinks the explosion at reactor number was nuclear. It was not. It was very dangerous in terms of containment breach, nuclear industry lying about amount of material released, and false denials of melt down for weeks after.

It is one thing to say you can’t trust nuclear industry – that statement is entirely rational and based upon the facts, ranging from Trinity to today.

It is quick useless though to claim that the detonation of reactor 3 was the same as an atomic bomb. It wasn’t.

Nuclear experts in Australia exclaimed “This is normal” and “This is not a nuclear explosion”. Well yea, its normal for a nuclear reactor to explode – three of them did at Fukushima Diiachi, so its not unusual, its scientifically repeatable. 3 out 3 aint bad, seeing as number 4 had an empty core. But the salient thing – the important thing – the breach of containment which the industry has promised would never happen except once an aeon. That has now been reduced to once every 30 years (Toshiba). In March 2011, the rate of reactor explosion was 3 times a month.

One Response to “Trinity vs the Fukushima Reactor 3 explosion. Can you tell the difference?”

  1. CaptD Says:

    The Nuclear experts were using very technical terms to describe the different type of explosions but still many believed that Fukushima was the result of a planned tiny nuclear explosion and or attack!

    http://is.gd/HV2nOg

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: